'•• ♦ ►i'*^. •>♦'■ •■••'' 



,;.^t^ 







■■*■ ''i'^i;', :■;■■■ 



V>1.> y 'n 

















LL— 

()opightl^?_. 

COFVRIGHT DEPOBl.'n 



H A N J? ^ O K 

■F 

COST DATA 

FOR 
CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS 



A REFERENCE BOOK GIVING METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION 

AND ACTUAL COSTS OF MATERIALS AND LABOR 

ON NUMEROUS ENGINEERING WORKS 



BY 

HALBERT P. GILLETTE 

Managing Editor, Engineering-Contracting 

Member American Society of Civil Engineers, Member American 

Society of Engineering Contractors, Member American 

Institute of Mining Engineers, Etc, 



second edition 
chicago and new york 
The Myron C. Clark Publishing Co. 

1910 









Copyright, 1910. 

■by 
The Myron C. Clark Publishing Co. 



WESTERN NEWSPAPER UNION PRINT, 
CHICAGO 



/^-^'^^cu.e...3 



PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION 

The first edition of this work , contained the equivalent of about 
250,000 words, while this edition contains more than a million. Its 
four-fold growth has been due not only to the filling of many gaps 
that formerly existed, but to the addition of certain kinds of cost 
data that interest engineers only. In writing the first edition, I had 
primarily in mind the contractor, whose concern is to know the 
most economical method of construction and the unit costs in 
every detail. While every engineer should, and many do, take 
as keen an interest as the contractor in itemized unit costs, all 
engineers are called upon, at one time or another, to give approxi- 
mate preliminary estimates of costs, and these must often be fur- 
nished before the structure has been designei. For example, a 
hydraulic engineer may be asked the probable cost of a filter plant 
for a city consuming a given amount of water. He should be able to 
state the cost of sand filter beds per acre, covered or uncovered, 
and the annual cost of operation per million gallons filtered. To 
illustrate again : A railway engineer fir>ds that a high steel viaduct 
may be needed to cross a valley. He desires a rational formula by 
which the approximate weight of steel in such a viaduct can be 
computed, knowing the profile area. Or, if he plans a high timber 
trestle, he wants a method of approximating the number of feet 
board measure and the pounds of iron it will require. 

In brief, the engineer needs frequently to ascertain the number of 
units in a structure of a given class and size, as well as the unit 
costs; whereas the contractor is usually satisfied with data giving 
the itemized unit costs under stated conditions. I have tried to 
supply both wants in this edition. 

During the last four years I have continued accumulating data on 
methods and costs, a large part of which have been published in 
Engineering-Contracting. When I began to make these data a fea- 
ture of Engineering-Contracting, I received several letters express- 
ing the hope that I should be able to continue the work of publish- 
ing such cost data, but at the same time voicing a fear that the 
good material would soon be exhausted. So long as men remain 
possessed of inventive faculties and of genius for organization, we 
need never fear that new and valuable cost data will be unobtain- 
able. Management engineering is an infant science, and we shall 
see astonishing changes in methods of doing work, in machines used, 
and consequently in unit costs. 

This comparatively new study of engineering costs has not only 

iii 



iv PREFACE 

had a pronounced effect upon methods of construction, but has 
already begun to work a change in designs of engineering struc- 
tures. Specifications drawn by engineers who are ignorant of the 
items of actual unit costs are often absurd in their requirements. 
Hence, as a knowledge of costs spreads, we may confidently expect 
radical changes in designs and in specifications. These changes will 
result in entirely new cost data, so that a dearth of this sort of 
information is not to be expected from now on. 

I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to the files of the follow- 
ing periodicals and society transactions : 

Engineering-Contracting, Engineering JS/ews, Engineering Record, 
Railway Age-Gasette, Electric Railway Journal, Municipal Engi- 
neering Magazine, Municipal Journal and Engineer, Good Roads 
Magazine, Engineering Magazine, American Society of Civil Engi- 
neers, Western Society of Engineers, Association of Engineering 
Societies, Canadian Society of Civil Engineers, Illinois Society of 
Engineers, Engineers' Society of Western Pennsylvania, Engineers' 
Club of Philadelphia, New England Water Works Association, 
American Water Works Association, American Railway Engineering 
and Maintenance of Way Association, American Association of 
Railway Superintendents of Bridges and Buildings, and the Insti- 
tution of Civil Engineers. 

HALBERT P. GILLETTE. 

New York, March 14, 1910. 



PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. 

Pour years ago I announced in my little book, "Economics of 
Road Construction," that I had in preparation a handbook of cost 
data for engineers and contractors. At that time this handbook 
had been under way for eight years, and it seemed nearly ready 
for publication ; but other duties prevented a speedy finishing of 
the task. The delay, however, has been fortunate in that I have 
added very much to my knowledge of the general subject. In the 
meantime, two books have grown out of the original manuscript, 
namely, my books on earthwork and on rock excavation. The 
writing of these two books has better fitted me for the writing of 
this book, and has put me in touch with many engineers and con- 
tractors who have generously furnished additional cost data. 

So far as I know, this is the first book on engineering cost data 
ever published. There are "price books" written for house builders, 
but they are essentially what their name implies — books on prices 
of materials and contract prices. This book differs from all such 
works, aside from the fact that it covers the whole field of civil 
engineering, in that it is a book in which costs are analyzed and 
discussed. A contract price is one thing, a contract cost is an 
entirely different thing, in spite of the common confusion of these 
terms. In order fully to understand any analysis of unit costs it is 
necessary to have a detailed description of the methods used in 
construction and operation. Hence, although itemized cost data 



PREFACE V 

occupy many scores of pages In this book, there are many more 
scores of pages devoted to descriptions of how the work was done, 
the organization of the forces, and the machines used. The records, 
in all cases, are actual records taken from every available source 
of published information, from personal letters sent by engineers 
and contractors and from my own records. 

It is often said that cost data are of no value to an inexperienced 
man. Generally the men who make such statements are themselves 
possessed of few records of cost, or use this argument as an excuse 
for not making public such records as they do possess. The very 
secretiveness of men having cost data which they refuse to make 
public, nullifies their statement that such data can be of no use to 
otliers. 

We also hear it argued that conditions vary so widely that grave 
errors occur when an attempt is made to apply published cost data. 
Those who have not been trained to study the conditions affecting 
costs are likely to make serious blunders in any case ; but, if this 
book is in even a slight degree what it aims to be, it will be of 
greatest benefit to just such men ; for it will indicate to them how 
to analyze costs and how to study methods of performing work 
economically. 

Many of the erroneous ideas about the value of cost recording 
arise from a confusion of the term cost with the term price. This 
is not a handbook of prices, although many prices are given. I 
could have filled ten volumes with prices, and with summaries of 
costs written by engineers who have failed to state rates of wages 
and conditions under which the work was performed. But, a short 
time after publication, all such matter is hardly worth the ink 
that it is printed with, since wages and prices are subject to constant 
change. 

The attention of contractors is called to the first part of the book 
in which systems of cost keeping are described. I have outlined 
what I believe to be some of the best systems of cost keeping. 
Samples of other record cards and methods than my own 
are shown ; for my purpose has been to elucidate principles, 
rather than to exploit pet theories as to business management and 
accounting. 

HALiBERT P. GILLETTE. 

New York, Sept. 1, 1905. 



NOTICE TO AUTHORS 

Authors of text books have quoted freely from the first edition 
of this boolc, often without securing- permission. While we follow a 
liberal policy in the matter of permitting quotations, both from 
our books and from the pages of Engineering-Contracting (which is 
also a copyrighted publication), we expect authors to communi- 
cate with us, indicating what they desire to quote. 

THE MYRON C. CLARK PUBLISHING CO. 



CONTENTS. Page 

INTRODUCTION 1 

SECTION I. — Principles of Engineering Economics and Cost 

Keeping 7 

Definitions. — Compound Interest Tables. — Sinking Fund 
Tables. — Present Worth of Annuity. — References and Cross- 
References. — Identity of Machine and Engineering Struc- 
ture. — Problem I. Which of Two New Machines (or Struc- 
tures) to Select. — Problem II. When to Retire an Old 
Machine in Favor of an Improved or Larger One. — The 
Life of a Machine or Structure and the Growth of Annual 
Repairs. — Problem III. To Determine AVhen Repairs 
Have Grown So Great as to Justify Renewal. — 
Straight Line Formula of Depreciation. — The Bastard 
Straight Line Formula of Depreciation. — Sinking Fund 
Formula of Deoreciation. — The Unit Cost Deprecia- 
tion Formula. — Physical Property ' Valuations. — Going 
Concern Value. — Commercial Valuations. — How to Prepare 
Estimates and Bids. — A Schedule of Items of Cost. — Plant 
Expense. — Cost of Superintendence and General Expense. — 
Percentage to Allow for Contingencies. — Percentage to Al- 
low for Profits. — Causes of Underestimates. — Indexing Con- 
tract Prices. — Unbalanced Bids. — Surety Company Bonds. — 
Reasons Why Contract Work Is the Most Economic Method 
of Doing Public Work. — Thomas Telford on the Day Labor 
System. — The Opinions of Members of the Am. Soc. C. E. 
on the Day Labor System. — The Metcalf and Eddy Report 
on the Day Labor System in Boston. — Mr. S. Whinery's 
Report on the Day Labor System in Boston. — Experience 
with Day Labor on the Chicago Main Drainage Canal and 
at Panama. — Subletting Work and Purchasing Materials. — 
Instructions to Superintendents and Foremen. — The Ten 
Laws of Management. — 1. The Law of Sub-Division of 
Duties. — 2. The Law of Educational Supervision. — 3. The 
Law of Co-Ordination. — 4. The Law of Standard Perform- 
ance Based on Motion Timing. — 5. The Law of Divorce of 
Planning from Performance. — 6. The Law of Regular Unit 
Cost Reports. — 7. The Law of Reward Increasing with In- 
creased Performance. — 8. The Law of Prompt Reward. — ■ 
9. The Law of Competition. — 10. The Law of Managerial 
Dignity. — Measuring the Output of Workmen. — ^Units for 
Concrete Work. — Two or More Units for the Same Class 
of Work. — Uniformity of Units of Measurement. — Units of 
Transportation. — Recording Single Units. — Record Cards 

vii 



viii CONTENTS 

Attached to Each Piece of Work. — Measurements of 
Length. — Measurements of Area. — Measurements of Vol- 
ume. — Measurements of Weight. — Functional Units of 
Measure. — Key Units of Measure. — Key Units on Draw- 
ings. — Keys Marked on Separate Members. — Conclu- 
sion. — Cost Keeping. — Cost Keeping Defined. — Differences 
Between Cost Keeping and Bookkeeping. — Time Keep- 
ing Defined. — Daily Cost Reports, By Whom Made. — 
Written Card vs. Punch Card Reports. — Time Cards 
That Show Changes of Occupation. — Individual Rec- 
ord Cards. — Kind of Punches to Use. — Size and Kind of 
Daily Report Cards. — Foreman's Diary. — Designing Punch 
Card Reports. — Record Cards Accompanying Each Piece of 
Work. — Store Keeper's Reports. — Reports on Materials and 
Supplies. — Cost Charts. — Progress Charts. — Methods of 
Payment in Proportion to Performance. — Profit Sharing. — 
Piece Rate System. — The Bonus System. — The Differential 
Piece Rate System. — The Differential Bonus. — Task Work 
with a Bonus. — The Premium Plan. — Principles Governing 
the Fixing of a Piece Rate or Bonus. — Benefits of the Bonus 
System. — Time Cards and Time Books. — Recording Work 
by Minute Hand Observations. 

SECTION II. — Earth Excavation 119 

Magnitude of the Subject. — Earth Measurement. — Earth 
Shrinkage. — Kinds of Earth. — Definitions of Haul and 
Lead. — Work of Teams. — Cost of Plowing. — Cost of Picking 
and Shoveling. — Cost of Trimming, Rolling, Etc. — Cost of 
Wheelbarrow Work. — Cost by Wagons. — Cost by Drag 
Scrapers. — Cost by WTieel Scrapers. — Cost by Fresno 
Scrapers. — Cost by Elevating Graders. — Steam Shovel Data. 
— Hauling with Dinkeys. — Summary of the Cost of Steam 
Shovel Work. — Cost of Digging a Well or Cesspool. — Cost 
of Trenching, Cross-References. — Cost of Backfilling a 
Trench with a Scraper. — Prices of Drainage Ditch Work. — 
Cost of Boring Test Holes in Earth.— Cost of Wash Bor- 
ings on a Canal Survey. — Cost of Wash Drill Borings on a 
Canal Survey. — Cost of Boring Test Holes. — Cost of Testing 
for Bridge Foundations. — Cost of Making Test Borings, 111., 
Etc. — Cost of Test Borings with Wood Augers. — Cost of 
Drilling Test Holes with a Well Driller. — Cost of Diamond 
Drilling, Cross-References. — Cost of Sinking a Well. — Ref- 
erences and Cross-References on Earthwork. 

SECTION III. — Roch Excavation, Quarrying and Crushing.... 171 
Weight and Voids. — Voids in Broken Stone and Gravel. — 
Weight and Voids in Crushed Limestone. — Settlement of 
Crushed Stone in Wagons. — Weight of Crushed Stone in 
Wagons and Cars. — The Per Cent of Voids in Railway 
Embankments. — Voids in Rock Blasted under Water. — • 

' Measurement of Rock. — Kinds of Hand Drills. — C^.-mt nf 
Hammer Drilling- — Cost of Hand Drilling in Granite. — O^st 



CONTENTS ix 

of Churn Drilling. — Sizes of Air Drills. — Data as to Rock 
Drills. — Test of Air Consumption at the Rose Deep Mine. — 
Tables of Air Consumption. — Steam Consumption. — Gaso- 
line Air Compressors. — Percentage of Lost Time in Drill- 
ing. — :Rule for Estimating Drilling per Shift. — Rates of 
Drilling in Different Rocks. — Cost of Drill Repairs. — Cost 
of Operating Drills. — Piece Rate and Bonus System in 
Drilling. — Cost of Loading by Hand. — Cost of Hand- 
ling Crushed Stone. — Cost of Unloading Broken Stone 
with a Clamshell. — Cost of Handling Broken Stone 
with a Derrick. — Cost of Loading Blasted Rock 
with Steam Shovels. — Cost of Hauling in Carts and 
Wagons. — Open-Cut Excavation. — Spacing Holes in Open- 
Cut Excavation. — Cost of Excavating Sandstone and Shale. 
- — Summary of Open-Cut Data. — Cost of Excavating Gneiss, 
New York City. — Cost of Gneiss Excavation for Dams. — 
Summary of Costs on Chicago Canal. — Trenching in Rock. 
— Cost of Drilling and Blasting in Trenches. — Cost of Quar- 
rying and Crushing Trap Rock. — Cost of Crushing at 
Newton, Mass. — Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Quartz- 
ite. — Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Limestone for Ma- 
cadam. — Price of Road Building Plant. — Cost of Jaw 
Crusher Renewals. — Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Lime- 
stone, Missouri. — Cost of Crushing and Hauling Cobble- 
stones. — Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Trap and Bal- 
lasting, D. L. & W. Ry. — Cost of Quarrying, Crushing and 
Ballasting, and Life of Ballast. — Cost of Crushing with City 
Plant, Boston. — Data on Jaw Crushers. — Data on Gyratory 
Crushers. — Cost of Breaking Stone by Hand. — Diamond 
Drilling. — Price of Diamonds. — "Water Required. — Price cf 
Diamond Drills. — Cost of Diamond Drilling in "Virginia. — 
Cost of Diamond Drilling in Lehigh "Valley. — Cost of Dia- 
mond Drilling on Croton Aqueduct. — Cost of Hand Dia- 
mond Drilling in Arizona. — Cost of Diamond Drilling in 
Pennsylvania. — Consumption of Diamonds in Drilling, Ten- 
nessee. — Cost of Diamond Drilling in British Columbia. — 
Cost of Core Drilling with a Well Driller. — Cost of Dia- 
mond Drilling and Wash Borings Near New York City. — 
Rock Excavating Using Well Drills. — Cost of an Artesian 
Well. — Cost of Drilling Limestone with a Well Drill, for 
a Quarry. — Cost of Drilling Rock with a Well Drill. — Cost 
of Drilling Copper Ore with Well Drills. — Cost of Tunnel- 
ing, Shaft Sinking and Mining, Cross-References. — Cost of 
Subaqueous Rock Excavation. — Cost of Chamber Blasting. 

SECTION I"V. — Roads, Pavements and Walks 258 

Definitions. — Cross-References to Excavation and Rock 
Crushing. — ^Units Used in Measuring Macadam. — Items 
of Cost of Macadam. — Quantity of Stone and Binder Re- 
quired for Macadam. — Cost of Loading Stone from Cars into 
Wagons. — Cost of Loading Stone from Bins into Wagons.— 



X CONTENTS 

Cost of Hauling Stone in Wagons. — Cost of Spreading Stone 
by Hand. — Cost of Spreading Stone witli a Leveler or 
Grader. — Cost of Rolling. — Cost of Sprinkling. — Summary 
of Cost of Macadam. — Estimating the Cost of Macadam, 
New York State. — Prices Allowed for Extra Work on New 
York State Roads. — Macadam Road Prices in Massa- 
chusetts. — Per Cent of Engineering for Road Construction. 
— Cost of Macadam Roads, New Jersey. — Cost of a Lime- 
stone Macadam Road, Buffalo, N. Y. — Cost of a Sandstone 
and Trap Macadam, Rochester, N. Y. — Cost of Macadam 
Roads, Illinois. — Data on Depreciation and Repairs of 
Steam Rollers. — Cost of Steam Roller Repairs in Massa- 
chusetts. — Cost of Scarifying Macadam by Hand. — Cost of 
Scarifying with a Machine. — Cost of Scarifying Macadam, 
Rhode Island. — Cost of Resurfacing Old Limestone Ma 
cadam. — Cost of Repairing Sandstone Macadam, Albion, 
N. Y. — Cost of Resurfacing Macadam and Data on Com- 
pression of Broken Stone. — Cost of Repairing Macadam 
in Ireland. — Cost of Maintaining Macadam Roads, Massa- 
chusetts.— Cost of Using Calcium Chloride as a Dust Pre- 
ventative. — Cost of Tarring Macadam, Michigan. — Cost of 
Tarring Macadam, Massachusetts. — Cost of Tarring Ma- 
cadam, Tennessee. — Cost of Oiling Macadam, Tennessee. — 
Cost of Oiled Earth Road, Arkansas. — Cost of Oiling Ma- 
cadam, New York State. — Cost of Oiling Macadam, Kan- 
sas City, Mo. — Cost of Tar Macadam, Massachusetts. — Cost 
of Tar Macadam, Duluth, Minn. — Cost of Asphalt Macadam, 
Redlands, Cal. — Cost of Petrolithic Macadam. — Cost of 
Petrolithic Road. — Cost of Telford Roads, New Jersey. — 
Cost of Sand-Clay Roads. — Cost of Sand-Clay Road, Iowa. 
— Cost of Cinder-Clay Road, Iowa. — Cost of Burnt Clay 
Roads. — Cost of Maintaining Earth Roads by Dragging. — 
— Cost of Making a Corduroy Road. — Cost of Gravel Street, 
Michigan. — Cross-References on Cost of Grading Roads. — 
Cost of Grading a Road, New York. — Cost of Grading a 
Road, Maryland. — Cost of Grading a Road with a Road 
Machine, Michigan. — Average Prices of Pavements in 100 
Representative Cities, Together with Wages of Labor and 
Prices of Materials. — Cost of Pavements in 50 Cities. — 
Prices for Estimating Street Work. — Cost of Unloading and 
Hauling Bricks. — Gravity Conveyor for Handling Paving 
Bricks. — Cost of Laying Bricks. — Summary of Cost of 
Brick Pavement. — Cost of Filling Joints of Brick Pave- 
ment. — Number and Weight of Paving Brick per Sq. Yd. — 
Cost of a Brick Pavement, Illinois. — Cost of 80,000 Sq. Yds. 
of Brick Pavement, Iowa. — Cost of Laying Brick Pavement, 
Indiana. — Cost of Laying Brick Pavement, New York. — 
Bricks Laid Per Man Per Day, Michigan. — Cost of a Brick 
Pavement, Minneapolis. — Cost of a Brick Pavement, Ten- 
nessee. — Cost of a Brick Pavement, Maryland. — Cost of Re- 
moving, Chipping Off Tar and Relaying Brick. — Cost of 



CONTENTS xi 

Removing and Replacing a Brick Pavement. — Cost of Lay- 
ing a Stone Block Pavement, St. Paul. — Cost of Stone Block 
Pavement, Rochester, N. Y. — Cost of Stone Block Pave- 
ment, Baltimore. — Cost of Granite Block Pavement, New 
York City. — Cost of Laying Block Pavement, New York 
City. — Cost of Granite Block Pavement, Baltimore. — Cost 
of Dressing Old Granite Blocks. — Cost of Removing and 
Relaying a Cobblestone Pavement. — Cost of Laying Asphalt 
Block Pavement, New York City. — Cost of Asphalt Block 
Pavement, Baltimore. — Cost of Creosoted Wood Block Pave- 
ment, Minneapolis. — Labor Cost of Creosoted Wood Block 
Pavement, Seattle. — Cost of Creosoted Wood Block Pave- 
ment, Massachusetts. — Life of Wood Block Pavement. — 
Cost of Asphalt Pavement in California. — Cost of 77,200 
Sq. Yds. of Asphalt Pavement. — Cost of Asphalt Pave- 
ments, Winnipeg. — Cost of Laying Asphalt Pavement. — 
Cost of Asphalt Pavement, New York City. — Cost of Patch- 
ing Asphalt, Indianapolis. — High Cost of Patching Asphalt, 
New Orleans. — Cost of Patching Asphalt, Marion, Ind. — 
High Cost of Patching Asphalt, Brooklyn. — Cost of Bitu- 
lithic and Asphalt Pavements and Repairs, Toronto. — Cost 
of Repairs to Asphalt Pavements, Syracuse, N. Y. — Cost of 
Repairs and Life of Asphalt, Washington, D. C. — Cost of 
Repairing Asphalt Pavement in Various American Cities. — 
Specific Gravity of Bitulithic and Asphalt Pavements. — 
Cost of Asphalt Cross Walks. — Cost of Mixing Concrete 
Base by Hand. — Cost of Machine Mixing and Wagon Haul- 
ing. — Cost of Mixing Concrete with a Continuous Mixer. — 
Cost of Concrete Pavement, Windsor, Ont. — Cost of Exca- 
vating a Concrete Base and Laying New Concrete. — Cost 
of Excavating an Asphalt Pavement and Its Concrete 
Base. — Amount of Materials for Cement Side Walks. — Cost 
of Cement Walks. — Cost of Cement Walk, San Francisco. — 
Cost of Cement Walk, Toronto. — Cost of Cement Walk, 
Forbes Hill Reservoir. — Cost of Acid Finish on Cement 
Walks. — Cost of Cement Curb and Walk, Indiana. — Cost of 
Cement Curb, Iowa. — Cost of Cement Curb and Gutter. — 
Cost of Cement Curb, Baltimore.— Cost of Cement Curb and 
Gutter, Ontario. — Cost of Setting Stone Curb. — Cost of 
Cutting and Setting Granite Curb. — Cost of Resetting Stone 
Curb. — Recording Cost of Street Sprinkling. — Cost of Street 
Sprinkling, Washington, D. C. — Cost of Sprinkling Streets 
and Roads. — Sprinkling Car Tracks. — Amount of Water for 
Sprinkling Streets. — Recording Cost of Street Sweeping.— 
Cost of Street Sweeping in 35 Cities. — Cost of Street 
Cleaning, Washington, D. C. — Cost of Sweeping with a 
"Pick-up" Sweeper. — Estimated Cost of Machine Sweep- 
ing. — Estimated Cost of Flushing Streets. — Cost of Street 
Sweeping, Minneapolis. — Cost of Street Sweeping, Williams- 
port, Pa. — Cost of Street Sweeping, Albany, N. Y. — Cost of 
Street Flushing and Sweeping, St. Louis. 



xii CONTENTS 

SECTION V. — Stone Masonry 475 

Definitions. — Percentage of Mortar in Stone Masonry. — 
Cost of Laying Masonry. — Estimating the Cost of Stone 
Dressing. — Data on Stone Sawing. — Cost of Stone Dress- 
ing. — Cost of Sandstone Piers for Bridge. — Cost of Cutting 
Granite for a Dam. — Cost of Cutting Granite, New York 
City. — Cost of Quarrying, Cutting and Laying Granite. — 
Cost of Plug Hole Drilling by Hand. — Cost of Pneumatic 
Plug Drilling. — Cost of Quarrying Granite. — Cost of a 
Masonry Arch Bridge. — Cost of Centers for a 30-ft. Arch. — 
Cost of Arch Culverts and Abutments, Erie Canal. — Cost 
of Lock Masonry, Erie Canal. — Cost of Sweetwater Dam. — 
Cost of a Granite Dam, Wyoming.— Cost of Masonry, New 
Croton Dam. — Cost of a Rubble Dam. — Data on Laying 
Masonry with a Cableway. — Cost of Masonry and Timber 
Crib Dam. — Cost of Laying Masonry, Dunning* s Dam. — 
Cost of Quarrying and Laying a Limestone Wall. — Cost of 
Masonry Abutments. — Cost of Laying Bridge Pier Masonry. 
— Cost of Sodom Dam. — Cost of Dams and Locks, Black 
Warrior River. — Cost of Rock-Fill Dams. — Cost of Cyclo- 
pean Masonry, Cross-References. — Cost of Limestone and 
Sandstone Slope Walls. — Cost of Granite Slope Wall. — 
Cost of Laying a Limestone Slope Wall. — Cost of Slope Wall, 
Upper White River. — Cost of Riprap on River Bank. — Cost 
of Riprap and Brush Mattress, Cross-References. — Cost of 
Riprap in a Crib Dam. — Cost of Riprap in Cribs. — Cost of 
Riprap, Stone, Cross-References. — Cost of Cleaning Ma- 
sonry with Acid. — Cost of Excavating Masonry. — Cost of 
Pointing Old Bridge Masonry. — Cost of Lining Tunnel 
with Masonry. — Cross-References on Masonry. 

SECTION VT. — Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Construc- 
tion 530 

Definitions. — Magnitude of the Subject and General Dis- 
cussion. — Cost of Manufacturing Cement. — Theory of the 
Quantity of Cement in Mortar and Concrete. — Size and 
Weight of Barrels of Cement. — Effect of Size of Sand 
Grains on Voids. — Tables for Estimating the Cost of Con- 
crete and for Designing Reinforced Concrete Beams and 
Slabs. — Percentage of Water in Mortar. — Estimating the 
Cost of Steel in Reinforced Concrete. — Cost of Sand. — Cost 
of Washing Sand in Tank Washer. — Cost of Washing Sand 
with a Hose. — ^Washing Sand with Ejectors. — Cost of Wash- 
ing Gravel. — Cost of Making Concrete by Hand. — ^Unload- 
ing the Materials from Cars. — Cost of Loading the Ma- 
terials. — Cost of Transporting the Materials. — Cost of 
Mixing the Materials by Hand. — Cost of Loading and 
Hauling Concrete. — Cost of Dumping, Spreading and Ram- 
ming. — Example of High Cost of Tamping. — Cost of Rolling 
and Finishing Concrete Floors. — Cost of Superintendence. — 
Summary of Costs of Making Concrete by Hand. — Cost of 



CONTENTS xiii 

Mixing Concrete with Machines. — Cost of Mixing with a 
Gravity Mixer. — Cost of Forms. — Cost of Fortification 
Worij, California. — Cost of Fortification "Work. — Cost of 
Breakwater, Buffalo. — Cost of Locks, Upper White River. — 
Cost of Locks, Coosa River. — Cost of Locks, Cascade Canal. 
— Cost of Locks, Illinois and Mississippi Canal. — Labor 
Cost of Retaining Walls. — Cost of Retaining Walls, Chicago 
Canal. — Cost of Retaining Wall. — Cost of Retaining Walls, 
References. — Cost of Filling Pier Cylinders with Concrete. 
— Cost of Harbor Pier, Wisconsin. — Rubble Concrete 
Data. — Cost of the Boonton Dam, Cyclopean Masonry. — 
Some English Data on Rubble Concrete. — Cost of a Rubble 
Concrete Abutment. — Cost of a Rubble Concrete Dam, 
Central States. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete Fence Posts. — 
Cost of Reinforced Concrete Telephone Poles. — Cost of 
Poles. — Bills of Materials and Cost of Poles. — Cost of Re- 
inforced Concrete Piles for a Building. — Cost of Piles for 
an Ocean Pier. — Cost of Pile Dike. — Cost of Raymond Piles. 
— Cost of Rolled Concrete Piles. — Cost of Simplex Piles. — 
Cost of Concrete Oil Tank. — Cost of Concrete Tanks, 
References. — Cost of Small Cement Pipes. — Cost of Cement 
and Concrete Pipes and Sewers, Cross-References. — Cost 
of a Band Stand. — Cost of Sylvester Wash and Sylvester 
Mortar. — Cost of Waterproofing with Tar Felt and 
Asphalt. — Cost of Waterproofing Batteries with Tar and 
Sand. — Cost of Waterproofing Bridge Floors. — Cost of 
Waterproofing, Cross-References. — Cost of Removing Efflo- 
rescence with Acid. — Cost of Bush-Hammering Concrete.— 
Cross-References and References on Concrete. 

SECTION VII.— Wafer Works 641 

Definitions. — Cost of Complete Water Works Systems. — 
Average Cost of Constructing and Operating Water Works 
in Massachusetts. — Prices of Cast-Iron Pipe. — Weight of 
Cast-iron Pipe. — Lead for Joints. — Items of Cost of Pipe 
Laying and Materials. — Cost of Loading and Hauling Cast- 
iron Pipe. — Trenches. — Cost of Digging a 3 6 -Mile Trench 
with a Machine. — Trenching in Quicksand, Using a Ma- 
chine. — Cost of Trenching, Corning, N. Y. — Cost of Trench- 
ing, Great Falls, Mont. — Cost of Trenching, Astoria, Ore. — 
Cost of Trenching, Hilburn, N. Y. — Cost of Pipe Laying, 
Providence, R. I. — Cost of Laying 107,877 Ft. of Mains, 
Cleveland, O. — Cost of Pipe Laid, Boston. — Comparative 
Cost of Pipe Laying in New England Cities. — Cost of Pipe 
Laj'ing and Placing Hydrants, Atlantic City. — Cost of 
Laying Pipe, Pennsylvania. — Cost of Pipe Laid, Alliance, 
O. — Cost of Pipe Laid and Service Connections, Porter- 
ville, Cal. — ^An Unusually Expensive Piece of Work. — Cost 
of a Pipe Line, Ohio. — Cost of Main and Service Pipes 
Laid in a Southern City. — Cost of Laying Wrought-Iron 
Pipe, Maryland. — Cost of Taking Up an Old Pipe Line. — 



xiv CONTENTS 

Cost of Constructing and Laying Cement Lined Pipe, 
Plymouth, Mass., and Portland, Me. — Cost of Lining Iron 
Service Pipes with Cement. — Cost of Setting Meters and 
Laying Service Pipes. — Cost of Meters and Setting, Cleve- 
land, O. — Cost of Setting Meters and Maintenance, 
Rochester, N. Y. — Cost of Operating and Maintaining Meters, 
Reading, Pa. — Cost of Placing Hydrants, Chicago. — Cost 
of Concrete Vaults for Valves. — Cost of Dipping Pipes. — 
Cost of Cleaning Water Pipes, Pittsburg, Pa. — Cost of 
Cleaning Pipes, St. John, N. B. — Cost of Cleaning Pipe, 
Boston. — Cost of Hydrant Maintenance in Winter. — Cost of 
Thawing Water Pipes by Electricity. — Cost of Stop Cock 
Box Repairs, Etc. — Cost of Subaqueous Pipe Laying. — Cost 
of Laying a Submerged Pipe Across Deal Lake, N. J. — 
Cost of Laying Pipe Across the Susquehanna. — Cost of 
Laying a Submerged Pipe, New Jersey to Ellis Island. — 
Cost of Submerged Pipe Laying, Massachusetts. — Cost of 
Laying Submerged Pipe, Vancouver. — Cost of Laying Pipe 
Across the Willamette River. — Cost of a Wood Stave Pipe 
Line, Denver. — Cost of Wood Stave Pipe Line, Astoria, 
Ore. — Estimated Cost of Wood Stave Pipe. — Cost of Wood 
Stave Pipe Line, Atlantic City. — Labor on Wood Stave 
Pipe, Ogden, Utah. — Labor on Wood Stave Pipe, Lynch- 
burg. — Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Conduit. — Cost of a 
Brick Conduit. — Weight of Steel Stand Pipes. — Cost of a 
Standpipe, Quincy, I lass. — Cost of Steel Standpipe Encased 
in Brick. — Brick Casing Around Standpipe. — Cost of a 
Steel Tank and Tower, Ames, la. — Cost of Steel Tank and 
Tower, Porterville, Cal. — Cost of Steel Tank and Tower, 
Fairhaven, Mass. — Cost of Steel Tank and Tower, Provi- 
dence, R. I. — Cost of Scraping and Painting a Stand Pipe. — 
Weight of Wooden Tank and Steel Tower. — Cost of a 
Wooden Tank, La Salle, 111. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete 
Standpipe, Attleborough, Mass. — Materials in a Reinforced 
Concrete Standpipe. — Cost of a 12-in. Well, Portersville, 
Cal. — Relative Cost of Water Works and Filters. — Cost 
of Filter and Filtering, Ashland, Wis. — Cost of Filter, Ber- 
wyn. Pa. — Cost of Filter, Nyack, N. T. — Cost of Filter and 
Filtering, Superior, Wis. — Cost of Filter and Filtering, 
Washington, D. C. — Cost of Filtering at Washington, Al- 
bany and Philadelphia. — ^Cost of Filter and Filtering, 
Albany, N. Y. — Cost of Groined Arches and Forms on the 
Albany Filter Plant. — Cost of Filter and Filtering, Law- 
rence, Mass. — Cost of Filter and Filtering, Mt. Vernon, 
N. Y. — Cost of Filtering, Poughkeepsie. — Cost of Ice Re- ' 
moval from Filters. — Estimated Cost of Filters and Filter- 
ing, Cincinnati, O. — Cost of Filtering and Ice Removal. 
Reading, Pa. — Cost of Filtering, Brooklyn, N. Y. — Out- 
put of Sand Washers. — Cost of Filter, Lambertville, N. J. — 
Cost of Reinforced Concrete Roof for Filter, Indianapolis. 
— Cost of Seven Mechanical Filters. — Cost of Mechanical 



CONTENTS XV 

Filter, Danville, 111. — Cost of Mechanical Filter and Filter- 
ing, Norfolk, Va. — Cost of Mechanical Filter and Filtering, 
Wilkes- Bar re. Pa. — Cost of Mechanical Filter, Asbury 
Park, N. J. — Cost of Mechanical Filter and Filtering, El- 
mira, N. Y. — Cost of Water Softening. — Cost of Concrete, 
Asphalt and Brick Lining of Reservoir. — Cost of Lining a 
Reservoir with Asphalt. — Cost of Lining a Reser- 
voir with Concrete. — Cost of Concrete Reservoir Floor, 
Pittsburg. — Cost of Reservoir, Forbes Hill, Mass. — 
Cost of Concrete Lining and Plastering, Forbes Hill Reser- 
voir. — Cost of Concrete Lined Reservoir, Clinton, 111. — 
Cost of Covered Reservoirs of Various Sizes. — Cost of Small 
Covered Reservoir, Portersville, Cal. — Cost of a Covered Re- 
inforced Concrete Reservoir, Fort Meade, S. D. — Cost of 
Concrete Reservoir, Pomona, Cal. — Cost of Storage Reser- 
voir, Hagerstown, Md. — Cost of a Wooden Covering for 
Reservoir, Quincy, 111. — Cost of a Concrete Core Wall. — 
Cost of Puddle. — Cost of Sheeting and Bracing a Small 
Circular Reservoir. — Cost of Dams Per Million Feet of 
Water Stored. — Cross-References on Dams and Reser- 
voirs. — Water Works Valuation and Plant Depreciation. — 
Going Value of Water Works. — Life of Cast-Iron Pipe. — 
Life of Wrought-Iron Pipe. — Life of Pipe, St. John, N. B. — 
The Life of Pipe and Appraisal of Syracuse V.'ater 
Works. — Estimated Depreciation of Water Pipe, Los 
Angeles, Cal. 

SECTION VIII. — Sewers *. 802 

General Considerations. — Cost of Pumping Water from 
Trenches. — Cost of Trenching with Trench Excavators. — Cost 
of Excavation with Trench Machines. — Cost of Trench Ex- 
cavation in Massachusetts, Using a Carson Machine. — Cost 
of Excavating with a Potter Trench Machine. — Cost of 
Excavating with a Trench Machine. — Cost of Trenching 
by Cableways. — Cost of Sewer Trench and Backfilling. — 
Cost of Excavating Trench with Orange Peel Bucket. — 
Cost of Sewer Trenching Using a Derrick. — Sizes and Prices 
of Sewer Pipe. — Cement Required for Sewer Pipe Joints. — 
Cost of Laying Sewer Pipe. — Diagram Giving Contract 
Prices of Sewers. — Cost of Pipe Sewers, Atlantic, la. — 
Cost of Pipe Sewers, Centerville, la. — Cost of Pipe Sewers, 
Laurel, Miss. — Estimated Cost of Pipe Sewers. — Cost of 
Pipe Sewer in Quicksand. — Cost of Pipe Sewers and Man- 
holes, Oskaloosa, la. — Cost of Two Pipe Sewers. — Cost of 
Pipe Sewer, Cordele, Ga. — Cost of Pipe Sewer, Me- 
nasha. Wis. — Cost of Pipe Sewer, Ithaca, N. T. — 
Cost of Pipe Sewers, Toronto. — Brick Sewer Data. — 
Cost of Large Brick Sewers, Denver. — Cost of an Egg- 
Shaped Sewer, Springfield, Mass. — Cost of a Large Brick 
Sewer, Gary, Ind. — Cost of a Brick Sewer in Water- 
Soaked Land, Gary, Ind. — Cost of 66-in. Brick Sewer, 



xvi CONTENTS 

Gary, Ind. — Cost of Rock Excavation in Trenches, St. 
Louis. — Cost of Pipe and Brick Sewers, St. Louis. — Cost 
of a Brick Sewer, Including Tunneling in Earth and Rock, 
St. Louis. — Cost of Pipe and Brick Sewers and Manholes, 
St. Louis. — Cost of a Brick Sewer and Tunneling, Syra- 
cuse. — Cost of a Sewer Tunnel, Using a Hydraulic Shield, 
Chicago. — Cost of a Sewer Tunnel, Using a Hydraulic 
Shield, Cleveland. — Cost of a Sewer in Tunnel, Cleveland. 
— Labor Cost of a Large Brick Sewer, Chicago. — Cost of 
a Concrete and Brick Sewer. — Cost of a Concrete Sewer. — 
Cost of Reinforced Concrete Sewer, Cleveland. — Cost of 
Reinforced Concrete Sewer, Wilmington, Del. — Cost of Re- 
inforced Concrete Sewer, Kalamazoo, Mich. — Cost of Rein- 
forced Concrete Sewer, South Bend, Ind. — Cost of a Large 
Reinforced Concrete Sewer, St. Louis. — Cost of a Reinforced 
Concrete Sewer. — Cost of Making Blocks for a Concrete 
Sewer. — Cost of Concrete Sewer Blocks. — Cost of Concrete 
Block Manholes. — Diagram for Estimating Cost of Man- 
holes. — A Device for Building Brick Manholes. — Cost of 
a Concrete Manhole. — Cost of Brick Manholes. — Cost of 
Brick Manhole, Flush Tank and Laying Pipe Sewer. — Cost 
of Making Cement Pipe. — Cost of Cement Pipe Sewer 
(Egg-Shaped) and Manholes, Brooklyn, N. Y. — Cost of 
Constructing Cement Pipe Sewer in Place. — Cost of Clean- 
ing a Large Brick Sewer. — Cost of Cleaning Sewers and 
Catch Basins. — Cost of Sewage Purification, Providence, 
R. I. — Cost of Sewage Disposal, 6 Cities. — Estimated Cost 
of Sewage Filtering. — Cost of Sewage Filters, Pawtucket, 
R. I. — Cost of Sewage Filters, Waterloo, Ont. — Cost of a 
Sewage Filter and Septic Tank, with Costs of Operation. — 
Cost of Cleaning Sewers and Catch Basins. — Cost of 
Flushing Sewers. 

SECTION IX. — Timberwork 945 

Definitions. — Importance of Timberwork. — Measurement 
of Timberwork. — Cubic Contents and Weight of Piles and 
Poles. — Cost of Manufacturing Lumber. — Prices of Yellow 
Pine for 14 Years. — Life of Trestle and Bridge Timbers. — 
Life of Treated and Untreated Fence Posts. — Life of Creo- 
soted Ties. — Cost of Treating Timber, Cross-References. — 
Processes for Treatment of Timber and Costs. — Cost of 
Creosoting and Life of Creosoted Timber. — Cost of Creo- 
soting Ties. — Cost of a Zinc Chloride Treating Plant. — Ties 
Treated with Crude Asphaltic Oil. — General Data on the 
Cost of Framing and Erecting Timber. — Cost of Loading 
and Hauling Timber. — Sawing, Boring and Adzing. — Formu- 
las for Quantity of Materials in Trestles. — Methods and 
Cost of Building a Railway Trestle. — Cost of a Timber 
Viaduct. — Cost of Wagon Road Trestles. — Cost of Trestles, 
Cross-References. — Estimated Prices of Howe Truss 
Bridges. — Cost of 160-ft. Howe Truss Bridge and Cribs. — 



CONTENTS xvii 

Cost of Log Culverts. — Materials Required for Timber 
Box Culverts. — Cost of a Wooden Reservoir Roof 
on Iron Posts. — Cost of Crib Dam. — Cost of Timber Cribs 
for Dams, Etc. — Cost of Four Caissons. — Cost of Two 
Small Scows. — Cost of a Semi-Circular Flume. — Cost of 
a Flume. — Cost of Liock Gates. — Cost of a Railway Box Car. 
— Cost of Making Bodies for Dump Cars. — Cost of Mak- 
ing Tool Boxes. — Cost of Plank Roads. — Piles. — The 
Steam Hammer vs. the Drop Hammer. — Cost of Making 
Piles. — Life of Pile Driver Rope. — Cost of Driving Piles 
with a Horse Driver. — Cost of Driving Foundation Piles for 
a Building. — Construction and Cost of a Small Pile Driver. 
— Cost of Driving Piles for Wagon Road Trestles. — Cost 
of Driving Piles for Trestle Renewals. — Cost of Driving 
Piles for a Trestle, N. P. Ry. — Cost of Pile Driving, O. & 
S. L. Ry. — Cost of Pile Driving, C. & E. I. Ry. — The Record 
for Rapid Pile Driving on the O. & M. R. R. — Cost of Pile 
Trestle, Sheet Piles, Etc. — Cost of a Pile Docking. — Data 
on Driving Plumb and Batter Piles, N. T. Docks. — Cost of 
Pulling Piles, Driving Piles and Timberwork. — Cost of 
Driving and Sawing Off Piles. — Data on Driving with a. 
Steam Hammer and Sawing Off Piles. — Cost of Driving 
Piles for a Swing Bridge. — Cost of Sawing Off 42-ft. Piles 
Under Water. — Data on Sawing Off Burlington Bridge 
Pier Piles. — Cost of Pulling and Driving Piles for a Guard 
Pier. — Cost of Driving Foundation Piles and Sheet Piles. 
— Cost of Pulling Piles. — Cost of Blasting Piles. — Cost of 
Driving and Pulling Test Piles. — Cost of Driving Piles for 
Shore Protection. — Cost of Driving Wakefield Sheet Piles. — 
Cost of Piling, Cross-References. — Estimating Cost of 
Brush Revetment. — Cost of Brush Mattress and Slope Wall, 
Missouri River. — Cost of Brush Mattress and Revetment, 
Mississippi River. — Cost of Brush Revetment Ballasted 
with Concrete. — Cost of Brush Mattresses. — Cost of Mat- 
tress and Slope Wall, M. K. & T. Ry. — Cost of Brush 
Mattresses and Dikes. — Cost of Clearing Land. — Design of 
Stump Pullers. — Cost of Removing Stumps. — Cost of Clear- 
ing and Grubbing, Ohio. — Cost of Blasting .'5,500 Stumps. — 
Cost of Blasting 1,100 Stumps. — Cost of Clearing and Grub- 
bing by Blasting. — Cost of Clearing and Grubbing for a 
Railway. — Cost of Transporting Logs by River Driving and 
by Trains. — Cost of Cordwood and Cost of a Wire Rope 
Tramway. — Cost of Planting Trees, Washington, D. C. — 
Cost of Tree Planting, Mass. — Cost of Digging Holes and 
Planting Trees and Shrubs. 

SECTION X. — Buildings 1069 

Cost of Items of Buildings by Percentages. — Cost of 
Buildings Per Cu. Ft. — Cost of Miscellaneous Buildings. — 
Cost of Concrete Buildings. — Cubic Foot Costs of Reinforced 
Concrete Buildings. — Cost of Mill Buildings. — Estimating 



xviii CONTENTS 

Quantity of Lumber.^Cost of Timberwork in Different 
Kinds of Buildings. — Cost of Laying and Smoothing Floors. 
— Cost of Placing Ceiling, Wainscoting and Siding. — Cost of 
Shingling. — Cost of Laying Base Boards. — Cost of Placing 
Doors, "Windows and Blinds. — Cost of Making Stairs. — Cost 
of Tin Roofing. — Building Papers and Felts. — Cost of 
Gravel Roofs. — Cost of Slate Roofs. — Brick Masonry 
Data. — Cost of Laying Brick. — Cost of Mortar. — Cost of 
Brickwork in a Shop. — Cost of Brickwork in Five Manufac- 
turing Buildings. — Cost of Brick Chimneys. — Cost of High 
Brick Stacks. — Cost of Brickwork, Cross-References. — Cost 
of Rubble Walls. — Cost of Ashlar. — Cost of Cut 
Stone Work. — Cost of Wood Lathing. — Cost of Metal 
Lathing. — Cost of Plaster. — Cost of Placing Tile Fire- 
Proofing. — Cost of Terra Cotta Brick Fireproofing. — 
— Cost of Ornamental Terra Cotta Work. — Cost of 
Combined Concrete and Tile Floors. — Cost of Combination 
Concrete and Tile Floors in Three Buildings. — Cost of Bitu- 
minous Concrete for a Mill Floor. — Cost of Passenger Sta- 
tions. — Cost of Four Frame Depots. — Cost of 57 Frame 
Depots. — Cost of 5 Frame Section Houses. — Cost of Black- 
smith Shop, Barn and Telegraph Oflfice. — Cost of 40 Hand 
Car Houses. — Cost of Six Tool Houses. — Capacity and Cost 
of Ice Houses. — Cost of 11 Ice Houses. — Cost of Car 
Shops. — Cost of Engine Roundhouses. — Cost of Roundhouse, 
Coaling Station, Turntable, Etc. — Cost of a Brick and Steel 
Building. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete Buildings. — Cost of 
Reinforced Concrete Building Construction. — Cost of Re- 
inforced Concrete Factory. — Cost of a House of Separately 
Molded Concrete Members. — Cost of Two Reinforced Con- 
crete Buildings. — Cost of Metal Forms for Concrete Build- 
ings. — Cost of Concrete Buildings, References. — Cost of 
Moving a Frame Dwelling. — References on Buildings. 

SECTION 'Kl.— Railways 1178 

Cross-References on Cost of Grading. — Cross-References 
on Bridges, Culverts and Buildings. — Cross-References on 
Telegraphs, Fences, Etc. — Cost o" Transporting Men, Tools 
and Supplies on Railroads for Grading. — Cost of Three 
Short Single Track Tunnels. — Cost of the Stampede Tun- 
nel. — Cost of the Stampede Tunnel Lining. — ^Wabash R. R. 
Tunnel Costs. — Cost of Mount Wood and Top Mill Tun- 
nels. — Cost of Hand Driven Tunnel, B. & O. — Cost of the 
Busk Tunnel. — Cost of a Double Track Tunnel, N. Y. 
Central. — Cost of Tunnels, Alaska Central Ry. — Cost of the 
New Raton Tunnel. — Cost of Lining the Mullan Tunnel. — 
Cost of Lining a 1,000-ft. Tunnel. — Cost of Brick and Stone 
Lining. — Weights and Prices of Rails. — Prices of Rails 
Since 1876. — Cost of Track Laying. — Cost of Track Laying, 
M. St. P. & S. M. — Cost of Track Laying, 50-lb. Rails. — 
Cost of Track Laying, A. T. & S. F. — Cost of Track Lay- 



CONTENTS xix 

Ing with Machines. — Cost of Laying Narrow Gage Track. — 
A Method of Unloading Rails. — Cost of Renewing Rails, 
C. C. C. & St. L. — Rail Relaying Gangs. — Cost of Relaying 
Rails. — Cost of Laying Side Tracks and Switches. — Esti- 
mated Cost of Growing Tie Timber. — A Cheap Way of 
Loading Ties. — Cost of Burnettizing Timber and Ties. — 
Cost of Burnettizing Ties, S. P. Ry. — Cost of Creosoting 
Piles and Ties. — Cost of Treating Ties with Zinc Chloride 
and Creosote, Galesburg, 111. — Labor Cost of Renewing Ties. 
Life of Treated Ties. — Estimated Life of Ties. — Life of Ties 
as Affected by Weight of Rail. — Prices of Ties and Labor 
Cost of Renewals. — Average Price of Ties in America. — 
Cost of Gravel Ballast. — Cost of Gravel and Rock Ballast- 
ing Old Tracks. — Cost of Gravel Ballasting. — Cost of Ce- 
mented Gravel Ballast. — Cost of Washing Gravel. — Cost 
of Ballasting, Using Dump Cars. — Cost of Rock Ballast. — 
Prices of Frogs, Crossings, Etc. — Cost of Track Scales. — 
Cost of Water Tanks. — Cost of Track Tank. — Turntable 
Construction and Costs. — Cost of Turntables. — Cost of Snow 
Sheds. — Cost of Snow Fences. — Cost of Mail Cranes. — 
Definitions of "Mile of Railway." — Average Cost of Rail- 
ways in America. — Cost of Railway Lines. — Cost of a 
Mining Railway. — Cost of a Logging Railway. — Cost of a 
Branch Line, Texas. — Cost of a Cheap Railway, Georgia. — 
Report of H. P. Gillette to the Washington R. R. Com- 
mission on the Valuation of the Railways of Washington. — 
Cost of the Great Northern Ry. in the State of Washing- 
ton. — Cost of the Northern Pacific Ry. (1,645 Miles) in 
the State of Washington. — Cost of the O. R. & N. (500 
Miles) in the State of Washington. — Appraised Value of 
the Railways of Wisconsin. — Cost Per Mile of Railways 
in Wisconsin and Michigan. — ^Appraised Value of the Rail- 
ways of Minnesota. — Cost of 1,100 Miles of the C, M. & 
St. P. in South Dakota. — Prices Used in Estimating the 
Cost of Railways in Texas. — Itemized Cost of the Northern 
Pacific Ry. System as Estimated by Its Chief Engineer. — 
Itemized Cost of the Great Northern Ry. System as Esti- 
mated by Its Chief Engineer. — Contract Prices for Railway 
Work in the State of Washington. — Weight and Cost of 
Steel in Brooklyn Elevated Railways. — Cost of Elevated 
Railways in New York City. — Cost of Tracklaying and 
Erecting Steel, New York Elevated Railways. — Cost of 
Elevated Railways, Brooklyn and New York. — Cost of 
Foundations, Boston Elevated Ry. — Cost of Elevated Rail- 
way and Subway, Berlin. — Cost of Excavation, New York 
Subway. — Itemized Cost to the Contractors for Excavating, 
Concrete, Steelwork, Etc., New York Subway. — Prices of 
Tools, Machines and Supplies, New York Subway. — Cost of 
Excavating a Subway, Brooklyn, Long Island R. R. — Cost 
of Cable Railways in Cities. — Cost of Constructing and 
Operating Cable Railways, ICansas City. — Cost of a Cable 



XX CONTENTS 

Railway in an Eastern City. — Cost of Operating Cable 
Railways, Chicago. — Cost of Brickwork in Vaults of a Cable 
Railway. — Cost of an Inclined Cable Railway for Hand- 
ling Freight Cars. — Cost of a Rack Railway, Pike's Peak. — 
Cost of Conduit Electric Street Railways. — Cost of an Elec- 
tric Railway, Denver. — Cost of an Electric Railway, Third 
Rail Line. — Cost of Interurban Trolley Line. — Cost of Third 
Rail and Trolley Lines Compared. — Cost of Two Electric 
Railways. — Cost of Steel Railway Track. — Comparative 
Cost of Street Railway Track Built with Steel and with 
Wood Ties. — Cost of Welding Rails by Thermit Process. — 
Cost of Electrically Welding 3,087 Rails. — Cost of Erecting 
Trolley Poles. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete Trolley and 
Transmission Line Poles. — First Cost and Cost of Operat- 
ing a Trolley Line. — Cost of Power Plants for Electric 
Railways. — Cost of Power Plant and Equipment of an Elec- 
tric Railway. — Cost of a Street Railway Power Plant and 
Its Operation. — Cost of Operating Street Railways. — 
Power to Operate Street Cars. — Cost of Operating an 
Elevated Railway. — Power to Operate New York Elevated 
and Surface Cars. — Weight and Power of Motor Cars. — Cost 
of Maintenance of Motor Cars. — Railway Operating Ex- 
penses, Etc. — Life of Rails and Cost of Renewals. — Curva- 
ture of Rails. — Cost of Maintenance of Equipment in 
America. — Cost of Maintenance of Equipment, N. P. Ry. — 
Life of Railway Cars and Locomotives and Cost of Repairs, 
S. P. Ry. — Percentage of Engines Laid Off for Repairs. — 
Percentage of Freight Cars Laid Off for Repairs. — Price of 
Locomotives. — Cost of Shop Machinery. — Cost of Stopping 
Trains. — Cost of Handling Locomotives at Terminals. 

SECTION XII. — Bridges and Culverts 1471 

Weight of Steel Bridges. — Weights of Steel Bridges for 
Highway, Railway and Electric Railway Bridges. — Weights 
of Standard Bridges, A. T. & S. F. Ry. — Weights of 
Standard Bridges, N. P. Ry. — Weights of Standard Bridges, 
111. Central Ry. — Tyrrell's Formulas for Weights of High- 
way, Railway and Electric Railway Bridges. — ^Weight of 
a 465-ft. Highway Bridge.— Weight of a 406-ft. Highway 
Bridge. — Weight and Cost of a Highway Bridge, 120-ft. 
Spans. — Weight of a 450-ft. Highway Swing Bridge. — 
Weight of a 520-ft. Double Track Railway Swing Bridge. 
— ^Weight of a 450-ft. Double Track Swing Bridge. — ^Weight 
of a 438-ft. Single Track §wing Bridge. — ^Weight and Cost 
of a 334-ft. Four Track Swing Bridge. — Weight of a 231-ft. 
Single Track Swing Bridge. — Weight of a 216-ft. Double 
Track Swing Bridge. — ^Weight and Cost of a 1,504-ft. Canti- 
lever Double Track Bridge. — ^Weight and Cost of a 1,296-ft. 
Cantilever Double Track Bridge. — Weight and Cost of a 
2,750-ft. Cantilever Double Track Bridge. — Weight of a 
1,380-ft. Cantilever Highway Bridge. — ^Weight and Cost of 



CONTENTS xxi 

Scherzer Highway and Railway Lift Bridges. — Cost of 
Page Highway and Railway Lift Bridges. — Cost of Bricson 
Trunnion Bascule Lift Bridges. — Weight of an 840-ft. Span 
Arch Bridge. — Weight and Cost of a 195-ft. Arch High- 
way Bridge. — Weight of a 207-ft. Arch Railway Bridge. — 
Weight and Cost of a 440-ft. Arch Railway Bridge. — Cost of 
an Arch Highway Bridge. — Weight of the Burlington 
Bridge, C. B. & Q. Ry. — Weight of a 195-ft. Double Track 
Swing Bridge. — Weight of a 533-ft. Span Railway Bridge 
and of a 323-ft. Swing Bridge. — Weight of a 1,024-ft. 
Cantilever Highway Bridge. — Estimating Cost of Steel 
Bridge Erection. — Cost per Lin. Ft. and Per Sq. Ft. — Most 
Economical Span. — Life of Steel Railway Bridges. — Amount 
of Work Done Per Man in a Large Bridge Works. — Cost 
of Erecting Bridges, A. T. & S. F. Ry. — Falsework for a 
Railway Bridge. — Cost of a Steel Railway Bridge and 
Substructure. — Cost of a Steel Railway Bridge of 155-ft. 
Span. — Cost of a Steel Railway Bridge of 180-ft. Span. — Cost 
of Two Steel Bridges of 180-ft. Span and One Plate Lattice 
Girder of 100-ft. Span. — Cost of Erecting Pratt Truss 
Bridge. — Cost of Three Plate Girder Bridges, 10 Spans. — Cost 
of a Plate Girder Railway Bridge with Concrete Piers. — 
Cost of Erecting Plate Girder Bridge. — Cost of Bridge and 
Abutments. — Cost of Plate Girder Bridge with Concrete 
Piers. — Cost of Erecting a 236-ft. Draw Bridge. — Cost of 
Howe Truss Bridges, Cross-References. — Cost of a 150-ft. 
Howe Truss Railway Bridge. — Cost of Two Howe Truss 
Bridges, 120-ft. and 130-ft. Spans. — Cost of Six Crib Piers, 
Three Howe Truss Spans and One Steel Draw Span. — 
Cost of the Frazer River Bridge. — Estimates of the Cost of 
Combination and All-Steel Highway Bridges. — Cost of a 
300-ft. Highway Draw Bridge. — Cost of a Steel Arch High- 
way Bridge. — Estimated Cost of a Cantilever and of a 
Bridge. — Cost of Three Plate Girder Bridges, 10 Spans. — 
Cost Brooklyn Suspension Bridge. — Cost of the Williamsburg 
Suspension Bridge. — Cost of Caisson Foundations for the 
Williamsburg Bridge. — Cost of Erecting Towers and End 
Spans of the Williamsburg Bridge. — Cost of the Anchorage 
of the Williamsburg Bridge. — Labor Cost of the Founda- 
tions of the City Island Bridge, New York. — Cost of a 
Bridge Foundation Excavation and Cofferdam. — Cost of 
Stone Masonry Bridge Piers and Abutments. — Labor Cost 
of a Bridge Abutment. — Cost of Concrete Foundations for 
a Railway Bridge. — Cost of a Cofferdam and of a Concrete 
Pier on Piles. — Cost of a Pneumatic Caisson and Masonry 
Bridge Pier. — Cost of Two Caissons and Bridge Piers. — 
Cost of a Caisson, Arizona. — Cost of a Caisson, Tennessee. — 
Materials for a Caisson. — Cost of Erecting Three Steel 
"Viaducts and a New Formula for Computing the Weight of 
Viaducts. — Cost of the Pecos Viaduct. — Cost of the Marent 
Viaduct. — Cost of the Old Kinzua Viaduct. — Cost of the 



xxii CONTENTS 

New Kinzua Viaduct. — Weight of a Steel Viaduct. — Data 
on Riveting a Viaduct. — Cost of Concrete Pedestals for a 
Steel Viaduct. — Cost of Abutments and Pedestal Piers, 
Lonesome Valley Viaduct. — Cost of Paint. — Weight and 
Surface Area of Steel Bridges. — Cost of Painting a Howe 
Truss Bridge. — Cost of Painting 6 Railway Bridges. — Cost 
of Painting 6 Railway Bridges and 2 Viaducts. — Cost of 
Painting 50 Plate Girder Bridges. — Cost of Cleaning and 
Painting 10 Bridges. — Cost of Painting 48 Bridges and 2 
Viaducts. — Cost of Cleaning and Painting 4 Bridges, St. 
Louis. — Cost of Painting 2 Bridges. — Cost of Painting 
Plate Girders, Truss Bridges and Trestles. — Cost of Paint- 
ing, Cross-References. — Cost of Bridge Abutments. — Data 
on 32 Concrete and Masonry Highway, Railway and Elec- 
tric Railway Bridges, Including Yardage, Cost, Etc. — Di- 
mensions and Cost of 45 Concrete Arch Bridges. — Cost of 
a Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridge. — Cost of Three 
Reinforced Concrete Bridges. — Cost of Small Rein- 
forced Concrete Highway Bridges. — Cost of Mixing 
and Placing Concrete for an Arch Bridge. — Cost 
of a Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridge. — Cost of a 
Concrete Ribbed Arch Bridge. — Cost of Centers of a 233-ft. 
Arch. — Materials for Centers of a 50-ft. Arch. — Data on a 
Concrete Viaduct. — Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Trestle. — 
Yardage in Concrete Culverts. — Cost of Reinforced Con- 
crete Culvert. — Cost of 6 Arch Culverts and 6 Bridge 
Abutments. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete Culvert. — Cost 
of a Stone Arch Culvert. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete 
Subways. — Cost of a Masonry Box Culvert. — Cost of Con- 
crete Culvert Pipe. — Cost of Placing Cast-Iron Pipe Cul- 
verts. — Cost of a Corrugated Metal Culvert. — Cost of Tear- 
ing Down a Small Bridge. — Cost of Moving a 65-ft. Bridge. 

SECTION XIII. — Steel and Iron Construction 1717 

Need of More Printed Data. — Cross-References. — Cost 
of Pneumatic Riveting. — Pneumatic and Hand Riveting. — 
Cost of Erecting Steel in New York Subway. — Weight of 
the Eiffel Tower. — Cost of Gas Pipe Hand Railing. — Cost 
of Erecting a 160-Ft. Steel Stack. — Cost of Iron Work. — 
Cost of Shop Drawings for Steel Work. — Cost of Sheeting 
a Foundation Pit with Steel Sheet Piling. — Cost of Driving 
Steel Sheet Piling for Cut-Off Wall of a Dam. — Cost of Sheet 
Piling for Cofferdam. — Cost of Driving Steel Sheet Piling. — - 
Cost of Steel Sheet Piling in a Cofferdam and in Cais- 
sons. — Cutting Off Steel Sheet Piles with the Electric Arc. — 
Cost of Driving Steel Sheet Piling. — Cost of Cleaning Steel 
by Sand Blast and Painting by Compressed Air. 

SECTION XIV. — Engineering and Surveys 1745 

Cost of Engineering. — Engineering Charges for Services. 
— Cost of Engineering on City Work. — Cost of Engi- 
neering in Reservoir Construction. — Rations for Men 



CONTENTS xxiii 

Camping. — Cost of Rations. U. S. Reclamation Service. — 
Equipment for and Cost of Railroad Surveys. — Cost of 2,000 
Miles of Railway Surveys. — Cost of a Railway Survey, Can- 
ada. — Cost of Reconnaissance Survey for Railway in 
Alaska. — Cost of Locating Two Railroad Lines in Michigan 
and Wisconsin. — Cost of a Railroad Re-Survey, Canada. — 
Cost of Re-Survey of Chicago & West Michigan Ry. — Cost 
of Re-Survey of Detroit, Grand Rapids & Northern Ry. — 
Cost of Railway Surveys. — Cost of Transit Lines in Heavy 
Timber. — Cost of Topographic Survey for 160- Acre Park. — 
Cost of Topographic Survey of St. Louis. — Cost of Stadia 
Survey, Baltimore. — Cost of Topographic Survey, West- 
chester Co.. N. T. — Cost of Topographic Survey Near 
Baltimore. — Cost of Three Stadia Topographic Surveys. — 
Cost of Surveys, Brie Canal. — Cost of U. S. Deep Water- 
way Survey, New York. — Cost of Government Topographic 
Surveys. — Cost of Triangulation and Plane Table Surveys. — 
Cost of Topographical Survey, Texas. — Cost of Two Small 
Surveying Jobs. — Cost of Level Survey for a Drainage 
Plan. — Cost of Sounding Through Ice. 

SECTION XV. — Miscellaneous Cost Data 1779 

Supplies and Plant Prices of Materials. — Cost of 
Fences. — Cost of Barbed Wire Fences. — Cost of a Wire 
Fence. — Cost of Digging Post Holes for a Fence. — Cost of 
Digging Post and Pole Holes. — Cost of Digging 600 Trolley 
Pole Holes. — Weight of Ashes, Garbage, Etc. — Cost of Gar- 
bage Reduction and Collection at Cleveland, O. — Cost of 
Garbage Disposal, Milwaukee, Wis. — Garbage Incineration, 
San Francisco. — Cost of Removing Ashes. — Cost of Tile 
Drains. — Weight of Drain Tile. — Prices of Tile Drains in 
Place. — Cost of Digging a Trench and Laying Tile Drains. — 
Cost of Parm Drainage. — Cost of Tile Trenching with a 
Machine. — Cost of Laying Small Gas Mains on Six Jobs. — 
Cost of Laying Wrought Iron, Screw Joint Pipe for Com- 
pressed Air Main. — Cost of Maintaining Teams. — Cost of 
Horse Maintenance. — Cost of Maintaining Horses, New 
York City. — Feed of Street Car Horses. — Cost of Main- 
taining Farm Horses and Raising Hay and Oats in Minne- 
sota. — Cost of Maintaining Mules. — Shipping Contractors' 
Horses in Cars. — Hauling Heavy Machinery in Wagons. — 
Handling Teams with a Jerk Line. — Cost of Plowing Farm 
Lands with a Steam Traction Engine. — Cost of Traction 
Engine Haulage of Ore. — Cost of Handling and Screening 
Cinders. — Size, Weight and Price of Expanded Metal. — 
Price of Mineral Wool. — Cost of Sodding. — A Device for 
Cutting Soil for Sodding. — Painting Data. — Cost of Paint- 
ing a Tin Roof. — ^Unloading Coal from Cars with a Clam- 
shell. — Cost of a 28-Mile Telegraph Line. — Cost of a 
Telephone Line. — Cost of Two Telephone Lines. — Life of 
Telephone Line Equipment. — Cost of Laying Electric Con- 



xxiv CONTENTS 

duits. — Cost of Vitrified Conduits, Memphis. — Cost of Brick 
Manholes for Electric Conduits. — Methods and Cost of 
Laying Vitrified Conduits for Electric Wires. — Cost of Pole 
Lines, Vitrified Conduits, Manholes, Etc. — Labor Cost of an 
Electric Transmission Line. — Cost of a Transmission Line 
for Interurban Electric Railways. — Estimating the Horse- 
power of Contractors' Engines and Boilers. — Cost of Cut- 
ting Cord Wood, 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



INTRODUCTION. 

John Stuart Mill has said: "Without any formal instruction, the 
language in which we grow up teaches us all the common philosophy 
of the age."- 

If it is even partially true that general knowledge is affected by 
words and expressions in common use, it is certainly undeniable that 
formal definitions of words have a much greater effect upon the 
scope of mental vision. When the formal definition is of a word 
that denotes a profession, the far-reaching consequence can hardly 
be estimated. No definition of any profession has had wider circula- 
tino and more general acceptance than the old one formulated by 
Tredgold and adopted in its infancy by the Institution of Civil 
Engineers : 

"Engineering is the art of directing the great sources of power 
in nature for the use and convenience of man." 

Note the entire absence of any reference to economics in this 
definition. Engineering, when Tredgold lived, was in the stage of 
development when the common problem before an engineer was 
not whether a thing could be done economically but whether it could 
be done at all. Then followed the reign of the mathematicians 
who took up engineering, just as in previous years mathematicians 
had seized upon astronomy as a delightful science in which to exer- 
cise their talents. But among mathematicians there has always 
been a liking for the ancient toast: "Here's to pure mathematics. 
May it never be of any use to anybody." So it was naturally to be 
expected that anything so "commercial" as saving money should not 
have appealed very strongly to the mathematician^ who had taken 
up engineering. Nor did it. Nor has there been an entire escape 
to this day from the bondage of that early type of engineering. 
Tredgold's definition really fails to define, or limit, the word engi- 
neering. Under his definition any man who directs any of the great 
forces of nature for the use of men is an engineer. The farmer 
who utilizes that enormous force — the sun's heat — for the "use 
and convenience of man," is an engineer. So, too, is the sailor who 
directs that other vast force, the wind, to the driving of his ship. 
In fact, there is no limit to the classes of men who fall within the 
literal wording of this definition. It is, therefore, a very unsatis- 
factory definition because of its vagueness. However, I object to It 
not so much upon the ground that it includes too much as upon the 
ground that it fails to include what it should, namely the funda- 
mental function of the modern engineer, which is to solve problems 
in economic production. 

I recall with what keen interest I first read that now historic 
work, Wellington's "Economic Theory of the Location of Railways." 
I was particularly struck with this opening paragraph : 

1 



2 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

"It would be well if engineering were less generally thought of, 
and even defined, as the art of constructing. In a certain important 
sense it is rather the art of not constructing ; or, to define it rudely 
but not inaptly, it is the art of doing that well with one dollar, 
which any bungler can do with two after a fashion." 

Wellington made no attempt to give a complete definition of engi- 
neering, but he certainly was among the first, if not the first, to 
indicate the inherent weakness of such definitions as that of Tred- 
gold. Wellington has it to his lasting credit that he made a valiant 
effort to reduce railway location to an economic science. That he 
made many errors, or that he was not always even logical, detracts 
little from his eminent position as one of the greatest teachers of 
what engineering really is. 

Engineering is the conscious application of science to the problems 
of economic production. 

Under this definition, which may ultimately be regarded as too 
broad, I aim to include that part of engineering which relates to the 
scientific management of men, and the scientific development of 
methods of construction and operation, as well as the design of the 
most economic structures and machines for a given service. The 
word art does appear in the definition, for it is obvious that in the 
application of scientific principles in the solution of any problem, 
what may be termed "art" must be exercised if the greatest success 
is to follow. Natural aptitude, practice and experience are the 
qualifications of every man who is a real artist in the execution of a 
task. These are the qualities that cannot be imparted by teaching. 

Since engineering in the modern sense of the term consists in 
solving problems in economic construction and operation, it should 
be apparent to all that cost data are of primary importance to every 
engineer. For, just as data on the resistance of materials to stress 
are essential in economizing the materials in a bridge, a building, 
or a machine, so data as to unit costs of construction, operation and 
maintenance are vitally valuable to every engineer who attempts 
to be an engineer in the modern meaning of the term. 

To my great surprise, the first edition of this Handbook of Cost 
Data was scarcely off the press before editorials and articles began 
to appear in certain engineering periodicals belittling the value of 
cost data. I had taken particular care, as I had thought, in pointing 
out the difference between the price of anything and its actual cost. 
Yet it was said by writers that prices fluctuated so rapidly that cost 
records are of no particular value except for very short periods of 
time. Lest this confusion of terms shall continue to mislead, I 
purpose briefly indicating again their meaning. 

The price of any article is the money paid for it by a consumer. 
It is the cost to the consumer, and in that sense of the word I use 
the term cost occasionally in this book, but never in such a way 
as to cause confusion, the meaning being always obvious by the 
context. 

The cost of any article is money paid by the producer for ma- 
terials, supplies, labor, etc., necessary in its production. His profit 
is the difference between this cost and the price he receives. 



INTRODUCTION. 8 

Clearly, then, if we give the number of hours or days of labor of 
a stated class rMuired to produce a unit of product, we have 
given its cost in terms that may be of permanent value, so long as 
the same methods of doing the work remain tin vogue. In brief, 
we have given the cost in terms of the day's output of a man, and 
this is by no means a quantity subject to erratic fluctuations. In- 
deed, under equally good management such costs are often astonish- 
ingly stable. If anyone doubts this statement, I ask him to com- 
pare the data in my little book "The Economics of Road Construc- 
tion," written in 1900, with corresponding data in Aitken's "Road 
>iaking and Maintenance," published a few weeks after I had turned 
over my manuscript to my publishers. Aitken wrote of English 
methods and cost of building macadam roads. He used American 
rock drills and English steam rollers. I used machines and tools 
almost identical, and our respective unit costs were, on most items, 
nearly identical when reduced to the same unit rates of wages. 

It is the veriest nonsense to attribute to cost data an ephemeral or 
purely local value, because prices vary with supply and demand, 
or because local conditions differ more or less. Prices have nothing 
to do with the matter at all in making proper comparisons of cost 
data, since, if quantities of materials and quantities of labor are 
stated, the substitution of standard prices for materials and of 
standard wages for labor is a mere matter of common sense and 
the multiplication table. 

Fallacies, however, die with cat-like protraction. Hence, when 
the first published objections to the real and general value of pub- 
lished cost data were seemingly killed, I found them struggling to 
life again. In a recent paper before the American Society of Civil 
Engineers it was urged that, while cost data may be valuable 
they are of no great value except to the man who gathered the 
data! This same fallacy has also been repeated in two engineering 
journals, both editorially and in contributed articles. 

Were it not for the sources of these errors I should ignore them. 
But they seem to merit at least a passing notice. 

Cost data differ from other engineering data in no essential 
respect, except, perhaps, in this : "Workmen who are underpaid, or 
poorly managed, or arrogant because of a false feeling of independ- 
ence, may not do a full day's work. When this is so, unit costs are 
necessarily high if measured in terms of the man-day. This con- 
. dition, however, can be recorded, and, in fact, it records itself if 
We have other data for comparison. 

. Cost data can be so reduced to items and accompanied by state- 
ments of conditions as to be of as much value to engineers and 
contractors as any other kind of data. Data of strengths, for ex- 
ample, are very misleading if unaccompanied by descriptions of the 
size of test pieces, chemical composition, and many other factors, 
which are entirely analogous to the "local conditions" that cause 
variations in cost data. By curious coincidence, one of the engi- 
neers who has most severely criticized cost data is the author of a 
250-page book giving nothing but records of strength and elasticity 
tests of Portland cement and concrete. If cost data were subject to 



4 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a tenth of the variation found in these cement strengths, well 
might we dispair of reducing the subject of cost estimating to a 
science. 

This last expression leads me to the real heart of the subject of 
this booli, and the heart is not cost estimating — at least it is not that 
per se. Important as the matter of estimating costs often is, the 
overshadowing value of cost data as a guide in reducing costs will 
be apparent to every engineer, contractor or manufacturer who has 
been long engaged as a producer of things for sale. 

Comparison of unit costs is the only scientific criterion by which 
to judge the economic merit of a structure, a machine^ or a m,ethod 
of doing work. 

This fact is so self-evident that its meaning needs but to be 
understood to find full acceptance by everyone of open mind and 
unclouded brain. Yet, failure to formulate this law has led to some 
of the most astounding methods of designing and of selecting engi- 
neering structures. For example, in nearly every American treatise 
on highway construction will be found a method which the highway 
engineer is supposed to follow in selecting the type of pavement 
for a given street. The method consists in assigning percentages to 
each of the qualities that pavement has, as follows : 

Per cent. 

Low first cost 15 

Low cost of maintenance 20 

Ease of traction 10 

Good foothold 5 

Ease of cleaning 10 

Noiseless 15 

Healthfulness 10 

Free from mud and dust 10 

Comfortable to use 3 

Non-absorbent of heat 2 

Total 100 

If a pavement possesses any one of these qualities to perfection, 
the full percentage assigned to each quality is credited to that pave- 
ment. The pavement showing the highest total percentage is the 
one to be selected. This looks somewhat scientific, with its tabula- 
tion of ratios, but it is not even scientific guesswork. As well choose 
a suit of clothes by assigning 10% to the buttons, 50% to the cloth 
and 40% to the style. Pseudo-science of this sort would never have 
gotten into the pages of engineering textbooks had there been a 
clear and complete definition of engineering in the minds of the 
authors. I need not stop to point out the scientific method of de- 
signing or selecting a pavement, for that will follow as a corollary 
to the criterion for economic design, given later. 

I wish here to emphasize the fact that no paper read before an 
engineering society, nor any article printed in an engineering peri- 
odical on the design of a machine or structure, is ideal in its char- 
acter unless it is accompanied by cost data. I would not be under- 
stood, however, as saying that the absence of cost data makes an 
article of this sort worthless. Far from it. But the absence of cost 
data weakens the article, for, without the accurate criterion that 



INTRODUCTION. 5 

cost data — and cost data only — furnish, a nrecise judgment as to 
the economic merit of the machine or structure is impossible. 

The same holds true of a method of doing work, and that is why 
I have chosen to link the words methods and cost in the subtitles of 
several of my books on construction. 

Often a cost is so nearly a function of the amounts of material 
required in a structure or machine that the dollar's mark need not 
appear at all — simply the quantities of each kind of material per 
unit of product. This is particularly true of steel bridges. Perhaps 
this fact accounts, in a measure, for the indifference of some bridge 
engineers to the importance of cost data. They fail to see that in 
other lines of engineering the quantity of materials is not always 
a function of the cost But even in bridge work it is fatal to true 
economy to have eyes only for the amount of materials required 
for the structure. A study of the section on bridgework in this book 
will make evident this fact. 

In the operation of plants of given capacity and of stated class, 
cost data are invaluable as a criterion of the efficiency of machines, 
of men and of management. Unfortunately, most writers on this 
branch of cost data have hitherto recorded only the dollars and cents 
cost of the various items of operating expense. "We often find, for 
example, that the item of fuel has cost so and so many dollars per 
year, or per horsepower-year, without a word as to the number of 
tons of fuel and the price per ton. We read that the wages of opera- 
tion totaled so and so, without finding a detailed statement of the 
organization of the operating crew and the rates of wages paid to 
each class of men. We are told that repairs cost so and so many 
dollars per year, but the first cost of the plant is omitted, so that 
we are unable to reduce the repairs to a percentage of the first 
cost ; nor is the age of the plant stated, so that, even if its first 
cost were given, we should be in doubt as to whether the plant had 
been long enough in use to reach a stage of average repairs. 

All such omissions, however, are not a fair indictment of cost data. 
A just criticism of imperfect cost data, or of imperfect records of 
the conditions to which they apply, is quite a different thing from 
an attempt to belittle the value of all cost data "except to the man 
who gathered them." Were it literally true that cost data are of 
worth only to the man who has seen the local conditions, we should, 
indeed, be in a sorry state. The civil engineer engaged in locating 
a railway, having never personally gathered any railway operating 
costs, would be compelled to ignore all such cost data in solving the 
various problems of location. 

Where, indeed, will this nonsense lead us, if we will be lead by it? 
Obviously to a point where no engineer will dare use any cost data 
at all, except his own meager pickings from his own little crab- 
apple tree of experience. 

The great and steadily greater growing efficiency of engineers is 
due to their use of all kinds of data — cost data included — gathered 
by all kinds of engineers. 

I expect to live to see the day when a knowledge of cost data and 
how to use them will be generally regarded by engineers as of 



6 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

greater importance even than a similar knowledge of the physical 
properties of materials. 

Finally, in this foreword, I would impress upon young engineers 
the importance of examining the definitions of all terms with care. 
I have indicated how a confusion as to the words price and cost has 
often resulted in speaking of costs as not being stable when what 
was meant was the instability of prices. I have indicated how an 
ancient definition of the word engineering may have been a factor 
in leading many engineering educators to follow the old precedent 
too closely for the good of the students who, upon graduation, must 
change their conceptions of what are the most common and the 
most important engineering problems. 

In the following pages will be found a striking illustration of the 
errors that some engineers have made through confusing the words 
depreciation and repairs. 

I commend to all engineers the careful study of Mill's "System of 
Logic," and particularly his chapters on Definition and on Fallacies 
of Confusion. 



SECTION I. 

PRINCIPLES OP ENGINEERING, ECONOMICS AND 
COST KEEPING. 

Definitions. — Not only for the benefit of younger men and of 
foreign engineers does it seem wise to give the following definitions, 
but because there is not at present an entire uniformity among 
American engineers as regards the meaning of some of the terms. 

Amount. — The principal plus accumulated interest. 

Amortization. — The extinction of a debt by means of a sinking 
fund, or the provision for the redemption of an investment in a 
plant, a mine, or the like, by means of a sinking fund. 

Betterment. — An improvement. In railway parlance, any expendi- 
ture for "addition and improvement." 

Bid. — To submit a contract price ; the bidding price being the 
tender. 

Book Value. — The value of a plant as recorded in the accounting 
books of a company. Often it represents the price paid for the 
plant and the franchise under which it operates. Often it is the esti- 
mated depreciated value. 

Bonus. — A payment to a workman in addition to his hourly, daily 
or weekly wage. The bonus system is a modified piece rate system 
by which a workman receives a stipulated price (= bonus) for each 
unit of work done in excess of a stipulated minimum, in addition to 
his regular wage. 

Capitalize. — To divide an annual operating or maintenance expense 
by a rate of interest. The quotient thus obtained is called the 
capitalized cost of the annual expense. 

Contingencies.- — Unforeseen expenses. 

Cost. — The actual cost of materials, supplies, labor, etc., required 
to produce an article or to perform a service. Also frequently used 
to denote the price that a purchaser has paid. 

Cost of Reproduction. — The present cost of a plant, or plant unit, 
regarded as reproduced new at present prices. 

Data. — Facts, and particularly those that can be numerically ex- 
pressed. The word is the plural of datum, but so many writers 
use the word data with a singular verb that it seems likely to fol- 
low the precedent of such words as news. In Shakespeare's time, 

7 



8 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

news was used only in the plural ; now it is always singular. 

Demurrage. — The amount paid a railway company for holding a 
car beyond a certain time. 

Depreciation. — Decrease in value. It is preferable not to use the 
word to denote "repairs and renewals," but to use "maintenance" 
for that purpose. Depreciation is best used only to denote annual 
expense for the entire renewal of a plant unit. It will then be 
either the amount annually placed in a sinking fund, or the amount 
paid out of current income for plant renewals, renewals, in the lat- 
ter case, being regarded merely as repairs on a larger scale. Three 
formulas for depreciation are given in the following pages : ( 1 ) The 
straight line formula ; ( 2 ) Sinking fund formula ; ( 3 ) Unit cost of 
production formula. 

Equipment. — In railway parlance, rolling stock, including locomo- 
tives and cars. Unfortunately the term has been latterly used to in- 
clude the power stations and electrical plant of electric railways. It 
will be well to discontinue the use of equipment in any sense but as 
relating to rolling stock. 

Fixed Charges. — Often used to denote only the interest charges 
on the funded debt of plant, but more often used to include all ex- 
penses that go on whether a plant is in operation or not. 

Funded Debt. — The bonds of a railway. 

Going Concern Value. — The amount of money expended in build- 
ing up a business, or the measure of increased value possessed by an 
old business over a similar business just started with a new plant. 

Maintenance Expense. — The annual expense for repairs and en- 
tire renewals of plant units. 

Materials. — The substances actually entering the construction of 
a machine or structure, as distinguished from supplies. This dis- 
tinction is not always made, but is desirable. 

Obsolescence. — The state of going out of use through becoming 
obsolete. 

Operating Expense. — In railway parlance this includes the ex- 
pense of operating and maintaining a railway plant. The operating 
ratio is the ratio of operating expense to gross earnings. In manu- 
facturing and contracting parlance, operating expense of^en does 
not include maintenance, which is classed as a distinct item, and 
includes repairs and renewals. 

Original Cost. — The actual original cost of a plant, including ad- 
ditions and improvements, but not including profits resulting from 
the sale of the completed plant. 



COST KEEPING. 9 

Overhead Charges. — Generally used to include only office expenses 
and general miscellaneous expenses, the latter being so general that 
they can not be charged either against the office or field or shop, 
and are incurred in the maintenance of the business in general. 

Piece Rate. — A rate paid to a workman for each unit, or piece, of 
work performed. When an increasing piece rate is paid as the num- 
ber of units of output increases, it is called a differential piece rate. 

Plant. — The physical property used in production, including ma- 
chines, land, etc. 

Present Value. — Depreciated value. 

Price. — The market price, as distinguished from the actual cost 
to produce a structure, machine, or the like. 

Principal. — The original sum upon which interest is calculated. 

Reciprocal. — The reciprocal of a number is 1 divided by that num- 
ber. The reciprocal of 20 is 1/20, or 0.05, or 5%. 

Salvage Value. — The price that is realized from the sale of a de- 
preciated machine or structure. 

Shop Repairs. — The repairs that a machine receives in a shop, as 
distinguished from repairs received in the field. 

Sinking Fund. — A fund established for the ultimate payment of 
a debt, or for the redemption of an investment in a plant, mine, etc. 
An annual deposit is ordinarily made in the fund, and the fund in- 
creases by these deposits and by compound interest. 

Supplies. — All items of material necessary to carry on work, but 
which are rapidly destroyed in the process of production ; e. g., coal, 
oil, rope, hose, etc. See Materials, above defined. 

Tender. — To bid. 

Unbalanced Bid. — A bid in which certain unit prices are above a 
fair price and other unit prices are below a fair price. 

Unit Cost. — Tlie total cost of producing a unit, such as a cubic 
yard of concrete. 

Unit interest cost is the total annual interest on a plant invest- 
ment divided by the total number of units of product. A plant unit 
is a single machine, or a single structure. 

Value. — The worth of a thing. This may be its market price, or it 
may be a sum arrived at by estimating depreciated value, or it may 
be a sum determined by capitalizing annual net earnings, or it may 
be a sum determined by capitalizing annual saving in operating or 
maintenance expense. See Book Value, above. 

Compound Interest Tables. — These are ordinarily given in two 
forms, as in Tables I and II. 



10 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Let A = amount, or accumulation of $1 and interest during n years. 
r = rate of interest, payments made at the end of each year, 
n = number of years. 

Then (1) A = (l + r)^. 

Table I is calculated by formula (1). If the principal is ?20, 
simply multiply the amount found in Table I by 20; and in like 
manner for any other principal. It is convenient to bear in mind 
that money at compound interest doubles itself in approximately the 
number of years obtained by dividing 72 by the rate of interest. 
This is not strictly accurate, as may be seen from Table I, but, for 
the rough and ready estimates that an engineer is often called upon 
to make, it will generally suffice. 

Table I is, for many engineering purposes, less convenient than 
Table II, which is also a compound interest table. The amounts 
given in Table II are the reciprocals of the corresponding amounts 
in Table I. Table II is useful in determining the present value or 
present justifiable expenditure to secure a return of $1 at the end of 
any number of years. 

To illustrate the use of Table II, suppose it to be probable that 
the traffic of a projected change of railway line will be double in 
ten years what it is at present. 

Suppose that present operating expenses can be reduced by an 
Improved location of the line, and that the capitalized value of the 
saving in present operating expenses is $1. Then there is certainly 
economic warrant for spending that $1, but how much may be now 
spent to save the other $1 in operating expenses which will be 
effected by this improvement when traffic shall have doubled 10 
years hence? 

Table II gives the answer; for if money can be borrowed at 5%, 
the table shows that ?0.614 may be spent now to secure a better- 
ment which will yield a capitalized value of ?1 in reduced operating 
expenses 10 years hence. 

Therefore the total present justified expenditure becomes ?1.614, 
of which $1 is the capitalized saving in present operating expense 
and $0,614 the capitalized saving in future operating expense when 
the traffic shall have doubled. 

As Wellington points out, this is the maximum justifiable expendi- 
ture to effect a future saving in operating expense ; for, unless there 
is assurance that earnings will be sufficient to pay the interest upon 
the increased obligations, danger exists of financial embarrassment 
which may result disastrously to the railway owners. 



COST KEEPING. 



11 



Table I. — Compound Interest Table. 
Amount of ?1 Placed at Compound Interest for a Term of Tears. 





3 


3% 


4 


6 


6 


8 


10 




per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


Years. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent 


1 


1.03 


1.03 


1.04 


1.05 


1.06 


1.08 


1.10 


2 


1.06 


1.07 


1.08 


1.10 


1.12 


1.17 


1.21 


3 


1.09 


1.11 


1.12 


1.16 


1.19 


1.26 


1.33 


4 


1.13 


1.15 


1.17 


1.22 


1.26 


1.36 


1.46 


5 


1.16 


1.19 


1.22 


1.28 


1.34 


1.47 


1.61 


6 


1.19 


1.23 


1.27 


1.34 


1.42 


1.59 


1.77 


7 


1.23 


1.27 


1.32 


1.41 


1.50 


1.71 


1.95 


8 


1.27 


1.32 


1.37 


1.48 


1.59 


1.85 


2.14 


9 


1.30 


1.36 


1.42 


1.55 


1.69 


2.00 


3.36 


10 


1.34 


1.41 


1.48 


1.63 


1.79 


2.16 


2.59 


11 


, ... 1.38 


1.46 


1.54 


1.71 


1.89 


2.33 


2.85 


12 


1.43 


1.51 


1.60 


1.80 


2.01 


2.52 


3.14 


13 


. ... 1.47 


1.56 


1.67 


1.89 


2.13 


2.72 


3.45 


14 


, ... 1.51 


1.62 


1.73 


1.98 


2.26 


2.94 


3.79 


15 


. ... 1.56 


1.68 


1.80 


2.08 


2.40 


3.17 


4.17 


16 


... 1.60 


1.73 


1.87 


2.18 


2.54 


3.43 


4.60 


17 


... 1.65 


1.79 


1.95 


2.29 


2.69 


3.70 


5.05 


18 


... 1.70 


1.86 


2.03 


2.41 


2.85 


4.00 


5.55 


19 


... 1.75 


1.92 


2.11 


2.53 


3.03 


4.31 


6.11 


20 


... 1.81 


1.99 


2.19 


2.65 


3.21 


4.66 


6.72 


21 


... 1.86 


2.06 


2.28 


2.79 


3.40 


5.03 


7.39 


22 


... 1.92 


2.13 


2.37 


2.93 


3.60 


5.44 


8.13 


23 


. . . 1.97 


2.21 


2.46 


3.07 


3.82 


5.87 


8.94 


24 


. . . 2.03 


2.28 


2.56 


3.23 


4.05 


6.34 


9.83 


25 


... 2.09 


2.36 


2.67 


3.39 


4.29 


6.85 


10.81 


26 


... 2.16 


2.45 


2.77 


3.56 


4.55 


7.39 


11.90 


27 


. . . 2.22 


2.53 


2.88 


3.73 


4.82 


7.99 


13.08 


28 


... 2.29 


2.62 


3.00 


3.92 


5.11 


8.62 


14.39 


29 


... 2.36 


2.71 


3.12 


4.12 


5.42 


9.31 


15.83 


30 


... 2.43 


2.81 


3.24 


4.32 


5.74 


10.06 


17.41 


31 


... 2.50 


2.91 


3.37 


4.54 


6.09 


10.86 


19.15 


32 


... 2.58 


3.01 


3.51 


4.76 


6.45 


11.74 


21.06 


33 


... 2.65 


3.11 


3.65 


5.00 


6.84 


12.67 


23.17 


34 


. .. 2.73 


3.22 


3.79 


5.25 


7.25 


13.69 


25.48 


35 


. .. 2.81 


3.33 


3.95 


5.52 


7.68 


14.78 


28.03 


36 


. .. 2.90 


3.45 


4.10 


5.79 


8.15 


15.96 


30.83 


37 


. .. 2.99 


3.57 


4.27 


6.08 


8.63 


17.24 


33.91 


38 .. 


. .. 3.07 


3.70 


4.44 


6.39 


9.15 


18.62 


37.30 


39 


. .. 3.17 


3.83 


4.62 


6.70 


9.70 


20.11 


41.02 


40 


. .. 3.26 


3.96 


4.80 


7.04 


10.28 


21.72 


45.12 


42 


. .. 3.46 


4.24 


5.19 


7.76 


11.56 


25.33 


54.59 


44 


. .. 3.67 


4.54 


5.62 


8.56 


12.98 


29.54 


66.04 


46 


. .. 3.90 


4.87 


6.07 


9.43 


14.59 


34.46 


79.90 


48 


. .. 4.13 


5.21 


6.57 


10.40 


16.39 


40.19 


96.67 


50 


. .. 4.38 


5.58 


7.11 


11.47 


18.42 


46.88 


117.00 



12 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Table II. — Compound Interest Table. 

Giving Sums Which at Compound Interest Will Amount to ?1 in a 

Given Number of Years. 

With Interest at — 





3 


4 


5 


6 


7 


8 


10 




per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


Years. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


cent. 


1 


971 


.961 


.952 


.943 


.935 


.926 


.909 


2 


943 


.925 


.907 


.890 


.873 


.857 


.827 


3 


915 


.889 


.864 


.840 


.816 


.794 


.751 


4 


888 


.855 


.823 


.792 


.763 


.735 


.683 


5 


863 


.822 


.783 


.747 


.713 


.681 


.621 


6 


837 


.790 


.746 


.705 


.666 


.630 


.565 


7 


813 


.760 


.711 


.665 


.623 


.584 


.513 


8 


789 


.731 


.677 


.627 


.582 


. .540 


.467 


9 


766 


.703 


.645 


.592 


.544 


.500 


.424 


10 


744 


.676 


.614 


.558 


.508 


.463 


.386 


11 


722 


.650 


.585 


.527 


.475 


.429 


.351 


12 


701 


.625 


.557 


.497 


.444 


.397 


.319 


13 


681 


.601 


.530 


.469 


.415 


.368 


.290 


14 


661 


.577 
.555 


.505 
.481 


.442 
.417 


.388 
.362 


.340 
.315 


.264 


15 ... 


642 


.240 


16 


623 


.534 


.458 


.394 


.339 


.292 


.218 




605 


.513 


.436 


.371 


.317 


.270 


.198 


18 


587 


.494 


.415 


.350 


.296 


.250 


.180 


19 


570 


.475 


.396 


.330 


.276 


.232 


.164 


20 


554 


.456 


.377 


.312 


.258 


.215 


.149 


21 


537 


.439 


.359 


.294 


.241 


.199 


.135 


22 


522 


.422 


.342 


.277 


.226 


.184 


.123 


23 


507 


.406 


.326 


.262 


.211 


.170 


.112 


24 


492 


.390 


.310 


.247 


.197 


.158 


.102 


25 


478 


.375 


.295 


.233 


.184 


.146 


.092 


26 


464 


.361 


.281 


.220 


.172 


.135 


.084 


27 


450 


.347 


.268 


.207 


.161 


.125 


.076 


28 


437 


.333 


.255 


.196 


.150 


.116 


.069 


29 


424 


.321 


.243 


.185 


.141 


.107 


.063 


30 


412 


.308 


.231 


.174 


.131 


.099 


.057 


31 


400 


.296 


.220 


.164 


.123 


.092 


.052 


32 


388 


.285 


.210 


.155 


.115 


.085 


.047 


33 


377 


.274 


.200 


.146 


.107 


.079 


.043 


34 


366 


.264 


.190 


.138 


.100 


.073 


.039 


35 


355 


.253 


.181 


.130 


.094 


.068 


.036 


36 


345 


.244 


.173 


.123 


.087 


.063 


.032 


37 


335 


.234 


.164 


.116 


.082 


.058 


.029 


38 


325 


.225 
.217 


.157 
.149 


.109 
.103 


.076 
.071 


.054 
.050 


.027 


39 


316 


.024 


40 


307 


.208 


.142 


.097 


.067 


.046 


.022 


42 


289 


.193 


.129 


.086 


.058 


.039 


.018 


44 


272 


.178 


.117 


.077 


.051 


.034 


.015 


46 


257 


.165 


.106 


.068 


.044 


.029 


.013 


48 


242 


.152 


.096 


.061 


.039 


.025 


.010 


50 


228 


.141 


.087 


.054 


.034 


.021 


.009 



COST KEEPING. 



13 



soooos 

>lOTt<OOt- 



COtHOOOO 
COC5 tH t— irt 
•>^.-lO00t:- 
iHr-lTHOO 



OS 00 to 00 to 

eoo5e<ic-(M 
tomiOTf<Tjt 
ooooo 



lOT)<tDC<I00 
CnM<CO«OiH 
00 LO (Most* 
COMCOIM<N 
OOOOO 



comt-«eONjt 
IM to 05 'I' r- ■«>< 
OOMOOtO^CO 
iHtHOOOO 

oooooo 



v5^tO(Ocqt-t 

i-^tOlOOCTS 
USOOt-ICOC- 



CO to toco t^ 

tH oooooo to 

u^ocgooc- 

TftcMOOO t^ 
iHrHiH'OO 



t-CCOOOON 

inotocj to 

OO tH Tt<C^-^ 

tOtOlrtTjH T}< 

ooooo 



ooTjtccimoo 

10005 tH to 
OC^COtHOO 

ooooo 



inot-<MM«o 

lA00 05COTt*0 
05 CO 05 t- in ■»!< 
tHiHOOOO 

oooooo 



OrHiHOO 
00MO03 
USC^C— NO 
00 tH CO CO 
-"tiCONiH 



cgcacqoso 
ooo t-tom 

t-C<IT)<005 
rti Cg005l>- 
i-li-lT-lOO 



05 CO lO N ■* 
COCOTt<<OCO 

ocgtoi-ito 
c- toiom*^ 
OOOOO 



t^O-^LCtlTt* 

c^it-iot-cq 

Ol 00 Irt C<I o 

■^ CO CO CO CO 

ooooo 



mint- 00 «o 00 

0500 Cgcq b- 

oiniHOOto-^ 
c^iHT-iooo 
oooooo 



» 

Q 

« 

o 

fa 

C5 
"A 



c 
si 
•d 

0) 

c 

3 

o 

o. 

s 

o 
o 



.';! ^ 



a 

ID 

u 

<D 

o 

0) 



s .^ 



n 

e5 



>t-Tf05 

3 00 CO eg 
DiHCOOO 
fCOC^iH 



stooco 
1 com to 
30m-^ 

5 eg CO 00 

f^cocqxH 



H CO 00 to 

3 th CO in 
5t-i tom 
5 eg CO 00 

ItCONiH 



J-^ tO05 

^ 05 eg -t^ 

H tH [^ to 

5 eg CO 00 

<COcgrH 



i-r-eg 

eooj 



inT*<cg 

egoot— 
e«cooo 

CO (M 1-4 



05 to eg in 
> tomo CO 

*^ coegcoosoo 
■M ojegcooo 

w Tt<coegiH 



CO in coo 
^jjicgcoojco 

«^C0"*05O5 

cq oscgcooo 
■^coegtH 



• iHoocg 
sinoo 
seg Tt* 03 
<coegiH 



s^inc 
■-P-*ii 
eg 05C 



oot-ot— 00 

ooto toin CO 
oo-^toegr-i 
■<i^cgoo5oo 

iHrHrHOO 



inc— t-cgi-1 

egtocgoOi-i 
eg Tt< 00 eg 00 
t- to in in-* 

OOOOO 



i-ieg«*<ot- 
o-*eg-*oo 

■*OC-Tt"TH 

M^-<*cococo 

OOOOO 



•^ 05 t-Tt<0 O 

•* CO eg CO eg to 
eg toeg 05t>-m 
egrHT-iooo 
oooooo 



05 T— ( CO 05 05 

t— to in^ eg 
o to 00 -^ CO 
meg 005 00 

tHiHiHOO 



mm-tft-Tji 

tHIO T-tt0 05 
^ t0 0>-*05 

f-totoin'* 
ooooo 



ego<r>-*oo 
oocgoxHm 
in eg 00 CD CO 
•<j<-*cococo 
ooooo 



T-i CO 00 eg to in 
ooommegio 

Tt-t-COOOOO 
Cg,HtH tHOO 
OOOOOO 



COOiOtOtO 

t— m m -^j^ eg 
rH t-osin-* 
in cq<oo5 00 

iHtHrHOO 



CdrHOegOO 
iHmiH to OO 

mc— rnmo 
c— totoinm 
ooooo 



o eg o ■* t- 

t- t-IOSO"* 

to CO oat-"* 
tp-^cococo 

OOOOO 



M*oo5 t-mo» 
00 tocg iHOOo 

-^OO-^rHOOt- 

eg T-( i-H 1-1 o o 
oooooo 



t-t-oo-*-* 
tom-**cg 
egoo otom 
meg i-i 05 00 

I-liHiHOO 



05 00 to t- eg 
O'^'omoo 
to 00 eg to tH 
t- totoinm 
OOOOO 



oor^cg ■* to 

tOOOOOiCO 

c-T)<oc-m 

■*'*■* CO CO 

ooooo 



t-t-ocomco 
tocoooo** to 
moim tHC?; t- 

egyHiHi-lOO 

oooooo 



■* tt* t- ■* ^ 
tom-*-*c<i 
cocaiHt- to 
mcgiHoiOo 

I-lrHTHOO 



oot^mmoi 
OTtiomt- 
t^05cot-cg 
t— to toinin 
ooooo 



Tj<O5tOt-05 

to03t-ooeg 

00-*rHCO to 
Tt^-^-^COCO 

ooooo 



in05r-^egm 
in '-' t- in T-i eg 
toOiocgooo 
(M e<J ^H th T-( o 
oCoooo 



l-(r-(tO-*-* 

torn-* ■* eg 
Ti<ocgoot- 

mCOiH O5 00 
tHt-IiHOO 



t-tococot- 
o-'i^omt— 

OOOt)<OOcO 

t-t-tomin 
ooooo 



nmr 



4 eg 



tbosc-oocg 
o^mcgos t- 

■^Tj^-^COCO 

ooooo 



CO eg-* to 00 1« 
•*Oioegt-oo 

t-rHtoCOOOO 

eg eg iH r-i 7-1 o 
ocoooo 



oootom'* 
mm-^Tj^eg 

inrHCOOiOO 

incoiHoioo 

tHiHiHOO 



03t--^C0t- 

o-*omt- 

05T-*m05-* 

t-t- «omm 
ooooo 



O-^OiOOOO 
tD05«0t-»H 

o tocoooo 
mTt*"*-*co 
ooooo 



m'^t-inegto 

eoO>eoomm 
00 7-1 1- ■* th oa 

Cgl^THTHrHO 

oooooo 



coojt— torn 
in ■*■*■* eg 
coegrj<oo3 

inCOrHOOO 
tHiHiHt-IO 



iHosinMit- 
iH-*c>mt- 
oegtoom 
00 1- to torn 
ooooo 



ocot-to-* 

tOCitO t-i-( 
7-lt--*i-l05 

in-*-*'* CO 
ooooo 



t-ooo-*t-eo 
eg t-cgoocaeg 
O5egoo-*N<S 
eg N T-i tH iH iH 
oCooo© 



eOrH00 00O5 

in in •* ■* eg 
t-comi-to 
incoi-tooi 

iHiHrHrHO 



^eg 00 to OS 
iHinom t- 

rHCOt-T-f to 

oot-totom 
ooooo 



eg-*t-to-* 

t0 03tOt-rH 

cqoomcgo 
m-* -*-*■* 
ooooo 



e<iC— otooo 
o^oimcorH 

CO =^ tH ,-1 T-i iH 

oooooo 



megcoto coegt-icgco oocoe^ioco int-ooom CQ^omrHcg 

ot— tOrH inmmmco »— imrntooo tooat— t— th cg^omoaoo 

c^mtocgcg 00'*toegiH' eg-*ooegt- cocTitocOi— i i-i'*o<ocorH 

03cg-*oi incorHoos oot— totom m-***"*** co'^egr-ii-irH 

•<!)<coegtH iHiHr-iiHO OOOOO ooooo oooooo 

p c ' • ! ; ! ! : : ! '.'.'.'.'. '.'.'.'.'. '.'•'.'.'.'. 

b3 • • . . . . 

« <- • • 

^QOqeo^ia tot-oooso rHcqeOT)<m tot-oooso m®momo 
»"*» tH th th 1-4 i-i t-i r^,HT-<iH<M eg <^ CO ■* ^ m 



14 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Sinking Fund Tables, — Table III is a sinking fund table, or an- 
nuity table, that gives the deposit that must be annually placed in a 
fund drawing compound interest to amount to $1 at the end of a 
given term of years. 
Let 

d = annuity, or sum deposited at the end of each year, which 

will amount to $1 in n years. 
r = rate of interest, interest payments being made at the end of 

each year, 
n = number of years. 
Then * 

r 
d = — 



Table III gives the values for d, for any rate of Interest (r) and 
any term of years in). 

If it is desired to redeem an investment of, say, $1,200, at the 
end of 25 years, interest being 4%, Table III gives d= 0.02401, which 
would redeem ?1. Hence 0.02401 X $1,200 = $28,812, which is the 
annual deposit in the sinking fund necessary to redeem the $1,200. 

Table IV is also a sinking fund table, its values being the recipro- 
cals of the corresponding values in Table III. Table IV gives the 
accumulation of annual deposits of $1 at the end of each year and 
the interest on the same compounded annually. The use of this 
table involves the operation of division, which is not ordinarily so 
rapid as the operation of multiplication. To illustrate, let us assume 
the same problem as before : It is desired to ascertain the annual 
deposit in a sinking fund necessary to redeem $1,200 at the end of 
25 years, interest being 4%. Table IV gives the accumulation of $1 
In 25 years at 4% as being $41.66. Hence $1,200 -^ 41.66 = $28,805. 
This is not quite the same as the result secured with Table III, due 
to the fact that Table IV is not carried out to as many decimal 
places. 

Present Worth of Annuity Table V is useful in determining the 

justifiable present expenditure to save $1 per year for various terms 
of years. In other words, Table V gives the capital sum that will 
return $1 per year in interest during the term of years and will also 
return an additional sum in interest each year suflficient to ex- 
tinguish the principal at the end of a term of years if placed at 
compound interest. 

The present worth, W, of an annuity is given by the formula 

Ci + r> — 1 

TF = 

(1 + r)^ r 

Table V was calculated by this formula. 

References and Cross- References. — At the end of the Waterworks 
Section of this book will be found an abstract of an excellent article 
by Mr. Leonard Metcalf on the appraisal of waterworks, wherein are 
given various sinking fund formulas and curves. 

For the deduction of the formulas given in the preceding pages, 
consult any higher algebra, or Frye's "Civil Engineer's Pocketbook." 



COST KEEPING. 15 



Table IV. — Sinking Fund. 

(The amount (or accumulation) when $1 is deposited annually in a 

fund whose interest is compounded.) 

At End — Rate of Interest, Per Cent. — 

of Year. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 

2 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 

3 3.06 3.09 3.12 3.15 3.18 3.21 3.25 

4 4.12 4.18 4.25 4.31 4.37 4.44 4.51 

5 5.20 5.31 5.42 5.52 5.64 5.75 5.87 

6 6.31 6.47 6.63 6.80 6.98 7.15 7.34 

7 7.43 7.66 7.90 8.14 8.39 8.65 8.92 

8 8.58 8.S9 9.21 9.55 9.90 10.26 10.64 

9 9.7b 10.16 10.58 11.03 11.49 11.98 12.49 

10 10.95 11.46 12.01 12.57 13.18 13.82 14.49 

11 12.17 12.81 13.49 14.21 14.97 15.78 16.65 

12 13.41 14.19 15.03 15.91 16.87 17.89 18.98 

13 14.68 15.62 16.63 17.71 18.88 20.14 21.50 

14 15.97 17.09 18.29 19.60 21.01 22.55 24.22 

15 17.29 18.60 20.02 21.58 23.27 25.13 27.15 

16 18.64 20.16 21.82 23.65 25.67 27.89 30.33 

17 20.01 21.76 23.70 25.84 28.21 30.84 33.75 

18 21.41 23.42 25.66 28.13 30.90 34.00 37.45 

19 22.84 25.12 27.68 30.54 33.76 37.38 41.45 

20 24.30 26.87 29.79 33.06 36.78 41.00 45.76 

21 25.78 28.68 31.98 35.72 39.99 44.86 50.43 

22 27.30 30.54 34.26 38.50 43.39 49.01 55.46 

23 28.84 32.46 36.63 41.43 46.99 53.44 60.90 

24 30.42 34.43 39.10 44.50 50.81 58.18 66.77 

25 32.03 36.46 41.66 47.72 54.86 63.25 73.11 

26 33.67 38.56 44.33 51.11 59.15 68.68 79.96 

27 35.34 40.71 47.10 54.66 63.70 74.48 87.35 

28 37.05 42.93 49.98 58.39 68.52 80.70 95.34 

29 38.79 45.22 52.98 62.31 73.64 87.35 103.97 

30 40.57 47.58 56.10 66.43 79.05 94.46 113.29 

31 42.38 50.01 59.34 70.75 84.80 102.07 123.35 

32 44.23 52.51 62.72 75.29 90.88 110.22 134.22 

33 46.11 55.08 66.23 80.05 97.34 118.93 145.96 

34 48.03 57.73 69.88 85.05 104.18 128.26 158.63 

35 50.00 60.46 73.67 90.31 111.43 138.24 172.32 

36 51.99 63.28 77.62 95.82 119.11 148.91 187.11 

37 54.03 66.18 81.72 101.61 127.26 160.34 203.08 

38 56.11 69.16 85.99 107.69 135.90 172.56 220.33 

39 58.24 72.24 90.43 114.08 145.05 185.64 238.95 

40 60.40 75.40 95.05 120.78 154.75 199.63 259.07 

■41 62.61 78.67 99.85 127.82 165.04 214.61 280.79 

42 64.86 82.03 104.84 135.21 175.94 230.63 304.26 

43 67.16 85.49 110.04 142.97 187.50 247.78 329.60 

44 69.50 89.05 115.44 151.12 199.75 266.12 356.97 

45 71.89 92.72 121.06 159.68 212.73 285.75 386.5? 

46 74.33 96.51 126.90 168.66 226.50 306.75 418.44 

47 76.82 100.40 132.98 178.10 241.09 329.22 452.93 

48 79.35 104.41 139.30 188.00 256.55 353.27 490.15 

49 81.94 108.55 145.87 198.40 272.94 379.00 530.37 

50 84.58 112.80 152.70 209.32 290.32 406.54 573.80 



16 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table V. — Present Worth of Annuity. 

Showing Justifiable Present Expenditure to Save $1 Per Tear for 

Various Terms of Tears. 

Justifiable Present Expenditure with Interest at — 

Term 3456789 10 

of per per per per per per per per 

Tears. cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. 

] $0.97 $0.96 $0.95 $0.94 $0.93 $0.93 $0.92 $0.91 

2 1.91 1.89 1.86 1.83 1.81 1.78 1.76 1.74 

3 2.83 2.78 2.72 2.67 2.62 2.58 2.53 2.49 

4 3.J2 3.63 3.55 3.47 3.39 3.31 3.24 3.17 

5 4.58 4.45 4.33 4.21 4.10 3.99 3.89 3.79 

6 5.42 5.24 5.08 4.92 4.77 4.62 4.49 4.36 

7 6.23 6.00 5.79 5.58 5.39 5.21 5.03 4.87 

8 7.02 6.73 6.46 6.21 5.97 5.75 5.53 5.34 

9 7.79 7.44 7.11 6.80 6.52 6.25 6.00 5.76 

10 8.53 8.11 7.72 7.36 7.02 .6.71 6.42 6.14 

11 9.25 8.76 8.31 7.89 7.50 7.14 6.81 6.50 

12 9.95 9.39 8.86 8.38 7.94 7.54 7.16 6.81 

13 10.64 9.99 9.39 8.85 8.36 7.90 7.49 7.10 

14 11.30 10.56 9.90 9.30 8.75 8.24 7.79 7.37 

15 11.94 11.12 10.38 9.71 9.11 8.56 8.06 7.61 

16 12.56 11.65 10.84 10.11 9.45 8.85 8.31 7.82 

17 13.17 12.17 11.27 10.48 9.76 9.12 8.54 8.02 

18 13.75 12.66 11.69 10.83 10.06 9.37 8.76 8.20 

19 14.32 13.13 12.09 11.16 10.34 9.60 8.95 8.37 

20 14.88 13.59 12.46 11.47 10.59 9.82 9.13 8.51 

21 15.42 14.03 12.82 11.76 10.84 10.02 9.29 8.65 

22 15.94 14.45 13.16 12.04 11.06 10.20 9.44 8.77 

23 16.44 14.86 13.49 12.30 11.27 10.37 9.58 8.88 

24 16.94 15.25 13.80 12.55 11.47 10.53 9.71 8.99 

25 17.41 15.62 14.09 12.78 11.65 10.67 9.82 9.08 

26 17.88 15.98 14.38 13.00 11.83 10.81 9.93 9.16 

27 18.33 16.33 14.64 13.21 11.99 10.94 10.03 9.24 

28 17.76 16 66 14.90 13.41 12.14 11.05 10.12 9.31 

29 19.19 16.98 15.14 13.59 12.28 11.16 10.20 9.37 

20 14.88 13.59 12.46 11.47 10.59 9.82 9.13 8.51 

31 20.00 17.59 15.59 13.93 12.53 11.35 10.34 9.48 

32 20.39 17.87 15.80 14.08 12.65 11.43 10.41 9.53 

33 20.77 18.15 16.00 14.23 12.75 11.51 10.46 9.57 

34 21.13 18.41 16.19 14.37 12.85 11.59 10.52 9.61 

35 21.49 18.67 16.37 14.50 12.95 11.65 10.57 9.64 

36 21.83 18.91 16.55 14.62 13.04 11.72 10.61 9.68 

37 22.17 19.14 16.71 14.74 13.12 11.78 10.65 9.71 

38 22.49 19.37 16.87 14.85 13.19 11.83 10.69 9.73 

39 22.98 19.58 17.02 14.95 13.26 11.88 10.73 9.76 

40 23.12 19.79 17.16 15.05 13.33 11.93 10.76 9.78 

41 23.41 19.99 17.29 15.14 13.39 11.97 10.79 9.80 

42 23.70 20.19 17.42 15.23 13.45 12.01 10.81 9.82 

43 23.98 20.37 17.55 15.31 13.51 12.04 10.84 9.83 

44 24.25 20.55 17.66 15.38 13.56 12.08 10.86 9.85 

45 24.52 20.72 17.77 15.46 13.61 12.11 10.88 9.86 

46 24.78 20.89 17.88 15.52 13.65 12.14 10.90 9.88 

47 25.03 21.04 17.98 15.59 13.69 12.16 10.92 9.89 

48 25.27 21.20 18.08 15.65 13.73 12.19 10.93 9.90 

49 25.50 21.34 18.17 15.71 13.77 12.21 10.95 9.91 

50 25.73 21.48 18.26 15.76 13.80 12.23 10.96 9.92 



COST KEEPING. 17 

Identity of Machine and Engineering Structure. — An engineering 
structure tliat performs a useful service is, in essence, a machine. 
A railway is a machine for manufacturing transportation. A street 
or road is part of a similar machine, the vehicles being the other 
part. Buildings are part of a manufacturing plant. Even When 
built merely to rent, they are machines for producing rentable floor 
area. 

In solving problems in engineering economics, the young engineer 
will be greatly aided by keeping in mind this identity of what is 
commonly called a "machine" and what is commonly called a 
"structure." 

Problem I. Which of Two New IVlachines (or Structures) to Se- 
lect. — This problem consists in determining which machine yields 
the desired number of units of product at the lowest cost. 
Let 

N — number of units produced annually by the 1st machine. 

n = number of units produced annually by the 2d machine. 

C =■ first cost of the 1st machine. 

c = first cost of the 2d machine. 

D — per cent of annual renewals, or annuity in sinking fund for 
1st machine. 

d = per cent of annual renewals, or annuity in sinking fund, for 
2d machine. 

R = per cent of annual repairs for 1st machine. 

r — per cent of annual repairs for 2d machine. 

/ = per cent of annual interest on capital. 

O — annual operating expense of 1st machine. 

o = annual operating expense of 2d machine. 

U = unit cost of production with 1st machine. 

u = unit cost of production with 2d machine. 
Then 

O + RC + DC + IC 

(1) U = 

N 
o + re -\- dc -{- Ic 

(2) « = — 



n 
Since U must be less than u^ to warrant the selection of the 1st 
machine in preference to the second, we have 

O + RC + DC + IG o + rc + dc + Ic 

(3) < 

N n 

Ordinarily, the number of units to be produced by each of the two 
machines is equal, or N = n. Then we have : 

(4) O + RC + DC + IC <: o + rc + dc + Ic 
Expressed in words we have this criterion : 

Select the machine that shows the least sum of these four items 
of cost: (1) annual operating expense, (2) average annual repairs, 
(S) average annual renewals, and (J,) annual interest on the invest- 
ment. 

Note carefully that there are two different methods of determining 
D, the percentage of first cost allowed for annual renewals. By the 



18 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

method in vogue on railways, D is the reciprocal of the life of a 
machine, hence for a locomotive having a life of 25 years, D is 4%. 
By the method often used for smaller plants, D is the annuity placed 
in a sinking fund to redeem to the investment in a machine at the 
end of its life. In the first case, renewals are treated like current 
expenses for repairs, and this is justiiied where a large number of 
plant units of different ages are in operation. 
Formula (4) can be put in another form, thus: 

(5) I(C — c) < (o + rc + dc) — (0 + RC + DC) 
A Still more common form is this: 

(o + rc + dcj — (0 + RC + DC) 

(6) C — c < 

/ 

Between two new machines of equal capacity, the higher first coat 
of one is economically justified when its excess cost is less than the 
capitalized saving in annual operating and m,aintenance expenses due ■ 
to its use. 

For the benefit of young engineers the meaning of the word 
"capitalize" should be explained. 

To capitalise an annual expense consists in dividing it by the rate 
of interest at which money can be borrowed. 

Thus, if a man is required to perform a certain class of work at 
an annual expense of $600, and if the rate of interest is 6%, the cap- 
italized cost of this annual expense is $600 -^ 6% = $10,000. 

Reverting to the rule following formula (6) we see that it is the 
one which Wellington has applied to the various problems of rail- 
way location in his "Economic Theory of Railway Location." I 
prefer, however, to use the criterion as given in formula (6), because 
sight is not then lost of the fact that maintenance expenses are a 
function of the first cost of the machine under consideration. That 
this is an important improvement over Wellington's criterion will be 
seen when one examines Wellington's data on the maintenance of 
locomotives, as well as other maintenance data in his book. There 
the maintenance is recorded not as a percentage of the first cost of 
the locomotive but in the train-mile as the unit. Yet Wellington 
knew that the first cost was a factor in maintenance cost, for he 
says (p. 144 of his book) : "Half the total cost of engine repairs 
varies as the weight, and half is independent thereof." Incidentally, 
I may say that he was entirely wrong in this conclusion, for the cost 
of annual repairs varies almost directly as the weight of a locomo- 
tive. Again he speaks (p. 148) of the fact that passenger engines 
cost about 20% less for repairs than freight engines, without recog- 
nizing that the difference In weight and first cost was what ac- 
counted for this difference in repairs. 

Formula (3) or (6) should be invariably used not only by engi- 
neers who are selecting or designing machines for a given purpose, 
but by engineers who are designing structures of all kinds. I have 
already stated that engineering structures should be regarded either 
as machines or as parts of machines. At first sight it may appear 
that some structures are not at all like machines in that thei/ 
seemingly have no operating expense (O). 



COST KEEPING. 19 

In the case of a country road, for example, the item of operating 
expense ( O ) may appear to be non-existent ; although, In fact, a 
little thought makes it clear that the owners of the horses and 
wagons, motor cars, etc., pay this operating expense, which should 
be as certainly considered by the engineer who is locating and de- 
signing a road or street as it would be considered if he were locating 
and designing a railway. 

In certain classes of work, serious error will occur if there is 
failure to give proper consideration to N and n in formula (3). 
This is strikingly seen in the ordinary designs of country highways, 
where failure to determine the number of ton-miles (.= N) to be 
hauled annually leads to the most glaring blunders in designing the 
road. 

In selecting an engine for a given purpose, the same error is fre- 
quent. The engineer whose mind is fixed upon economy of fuel, 
for example, is very apt to choose a type of engine so expensive in 

I 

first cost that the unit inteiest is so greatly increased as to 

N 
exceed greatly the unit fuel saving. 

A blunder often made by contractors is the selection of a machine 
that is too large for the work in hand. Not only does too large a 
machine increase the unit interest and unit maintenance, but it often 

O 

increases the unit operating expense , due to the fact that its 

N 
size makes it expensive to move or shift from place to place. This 
is particularly true of large steam shovels used on small excavations. 
The item of operating expense (O), as the term is here used, 
includes supervision, taxes, labor (except for maintenance), fuel 
and other supplies, materials, etc. 

Som.e statisticians insist that taxes should not be regarded as an 
operating expense, because unit taxes tend to increase while other 
unit operating items tend to decrease as the plant grows in size. 
Even if this were true, I fail to see sufficient reason for segregating 
taxes with fixed charges. But I deny the truth of the statement that 
unit taxes must necessarily increase. If corporations have lied to 
tax assessors, then unit taxes do eventually increase when the lies 
are found out, and that is precisely what has caused most of the in- 
crease in unit taxes in recent years. The subject, however, is not 
one of sufficient importance in this connection to merit more than 
passing notice. 

The item of annual repairs (RC) is commonly underestimated, 
and is grossly underestimated in the majority of instances that I 
have seen in print. 

The cost of annual repairs is not a constant for each year, but 
Increases, at least for a time, as the plant grows older. Hence, if 
estimates of maintenance are based upon the maintenance costs dur- 
ing the earlier part of the life of a machine (or structure), seri- 
ous errors result. This subject will receive consideration at greater 
length In subsequent pages. 

The item of renewals (.DC) relates to entire renewals of plant 



20 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

units, such as the entire renewal of a locomotive. The rate, D, may 
be the reciprocal of the life of the plant unit. Thus if the life is 20 
years, the annual rate of renewal (£>) is 5%. Many engineers pre- 
fer to use the annuity deposited in a sinking fund, instead of this 
rate of renewal, D. In such a case, use Table III. For example, a 
life of 20 years, with interest at 5%, would require an annual de- 
posit of $0.0372 to redeem $1, which is equivalent to 3.72% rate to 
be used instead of the 5% obtained by the straight line formula. 

I prefer, however, not to use the sinking fund method in cases 
where a large number of similar plant units are under considera- 
tion, as in the case of a railway. The reasons for this preference 
will be given subsequently. 

Problem II. When to Retire An Old Machine in Favor of An 
Improved or Larger One. — Like Problem I, this problem involves 
the determination of unit costs of production. We shall, therefore, 
use the same symbols as on page 17, with the addition of 

Ci = salvage value of the old machine. 

Then the unit cost of production with the new machine will be 
O + RC + DC + I(C — cj 



K 1 } 


c — ' — - 


and 






-\- re ■\- dc -\-Ic 


(8) 


u = 



u 
Since U must be less than u to warrant the purchase of the new 
machine, we have 

+ RC + DC + I(C — cj o + rc + dc + Ic 

(9) < 

N n 

Ordinarily the new machine Is expected merely to turn out as 
many units of product as the old machine is already delivering, In 
which case N =n, and we have 

(10) + BC + DC + I(C — Cj.) < o + rc + dc-\- Ic 

Whence 

(O + RC +DC) — (o + rc + dc) 

(11) C — (c+cJ < 

In words this means : The purchase of an improved machine of the 
same capacity as the old is economically justified when its excess 
first cost over the sum of the first cost and salvage value of the old 
machine is less than the capitalised saving in annual operating ex- 
pense and maintenance effected by the new machine.. 

If Ci = o, formula (11) becomes identical with formula (6), be- 
cause the old machine has then perished, and we are comparing two 
entirely new machines. If the old machine can be disposed of for Its 
full first cost, then Ci = c, and formula (11) becomes: 

(O + RC +DC) — (o + rc + dc) 

(12) C — 2C < 

Expressed In words this is : If an old machine has a salvage value 
equal to its full first cost, the purchase of an improved machine is 
justified if the excess cost of the new machine over double the first 



COST KEEPING. 21 

cost of the old machine is greater than the capitalized saving in an- 
nual operating expense and maintenance effected by the new machine. 

This is a condition rarely existing, but it is well worth remember- 
ing as indicating an extreme case which may be approached more 
or less closely at times. 

The Life of a Machine or Structure and the Growth of Annual 
Repairs. — Probably no subject in engineering economics has been 
enveloped in a greater haze of contradictory opinions than tkis. 
Many eminent engineers maintain the doctrine that the curve of 
annual maintenance resembles some sinking fund accumulation 
curve — a doctrine that rests wholly on speculation and has never had 
a single curve of actual maintenance cost adduced in its support, so 
far as I have been able to discover. Actual curves of machine re- 
pairs of individual machines are ordinarily not regular curves at all, 
but are saw-toothed lines, usually of great irregularity. 

As fairly typical of a large class of machines, I will take a rail- 
way freight car, whose wheels, axles, brasses, brakes, draw-bars, 
trusses, paint, etc., constitute the separate parts subject to the wear 
and tear due to use and exposure to the elements. The life of each 
of these parts is the average life, and the cost of renewal of the 
part Is the cost ascertained by deducting the scrap value from the 
original value of the part in place. This is not strictly correct, for 
the labor of renewing a part is usually greater than the labor origi- 
nally involved in assembling the parts. For our present purpose, 
however, this difference is not material. 

Table VI gives the data for a small box car of about 30,000 lbs. 
capacity, and will serve our purpose if we bear in mind that it 
slightly underestimates the actual cost of renewals of parts, for 
the reason above given. 

Table VI. — Box Car Repairs. 

Average 

Truck: First Scrap Net cost Life, annual 

Item. cost. value. repairs. years. repairs. 

(1) Wheels $ 90 $35 ? 55 4 ?13.75 

(2) Axles 45 15 30 8 3.75 

(3) Brasses 10 4 6 3 2.00 

(4) Frame 95 25 70 35 2.00 

Total truck.. $240 $ 79 ?161 .. ?21.50 
Box: 

(5) Brakes $10 ? 2 ? 8 6 ? 1.33 

(6) Draw-bars ... 29 6 23 6 3.83 

(7) Frame 60 10 50 15 3.33 

(8) Roof 29 4 25 8 3.12 

(9) Floor 12 1 11 10 1.10 

(10) Sides 44 2 42 20 " 2.10 

(11) Painting 8 .8 7 1.14 

(12) Trimmings ... 20 3 17 20 0.85 

(13) Trusses 6 3 3 20 0.15 

Total box ..$218 $ 31 $187 .. 516.95 

Grand total.?458 $110 ?348 .. ?38.45 

There are 13 parts given in Table VI. If we add their lives, as 

given in the last column, and divide by 13, we get 12.2 years, which 

might be called the "unweighted" average life. It is obviously not 

the true average. 



22 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 1 

If we divide the total average annual repairs, $38.45, into the 
total net cost of repairs, $348, we get 9.1, which has been called the 
"average life of the car," but this, too, is deceptive. Nor would it 
be more correct to divide the total first cost, ?458, by $38.45, for 
the quotient, 11.9, is not the average life. The fact is, that the aver- 
age life of a car, taken as a whole, bears no necessary relation to the 
average life of any or all its parts, as will be explained more fully 
later on. Average annual repairs, such as the $38.45 given in Table 
VI, is an item involving credits for scrap value, thus making it im- 
possible to derive the average life of the parts, using life In any true 
sense of the word. The average life of a machine is not deduciblo 
from its average annual repairs. 

Referring to Table VI, we see that the life of the frame of the 
truck is 35 years. Therefore, before the frame requires renewal, 
nearly all the other parts will have been renewed several times. If 
the frame were assigned a life of 40 years, there would not be a 
single part that had not required at least two lives to equal the life 
of the frame. But the life of the longest lived part does not itself 
determine the life of the machine, for. as in this case of the car. a 
new truck frame might be provided at the end of 35 years. Then 
the car would be prepared to go on living another 35 years. 

We see, then, that the average life of a machine taken as a whole 
may bear no necessary relation to the average life of any of it^ 
parts, even of its longest lived part. The fact is that the actual life 
of most machines is determined by no self-contained elements of 
destruction, but by "improvements in the art" or by increase in the 
service required of the machine, necessitating, in the first case, sm 
improved machine, and, in the second case, a larger machine. The 
death of most machines is, therefore, caused by obsolescence — th© 
machine having outlived its economic usefulness, though still cap- 
able of rendering service. In America, the actual average life of 
railway cars and locomotives has not much exceeded 20 to 25 years. 
In Europe and England, cars and locomotives more than half a cen- 
tury old are in common use yet. On the whole Northern Pacific 
Railway (U. S. ) the oldest locomotive is only 33 years old. Such 
is the difference in obsolescence in America and Europe. In a grow- 
ing community it is obvious that obsolescence of certain classes of 
machines will be much more rapid than in a community whose 
growth is slow. Thus, a pump may economically serve a water- 
works in a growing community not longer than ten years, while the 
same pump might economically serve a non-growing community for 
thirty years, or more, provided no radical improvement in pump de- 
sign Were effected. 

In America we have had not only rapidly growing communities, 
but ingenious men and aggressive business managers who have been 
little hampered by labor union resistance to improved machinery. 
Hence obsolescence of machinery due to "improvements in the art" 
has played a very important part. I think I am safe in saying that 
the vast majority of machines in America have had a life averaging 
not to exceed about 20 ye^vs. Often the life of certain classes has 



COST KEEPING. 23 

not been five years. Witness the short life of cable railways in our 
large cities, due to the rapid improvement in electric car transporta- 
tion. Cableway systems had been hardly installed in New York and 
Philadelphia before they were torn out to make way for electric 
traction. 

While the total actual life of a machine is usually independent of 
the amount of service it renders, but is usually determined by obso- 
lescence, the life of the parts of the machine is determined by three 
factors : (1 ) The activity of use ; ( 2 ) the care in lubrication, etc., 
to reduce wear ; and ( 3 ) the amount and character of exposure to 
the elements. 

Activity of use is an exceedingly important factor in the wear of 
most machine parts. Hence records of repair costs should give 
some statement of work done that will indicate the activity of the 
machine. Thus, the car-miles per year will show the activity of a 
car. The number of hours of actual work per year is often a suffi- 
cient index as to work done. A steam road roller usually works 
about 100 days of 10 hours, or 1,000 hours per year. A locomotive 
usually works nearly three times that number of hours, and its an- 
nual repairs form about three times as great a percentage of the 
first cost as the percentage of repair cost of a steam roller. 

A rock drill working two shifts of 8 hours daily will show almost 
twice the annual repairs incurred when only one daily shift is 
worked. Incidentally, I may add that under severe and constant 
service, the annual cost of repairs of a rock drill may exceed the 
first cost of the machine. 

Fortunately there are many classes of service that differ so little 
that annual repair costs or life of parts can be correctly judged 
without having at hand a statement as to the precise activity of 
the machine. 

Let us now plot the costs of car repairs given in Table VI, so as 
to secure a curve of actual annual repairs. To do so we must first 
tabulate the recurring costs of renewals of parts given in Table VI 
as follows: 

EJnd Items Total 

of year, repaired. Repairs. 

1 None None 

2 None None 

3 ( 3 ) Brasses $ 6 

4 (1) Wheels $ 55 

5 None None 

6 (3), (5) and (6) $ 36 

7 (11) ? 8 

8 (1), (2) and (8) ? 110 

9 (3) ? 6 

10 (9) ? 11 

11 None None 

12 (1), (3), (5) and (6) ? 92 

13 None None 

14 (11) ? 8 

15 (3) and (7) ? 56 

16 (1), (2) and (8) $110 

17 None None 

18 (3), (5) and (6) f 36 

19 None None 

20 (1). (9). (10), (12) and (13) ? 86 



24 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Plotting the total annual repairs, for this 20 year period, we have 
the "curve" shown in Fig. 1, which bears no resemblance whatever 
to the "sinking fund curve of depreciation." 

I have not carried the "curve" out to the 35 year period (the life 
of the truck frame), since our present purpose is fully served by 
considering the 20 year period. 



1 



110 
100 
90 

<§ 70 
ti 30 

w 
w 




















no 
















I/O 






























































1 








, 


:Si 






























1 


















1 






<^( 
















1 








/ 










1 






/ 
















1 








/ 










1 






/ 










,.«■ 






1 








/ 






j 


1 JS 








/ 








\ 


\ . 






1 








/ 






/ 




1 






/ 










\ 


j 


r 


1 








1 






/ 




1 


/ 


\ 


/ 










\ 




V 


1 








/ 






/ 






/ 


\ 


/ 








1 


\ 




\ 








i/^ 


/ 










1 


/ 


\ 


/ 






A 


' 


\ 


1 


! 


a 


6 < 


r^' 


\ 


f 


' 


y 


'' 






/ 


\ 


( 



1 Z 3 4 S 6 7 ff 3 /O // /i /3 M /S /S /7 /S /S za 

Years. 

Fig. 1. Repairs of Freight Car. 



This saw-toothed "curve" of annual repairs of individual cars 
obviously will resolve itself into a straight line if the total annual 
repairs to a large number of different cars of slightly different ages 
is taken. During the first eight years of life of a group of wooden 
box cars, the total annual repairs will increase rapidly, but after 
that there will be comparatively little increase in the totals for 
each year. 



COST KEEPING. 25 

The same general law holds of all machines in active and regu- 
lar service. For a period there will be a rising cost of repairs, de- 
termined, as to rapidity of rise, by the life and cost of the various 
parts. Eventually the curve of repairs will become a saw-tooth line, 
whose general direction is either horizontal or slightly ascending. In 
no class of machine of which at present I have knowledge is there a 
repair curve bearing the remotest resemblance to a curve derived by 
plotting any function of any "sinking fund formula." 

I should leave the discussion of this subject in somewhat incom- 
plete form were I not to touch upon such structures (or parts of 
machines) whose life is terminated by the various forms of chemi- 
cal change. The rusting of iron, the rotting of wood (due to fungi), 
the decay of asphalt (due to little understood chemical action), and 
various other forms of plant deterioration fall into one general class 
for which it may be possibly claimed that annual repairs of individ- 
ual units follow some sort of regular curve, ascending rapidly to- 
ward the close of life. I think that the reasoning that has led to 
such a belief can readily be seen to be fallacious, if we start out by 
drawing a sharp distinction between the annual repairs required by 
a single unit and the annual repairs of a group of similar units. 

Let us take a railway cross-tie of untreated yellow pine, for ex- 
ample. If we confine our attention to one tie, we shall find that 
for, say, 7 years it gives perfectly uniform service without requir- 
ing any particular attention. Then, perhaps, the qualities by virtue 
of which it has resisted decay, begin to depart, and rot fungus gains 
a hold here and there. The growth of this fungus under the rail 
may result in the decay of the wood fibres to such' an extent that a 
spike works loose and the track foreman finds it necessary to pull 
the spike and drive it in another place. Some time later he may 
shift the tie slightly and redrive all the spikes. Finally he decides 
that the tie is so weakened by decay as to be unsafe, and removes 
it. The current repairs (the spike pulling, shifting, etc.) have 
been so slight in cost as to be entirely negligible when compared 
with the one great repair of entire renewal of the tie. Hence there 
exists no curve of repairs for this single tie at all, other than the 
one final upleap in the "curve," due to its renewal. 

Let us see now what happens to a group of the same ties. Each 
tie differs slightly from the others, both in its physical and chemi- 
cal make up. The character of the service differs also. One tie is 
near a rail joint, another is not. Some ties are on curves, some on 
tangents. Some are near soil where the spores of rot fungus are 
numerous, others are not. Hence at the end of, say, 5 years, some 
ties are so badly rotted that they must come out of the track ; at the 
end of 10 years many ties are still in service, although the great 
majority may have been removed at the end of 8 or 9 years. Now 
if we plot the curve of annual tie renewals of this group of ties, we 
shall find it following the zero line for 5 years, then slightly ascend- 
ing until about 8 years when it takes a sudden leap upward for a 
year or two — and all is over. This final action and sudden rise in 
the renewal curve indicates the somewhat varying life of the differ- 
ent ties, and nothing more. 



26 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The repairs of an asphalt pavement show a similar sudden rise 
toward the end of the life of the asphalt, and for similar reasons. 
Each square yard of the asphalt may be regarded as a unit similar 
to a railway tie. Slight original differences in chemical and physi- 
cal constitution exist in the different square yards. Differences in 
severity of traffic exist in different places. Hence, as in the case 
of a group of railway ties of the same age, there will be differences 
in the life of different square yards of asphalt. This will show in 
the sudden rise of annual repairs of asphalt pavement after 15 to 20 
years of life. 

In general, any machine or structure consisting of a number of 
parts of equal age and subject to about the same exposure to the 
elements, or to wear, will have a curve of repairs that will eventu- 
ally take a sudden rise. This rise in repairs is simply the evidence 
of the termination of the life of the group of units composing the 
machine or structure. If the machine or structure is of a kind that 
permits the economic renewal of each of those units by itself, as in 
the case of railway ties or rails, no problem in economics presents 
Itself. 

There Is obviously nothing to do but to renew each unit as rapidly 
as it reaches the limit of its endurance. 

If, on the other hand, the units are so interrelated that the renew- 
al of single units is more expensive than the renewal of the entire 
group of units at one time, then a problem in economics does pre- 
sent itself, the question being this : When does the rising curve of 
cost of repairs to the expiring units reach a point where it becomes 
economic to abandon the entire group of units and procure a new 
group of units? 

This problem is not one that comes before many classes of engi- 
neers, but it does present itself to highway engineers, particularly 
in connection with repairs to asphalt pavements. In view of this 
fact, and because several entirely erroneous solutions of the prob- 
lem have been published by engineers eminent in the field of highway 
engineering, I have prepared a correct solution of the problem. (See 
page 27.) 

While on the subject of repairs, it may be well to discuss briefly 
the identity of repairs and renewals in cases where a plant is being 
operated with a large number of plant units of different ages. 

A railway is a plant for manufacturing transportation, as Wel- 
lington has well put it. The principal plant elements are: 



1. 


Roadbed. 


2. 


Ballast. 


3. 


Ties. 


4. 


Rails. 


5. 


Buildings. 


6. 


Rolling stock, or equipment. 


7. 


Repair shops and tools. 



Minor repairs of roadbed and track are being constantly made. 



COST KEEPING. 27 

A bolt is renewed here, a spike there, a bit of ballast in another 
place — all renewals of plant on a minor scale. About 10% of the 
wooden ties are replaced annually — renewals again, though on a 
larger scale. About 5% of the rails are replaced annually — still 
more renewals. About 4% of the cars and locomotives are entirely 
renewed annually — renewals on a still larger scale. But from the 
worn-out track bolt to the worn-out locomotive, we have renewals 
of plant elements, varying in size and cost, it is true, but differing 
not one whit in the real character of the process. 

Evidently, then, after any large plant has been in use for a con- 
siderable period of years, there is no logical reason for distinguish- 
ing between minor renewals (called repairs) and major renewals 
(called renewals, or "entire renewals"). They are all one and the 
same thing in fact, difEering only in degree. Accountants have 
preached for a century or more about the dire consequences of 
failure to provide sinking funds for the redemption of large plant 
elements at the expiration of their life. But the great majority of 
managers of railways, lighting companies, mills, factories and mines, 
have ignored the arguments of the accountants, and have gone right 
on without providing a fund for renewals, but regarding renewals 
as identically the same in nature as repairs. In this I conceive that 
they have been right. 

The managers and owners of plants have known, what accountants 
have ignored, that money is worth more to a company for use in 
extensions and betterments of plant than it could possibly bring 
by placing it in a sinking fund, since all sinking funds draw com- 
paratively small interest. This has undoubtedly been a strong actu- 
ating motive — and a sound one — with plant managers, but I am 
satisfied that the inherent reasonableness of regarding even large 
renewals as repairs must have appealed quite as strongly to the 
managers of large plants. 

Problem III. To Determine When Repairs Have Grown so Great 
as to Justify Renewal. — The following discussion can be understood 
only after a study of the preceding paragraphs. 

This problem is one that seldom arises except in considering the 
repairs to such a structure as an asphalt pavement, for reasons 
previously given. If the rising "curve of annual repairs" is either 
a straight line or any curve which can be expressed as an equation, 
an accurate solution of the problem is possible by the use of the 
method about to be explained, aided by the application of differential 
calculus. 

An approximate solution is possible even without resort to the 
higher mathematics, as will be now shown. 

For simplicity of illustration, and not because it represents 
actual conditions, let us first assume that repairs increase at a 
uniform rate. It should be clear that the problem consists in 
finding the minimum quotient obtained by dividing the sum of the 
cost of the structure and the total repairs by the number of years 
during which the renair curve has been steadily rising. 



28 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Let 
C = first cost of structure. 
R = total repairs during y years of steadily increasing repairs. 

Then when 
C + R 
■ is a minimum we have the period beyond which It is 



uneconomic to continue repairs. 

In other words: 

The average annual first cost plus the average annual repair cost 
must te a minimum. 

We need not consider the item of interest in first cost, for that 
is a constant that goes on forever, unaffected by the period of re- 
newal of the structure. To those acquainted with calculus this state- 
ment should be self-evidently true, and to those who are not familiar 
with the higher mathematics it should become self-evident if they 
will consider the item of annual interest as being entirely analogous 



•8 



te 



40 






f» 



































!r« 


, y 


y^ 


y^ 










of. 


/ 


^ 


y 










c 


i^ 




c. 










^ 


^ 


7>^- 






B. 










o 










r 








JO 



Years of ^/sin^ J&po/rs 

Fig. 2. 

to an expense for sweeping a street, a cost that depends, it is true, 
upon the character and therefore the first cost, of the pavement, but 
one having no bearing upon the question ot'when an old pavement 
shall be replaced by a new one of the same sort.' 

Let us assume that the annual repairs rise steadily, at the rate 
of 4 cts. increase per year. Let us assume that the first cost of 
this asphalt is $1 per sq. yd., not including the concrete base which 
is permanent, and therefore should not enter the problem any more 
than should the cost of sweeping, or the annual interest on the 
investment. Then we can show the "curve of repairs" as in Fig. 2. 

By a series of approximations, we can now determine when th© 
C + R 

value of Is a minimum. Let us first assume 5 years. Then 

2/ 
y = 5. The total repairs during this five-year period can be readily 



COST KEEPING. 29 

calculated by determiningr the area of the triangle ABC, in Fig. 2, 
20 X 5 

which is =$0.50. 

2 
Hence we have 

C + R ?l-0.0 + ?0.50 

= — = ?0.30, 

y 5 

which is the average annual first cost of the pavement and its re- 
pairs for the 5-year period. If this seems high, let us try a 4-year 
period. Then we have iJ = $0.32., 

C + R ?1.00 + $0.32 



•=$0.33. 



y 4 

Evidently, then, the economic period is not less than 5 years, 
and may be greater. Let us try 10 years. Then R— $2.00, 

C + R $1.00-1- $2.00 

. = $0.75. 

y 10 

This is much higher than for the 5-year period. Let us try 7 

years. Then JJ = $0.98. 

C + R $1.00-1- $0.98 

= = $0.27. 

■ y 7 

Further tests will show that this is practically the minimum. It 
should be noted that the minimum is attained, in this case, when 
the total repairs for the period of rising repairs equals the first 
cost of the asphalt wearing coat. As a matter of fact, this is a 
law of general application wherever the curve of rising annual 
repairs is a straight line, that is wherever repairs increase annu- 
ally by any constant percentage. I will prove this generalization 
by the aid of calculus,, but it can be demonstrated in the more 
roundabout and primitive way above used. 

In all cases, no matter what the curve of increasing repairs may 
be, the method of plotting the annual repairs and determining the 
area, to ascertain total repairs (,R) will enable anyone to find when 
C + R 
■ is a minimum, by a series of approximations. 

y 

For the engineer who is familiar with calculus the following 
method will afford a more direct solution of the problem. The prob- 

C + R 
lem is to determine when IC -\ = m is a minimum, « being the 

y 

unit annual pavement cost. 

When repairs increase regularly each year, by a rate a, then the 
equation of a straight line x = ay gives us the "curve of annual re- 
pairs." Since R is the area of a triangle whose base is y (see 
Fig. 2), 

xy 

R = , 

2 
But X = ay, 

ay' 
Hence R = . 



30 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Substituting this value of R in the equation 
C + R 
IC H = u, we have 

y 

C ay 

/a H 1 — = u. 

V 2 
Differentiating, we see that IC (the annual interest) disappears, 
as it is a constant, and we have 
— Cdy ady 

1 • = du. 

2/2 2 

Solving for a minimum by placing 
du 

■ — = o, we have 
dy 
—C a 

h — = o, 

j/2 2 

2C 
2/^ = —, 






This gives us the desired formula for determining the time (j/) 

C 




>hp/^ of £is//y Fepo/'/y. 
Fig. 3. 

when it becomes economic to renew the entire pavement, 
the example above given, a= 4% ot C, we have 

200 
y — ^\ — —=7.07 years. 



If, as in 



H 



Since the minimum average annual plant expense is attained 

/ tU~ ay^ 
. when 1/ = ^ / , and since R = , we have 



/ tc 

y:^ y-— , and 



a 
R — — X 

2 



2C 



C. 



Hence : 

When annual repairs increase steadily by a constant ratio it 
ceases to be economic to retain a structure or machine in service 
after the aggregate repairs exceed the first cost of the structure or 
machine. 

Should the structure or machine have any salvage value, substi- 
tute the expression "first cost minus salvage value" in the fore- 
going criterion in place of the expression "first cost." 

As a further example, let us assume that the curve of annual 



COST KEEPING. 31 

repairs la a parabola instead of a straight line, -as indicated in 
Fig. 3. 

The area ABC gives us the total repairs, or R ; and for a para- 
bola this external area is 

XV 





3 




Since the curve of the parabola 


is 






_2/» 




y" = '^px, X - 


'2p 


Hence 


yS 

R = . 




Our eauation of condition is. as 


before. 




C + R 






= u. 




Hence 


y 

C 2/2 

1 Tf 






-J- — W 

2/ . 6p 
and placing 


* 


Differentiating 






du 






= 0, we 


have 




dv 






— G ydy 






+ = 


= 0, 



2/2 3p 

ZpC 

y2 = . 

y 

2/3 = ZpC, 



y = V ZpC. 
Substituting the values of p and C in this equation will give 
us the period of years during which it continues to be economic 
to pay the increasing cost of repairs. 



y 



Since jB — , and since y = ^ 3pC, combining we have 

6p 

C 

R = . 

2 
Hence : 

When annual repairs increase steadily according to the curve of 
a parabola, it ceases to be economic to retain a structure or machine 
in service after the aggregate repairs exceed half the first cost of 
the structure or machine. 

In the case of an asphalt or block pavement, annual repairs are 
usually very slis:ht for a considerable term of years, the repairs 
often amountins to nothing at all. Let us assume that for K years 
there are no reoairs and that then the repairs increase uniformly 
at the rate a for z years. Then the annual repairs (x) at any 
given year after the period of no repairs are given by this equation 
X = az 

And the total repairs are 

xs az^ 

~ 2 ~ 2 



32 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The average unit cost (m) of repairs per year is 
C + R 



K + z 
K -\- s being the total life iy). 

az- 

Substituting for R its value we have 

2 

C + 

2 

u = 

K + z 

As before, solve for a minimum by differentiating and placing 
the first differential coefficient equal to zero. To do this, let 

K + z = y 
Then 

C az- 

u = — + 

y 2y 

— Cdp a flyzdz — z'^dy 
du — — |- 

y' 2 

But, since K + z = y, dy = dz, hence 

— Cdy a flyzdy — zMii 

du = 1 

y" 2 

du 
Then if we make — =0, we have 
dy 

— C-\ {2yz — z^) =0 

2 

2C 

— z^ + 2yz = 

a 
But y = K-\-z. hence 

2C 

— «2 + 2 (.K + s) « = — 

a 
2C 

«2 + 2^2! = — 

a 

2C 

z^ + 2Ks + K^ — \-K^ 

a 



(lyzdz — z'^dy \ 

5nce 

(lyzdy — zMy X 
y- ) 



I 2C 

X o 

But z + K is the economic life (y) of the pavement, hence 
expressed in words this formula becomes : 

When a structure requires no repairs for a period of years IK), 
and then the repairs increase annually hy a regular rate (a), the 
economic life (in years) of the structure is equal to the square 
root of the sum of (1) twice the first cost {in dollars) of the 
structure divided by the rate (a) and (2) the square of the number 
of years (K) of no repairs. 

Thus if the period of no repairs (.K) is ten years, and if the 
repairs then start and increase steadily at the annual of rate (a) 



COST KEEPING. 33 

of 0.04 (or 47o) of the first cost, and if the first cost (c) is $1, 
we have : 

— + 100= V 150 = 12.25 

Hence the economic life would be 12.25 years, or only 2^4 years 
after the 10 year period of no repairs has expired. 

In like manner formulas can be readily deduced for any other 
curves of repairs. 

Having now before us a mathematically correct method of solv- 
ing problems of this nature, it may be well to examine at least 
one of the incorrect solutions that have previously been published. 
In the following paragraphs will be found an erroneous method of 
attacking this problem. 

Fallacious Formula For Determining When Increasing Repairs 
Justify Resurfacing a Pavement. — In 1906, Mr. George M. Tillson, 
Chief Engineer, Bureau of Highways, Brooklyn, New York City, 
read a paper* before the Meclianical and Engineering Section of 
the Franklin Institute, in which a method was given for solving a 
problem that often comes before highway engineers. Mr. Tillson 
said : "It is often desirable to know positively when the cost of re- 
pairing a pavement has become so great that it would be econom- 
ical to relay the pavement. This can be determined by the same 
formula, as its result governs the cost of maintaining the pavement 
perpetually, so that when the annual repairs equal or exceed the 
perpetual annual cost, it is time to repave." 

R 

The formula to which he alludes is A + CI -\ = annual ex- 
pense, in which N 

N = life of pavement in years. 

C = first cost per square yard. 

I = rate of interest. 

A = amount to be paid in each year to create a sinking fund to 
equal C in N years. 

JB = total cost of repairs. 

Mr. Tillson gives the following example: 

"Take for instance an asphalt pavement and let N equal 15 years, 
C equal $1.50, / equal 0.035, and R equal ?0.40. Then A will equal 
0.0807 and the equation becomes $0.0807 + 0.0525 + 0.0267 = 
$0.1599 ; or if the street be repaved It will cost annually $0.16 till 
It is renewed. Consequently if the life of asphalt be correctly as- 
sumed at 15 years, it should not be repaved until the annual cost 
approaches $0.16 per sq. yd. Assuming the life to be 20 instead 
of 15 years and applying the formula as before, the annual cost 
will be reduced to $0.1356 per yard. The author believes this is the 
true scientific way in which to determine when an asphalt pavement, 
from an economical standpoint, should be relaid." 

The problem that Mr. Tillson undertakes to solve is when a pave- 

•The paper was reprinted in full in Engineering-Contracting, 
July 17, 1907. 



34 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ment should be relaid. Therefore the unknown quantity should be 
j/j the number of years of economic life ; but where does y appear 
in Mr. Tillson's equation? It really exists on both sides of the 
equation and is not transposed to one side before solving. If we 
study Mr. Tillson's method, we see that it amounts to this: His 
equation of condition is that when current repairs (r) for any given 
year equal "average annual cost," then it is time to renew the pave- 
ment. But we have seen that his assumed average "annual ex- 

R 
pense is A + CI -{ . Now, calling the current repairs for any 

N 
flven year r, we have 

R 
r = A + CI + - 



N 

This is the equation that we are to solve. Where is y, the num- 
ber of years? If the repairs are increasing annually — and that is 
one of the conditions of this problem — r must be a function of y, so 
we have y on the left side of the equation. What is U? IS is the 
total cost of repairs during the life y, so R is also a function of y. 
Hence the very thing we are trying to ascertain is assumed in the 

R 
expression . 

N 

Yet this is not the only place where it is assumed, for the 
amount to be paid annually into a sinking fund. A, is also a 
function of y. Hence one function of y is placed on the left side of 
the equation, and two functions of y and a constant are placed on 
the right side. We are then told that if we will juggle with the 
variable, y, until there is an equality, we have solved for y. Fur- 
ther comment on such misuse of mathematics appears to be 
unnecessary. 

Straight Line Formula of Depreciation. — The most common way 
of determining the depreciated value of a machine, where ap- 
praisal of physical property is being made, is by the "straight 
line formula of depreciation." This consists simply in regarding 
each lost year of plant life as causing a depreciation propor- 
tionate to the entire loss of value at the end of its life. In other 
words, the rate of annual depreciation is 1 -^ the total number of 
years of life. Thus, when the average life of a railway tie is 10 
years, each year causes a depreciation of 1/10, or 10% of the first 
cost of the tie. At the end of 6 years it has lost 60%, and its de- 
preciated value is 40%. 

For some purposes of appraisal of present value of plant units, 
this method is, perhaps, satisfactory. Its simplicity appeals to all. 
But with increased knowledge as to life and cost of plant repairs, 
this simple method is likely to give way to the exact method of the 
Unit Cost Depreciation Formula (page 36). 

It should be remembered that where a plant contains a large 
number of similar plant units of varying age— as in the case of all 
old railways — the average annual renewals are identically the 
same as the annual depreciation obtained by the straight line 



COST KEEPING. 35 

torinula. Thus if locomotives average a life of 25 years, annual 
depreciation by the straight line formula is 4%, and if the loco- 
motives are of equal value but of different ages, annual renewals 
will be exactly 4% of the cost new. 

As I have stated elsewhere, this condition makes it unnecessary 
to use a sinking fund table for determining depreciation, since re- 
newals of entire plant units are regarded as identically the same 
as renewals of parts of each plant unit commonly called repairs. 

The Bastard Straight Line Formula of Depreciation — It is not an 

uncommon practice to "write off" a certain percentage for plant 
depreciation each year. When the amount written off is a fixed 
percentage of the first cost of the plant there is an application of 
the straight line formula of depreciation. However, it is the prac- 
tice among many accountants to "write off" each year a percent- 
age of the last year's "book value" of the plant. This produces 
a curve of "depreciated value of plant" that rapidly flattens out, 
and extends to infinity. There is certainly no logical defense possi- 
ble for this method of estimating depreciated values. 

Sinking Fund Formula of Depreciation. — ^According to this method 
it is assumed tliat the total depreciation of a machine or structure 
at any given age is the amount already accumulated in a sinking 
fund established for its redemption at the end of its life. 

Table IV (page 15) gives the accumulation (a) of ?1 for any 
number of years (n). 

Table III (page 13) gives the annual deposit ip) in a sinking 
fund to redeem ?1 at the end of the life of the machine, that is 
at the end of N years. Hence the accumulation in n years of an 
annual deposit of d will be 

(16) A = dXa, 

d being taken for JV" years (life) from Table III, 
o being taken for n years (age) from Table IV. 
But, as previously shown in explaining these two tables, 
1 
a = — ,. 

d^ being taken for n years from Table III. Hence, 

d 

(17) A = . 

d being taken for N years (life) from Table III, 

d^ being taken for n years (age) from Table III. 

Equation (16) is the most convenient for general use, but it is 
well to remember that equation (17) is equally applicable. 

To illustrate by an example let us determine the depreciation of 
a railway tie 6 years of age, whose total life will be 10 years. If 
we assume a rate of interest of 4% we have by formula (17) and 
Table III 

d .0829 

.A = •=> =55% nearly, 

di .1508 
which is the percentage of depreciation or lost value. 



36 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Since the depreciation by this sinking fund formula is 55% of 
the first cost, the present value is 45%. 

By the straight line formula the depreciation is 60% and the 
present value is 409o- 

The same result (55% depreciation) is obtained with more ex- 
pedition by the use of equation (16) and Tables III and IV. 

Depreciation curves have been prepared from calculations made 
in this manner, and will be found at the end of the Waterworks 
Section of this book, for which consult the index under "Depre- 
ciation, Sinking Fund Curves." 

The arguments upon which this method relies for support are 
two : ( 1 ) That the redemption of all perishable plant units 
should be provided for by sinking funds, and that, consequently, 
the accumulation in a sinking fund at any time represents the 
depreciation of the plant, which if delivered to a purchaser of the 
plant would recompense the purchaser in full for the plant de- 
preciation. (2) That a sinking fund curve of increase, year by 
year, is analogous to the curve of increased cost of plant repairs. 

The first argument looks sound, but is really fallacious. The 
purchaser is asked to accept a fund in place of an actual loss of 
value of the plant which may bear no relation to the fund at all. 

The second argument is even more faulty, for by the wildest 
stretch of the imagination there can be found no logical relation 
between the annual cost of repairs and a sinking fund curve, since 
the one is the result of physical and chemical action, while the 
other is a function of rates of interest on capital. 

We have already seen that the actual curves of plant unit repairs 
are not regularly ascending curves at all. And we have also 
seen that certain numerous classes of plant units have no appre- 
ciable repairs, save the final upleap in the curve which marks the 
entire renewal of that plant unit. It is, therefore, apparent that 
the sinking fund formula will not remain long popular after engi- 
neers have a clearer conception of the nature of plant repairs, and 
particularly after the fundamental principles of estimating unit 
costs of production are better understood. 

In the following paragraphs will be found a determination of 
depreciation based upon the criterion of unit costs of production, 
which is the only criterion by which relative plant values can ever 
be accurately determined. 

The Unit Cost of Depreciation Formula. — In selecting a name 

for the formula that I have deduced below, I have been somewhat 
at a loss to choose a title that would be descriptive of the principle 
involved, without being too cumbersome. For brevity it seems 
well to call it The Unit Cost Depreciation Formula. 

The owner of a secondhand machine is entitled to such a price 
for it as will enable the purchaser to go on with its use and pro- 
duce each unit of product at as low a cost as the average unit 
cost of production would he during the entire life of the machine. 

This is but common equity, and needs no argument in its sup- 
port. The equitable price thus arrived at is the depreciated value 



COST KEEPING. 37 

of the machine. It will be noted that the criterion thus announced 
is essentially the same in principle as the criterion used in Prob- 
lem I, for determining which of two new machines to select 
(page 17). 

Adopting similar symbols we have : 
. N = annual average, number of units of product of machine dur- 
ing its entire life. 
n = annual average number of units of product of the old 

machine during its remaining years of life. 
C = first cost of a new machine. 
c = depreciated value of old machine. 
D = sinking fund annuity (Table III) to redeem first cost (C) of 

new machine at end of life. 
d = sinking fund annuity (Table III) to redeem depreciated 
value iC) of old machine during its remaining term of 
years of life. 
R = rate per cent of average annual repairs during entire life, 
r = rate per cent of average annual repairs during remaining 

life. 
T^=rc = total repairs during remaining life. 
/ = interest on capital. 

O = average annual operating expense during entire life. 
o = average annual operating expense during remaining life. 
U = average unit cost of production during entire life. 
u = average unit cost of production during remaining life. 
Then 

+ RC + DC + IC 

(18) U = . 

N 

o -\- re -\- dc + Ic 

(19) « = - . 

n 

But re = T. hence 

o + T + do + Ig 

(20) w = . 

n 
According to the principle that U should equal u, we have 
O + RC + DC + IC o + T + dc + Ic 

(21) = . 

N n 

In all ordinary cases, O = Oj and N = n, hence 

(22) RC + DC + IC = o + T + dc + Ic. 
Therefore, 

C(R + D+I) — T 

(23) C = . 

d + I 
Formula (23) gives the depreciated value of a secondhand ma- 
chine or structure. If it is desired to express this depreciated 
value as a percentage of the first cost C, we have 

c (R + D+IJ — T 

(24) — = . 

C d+I 

Formula (24) is our unit cost depreciation formula. 



38 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

If repairs during the entire life are nominal in amount, then both 
R and T vanish, and we have 
c D+I 

(25) — = . 

C d + I 

Formula (25) is the one to apply to railway ties, water pipe, and 
other plant units that have no appreciable current repairs. 

For contrast with the sinking fund formula, let us find the de- 
preciated value of a railway tie 6 years old, whose life is 10 years, 
interest being 4%. 

Table III (page 13) gives: 

I> = 0.0833 for 10 years, and 4%. 
d= 0.1508 for 6 years, and 4%. 

Then according to equation (25) we have 
c 8.33 + 4 12.33 

— = = =64.5%. 

C 15.08 + 4 19.08 

We have seen that the sinking fund formula gives a depreciated 
value of 45%, and that the straight line formula gives 40%, with 
the same data as to life, age, etc. 

Contrast formula (25) with formula (17), and it will be seen 
that the sinking fund formula differs in not having / added to both 
numerator and denominator. 

Contrast formula (25) with formula (17), and it will be seen 
that the sinking fund formula errs to an even greater extent, for 
it makes no rational provision for consideration of the actual re- 
pairs during the whole life and the remaining life of the machine. 

So far as I know, these formulas (24) and (25) — unit cost depre- 
ciation formulas — have never been deduced before. Formula (25) 
lends itself as readily as the sinking fund formula to being platted 
as a curve. Formula (24) can also be expressed as a curve, when 
the actual rates of repairs are known, but it does not lend itself 
to any guesswork, which, after all, is a real merit. There has 
been too much guessing as to rates of repairs. 

Physical Property Valuations. — As a result of the growing 
control that governments are exercising over public service cor- 
porations, as well as because of the tendency to place all property 
values on a scientific basis for taxation, there have been many 
recent appraisals of the physical, or tangible, property of rail- 
ways, lighting companies, etc. Many more such valuations will be 
made in coming years, and will require the constant services of 
many engineers in keeping the valuations up to date. Moreover, 
I am inclined to believe that the valuation of the physical prop- 
erty of all large corporations will eventuallly be made by govern- 
ments, if for no other reason than to protect stockholders from 
unscrupulous company officials, who by insufficient maintenance 
of plants can maKe net earnings seem to be larger than they 
really are, and thus inflate stock values for a time, only to reverse 
the process and cause a slump. No scientific expenditure for 
proper plant maintenance is possible without a knowledge both of 
the character of the plant and the service it is rendering but of 



COST KEEPING. 39 

the amounts of capital invested in the various plant units. This is 
tantamount to saying tliat no one can judge accurately from re- 
ports of annual maintenance expenditures whether a large plant is 
being properly maintained unless a detailed appi-aisal of the 
physical property is at hand. This alone would justify every rail- 
way and every large manufacturing company in having a physical 
appraisal made and kept up to date, for its own purposes. Some, 
in fact, do, but they are woefully in the minority as yet. 

A physical appraisal involves ascertaining all unit quantities of 
construction, and the number of plant units of each class, to which 
standard present prices are applied. This gives the cost of repro- 
duction neio. 

The next step is to ascertain the average age of the units of each 
class, for the purpose of estimating depreciated value, or, as it is 
more often called, present value. We have just seen that three 
formulas are now available ifor this purpose : ( 1 ) The Straight 
Line Depreciation Formula; (2) the Sinking Fund Depreciation 
Formula; and (3), one that I now submit for the consideration of 
appi'aising engineers,- the Unit Cost Depreciation Formula. 

In the Railway Section of this book I have discussed the proper 
method of arriving at the average age of plant units of the same 
kind, but differing in first cost. (See the index under "Appraisal, 
Railways" ; also see "Appraisal, Waterworks)." 

Going Concern Value. — In addition to the first cost of a plant, 
including the interest on the investment during construction, there 
is another sort of expense that should properly be included in 
arriving at the cost of the plant to its owners, and that is the cost 
of getting the business. 

For some years after a plant is put in operation, it frequently is 
run at an actual loss, until its products become favorably known 
to the public, or until the development of its tributary population 
supplies the business. 

The early losses in operating a plant should usually he regarded 
as actual expenditures in developing the business, and should be 
figured at compound interest up to the time that there ceases to be 
a loss from operation. 

And now comes a very important point to bear in mind when 
determining these operating losses, namely that during the early 
years of a plant operating expenses (including maintenance in the 
term) are below normal. This results from the fact that new 
machinery requires little or no repairs. In equity, therefore, not the 
actual repairs should be considered but the annual sinking fund 
deposit necessary to provide for the excess repairs that must be 
borne in later years. 

Having thus determined the full theoretical maintenance (actual 
plus proper annual allowance for sub-normal repairs), and operat- 
ing expense, there comes a time when there ceases to be a loss 
from operation and when the earnings also suffice to pay the inter- 
est on the bonds, or the capital invested. Still, money continues to 
be expended in advertising and in soliciting new business. This 



40 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

money is also an element of cost in establishing the business, and, 
as such, is to be regarded as a part of the cost of the plant and 
its business. 

The sum of the money lost at first in operating the plant, and 
the money spent in advertising, soliciting business, etc., may be 
called the going concern value of the plant, which should certainly 
be added to its physical value. 

A further discussion of this subject appears at the end of the 
Waterworks Section. Consult the index under "Value, Going 
Concern." 

Commercial Valuations. — The method of valuing an existing busi- 
ness is one of comparative simplicity, unless tliere is doubt as to 
physical condition of the plant. In which case a physical valua- 
tion of the plant may be needed to determine what the excess cost 
of repairs is likely to be due to a run-down condition. 

When this does not enter the problem, the question is simply one 
of ascertaining the net earnings and of capitalizing them at a rate 
of interest which judgment in such matters dictates as being rea- 
sonable. If the business is large and long established, the rate 
of interest used in capitalization may be as low as 5%, provided 
"net earnings" are regarded as the remainder after deducting oper- 
ating expense, maintenance and interest on the investment (= inter- 
est on bonds). 

This is as low a basis as is apt to be used, unless the curve 
of growth of the business is such as to warrant favorable specula- 
tion as to its future, or a discounting of the future by assuming 
a lower rate of interest as a basis for capitalization. 

When a business is small and subject to fierce competition of 
capable rivals, and is dependent for its present success largely upon 
one or more individuals, the rate used in capitalizing its net earn- 
ings should be very high. In this connection it may be well to 
caution the young engineer against being deceived as to the operat- 
ing expense of a small business. Tlie owner of such a business 
frequently draws only a small salary, and lool-cs to the dividends or 
profits for his real salary. When he has sold the business, it will 
probably be necessary to hire a manager of ability equal to that of 
the owner, and to pay him a much higher salary than the owner 
drew. 

It is a curious fact that this consideration has escaped the 
attention of not a few men who have appraised the value of small 
business concerns. One celebrated English promoter made several 
fortunes by capitalizing comparatively small business concerns on 
net earnings shown truthfully in their books, but which did not 
show that the mental equal of the old owner of the business could 
not be hired except for a very large salary. 

An interesting discussion of the commercial valuation of railways 
will be found in Bulletin 21, Department of Commerce and Labor, 
Bureau of the Census, entitled "Commercial Valuation of Railway 
Operating Property in the United States, 1904." 

Prof. Henry C. Adams, Prof. B. H. Meyer, and Mr. William J 



COST KEEPING. 41 

Meyers give many valuable data in the course of the discussions 
in the Bulletin No. 21, which contains nearly 90 pages. 

From a great array of railway statistics, Mr. William J. Meyers 
concluded that railway bonds averaged a return of 3.7939b on their 
market price, and that railway stocks averaged a return of 4.918% 
on their market price. He says : "Combining the figures for share- 
holders' interests with those for the funded debt (bonds) we get 
as the mean rate of annual return on all securities 4.256%, which 
is thus indicated as the proper rate to be used in capitalizing net 
earnings from operation (diminished by taxes) in order to arrive 
at the value of the security holders' interests in the operating 
property." 

How to Prepare Estimates and Bids. — In estimating a unit price 
for any kind of work, contractors often place too much reliance 
on published prices for similar work. There are seven serious 
sources of error in so doing: (1) The conditions may vary greatly in 
places but a few miles apart; (2) i-ates of wages often vary widely, 
being, for example, higher in large cities than in small cities or In 
the country; (3) specifications and the interpretations of identical 
specification clauses by different engineers vary greatly; (4) con- 
tractors inexperienced in the particular work in question often have 
bid prices altogether too low ; ( 5 ) the bidding prices may be pur- 
posely unbalanced, being too high on certain items and too low on 
others; (6) a unit price that is fair for a large job is generally too 
low for a small job ; ( 7 ) a contractor already equipped with a 
plant can often afford to bid lower than the contractors not so 
equipped. 

While previous bidding prices should be used as a guide, they 
should never be relied upon implicitly if the work is of any con- 
siderable magnitude. Each item should be estimated in detail, and 
this estimating should be done systematically to avoid some serious 
omission. The cost of any item of work may be divided into five 
parts : 

1. Development expenses. 

2. Plant expense and supplies. 

3. Materials. 

4. Labor. 

5. Superintendence and general expense (overhead charges). 

Development expense Includes the cost of making roads, deliver- 
ing and installing the plant, draining the site of the work, salaries 
of foremen and others on the idle list pending the beginning of 
work, and all expenses involved in getting ready to build the 
structure. On small jobs this item of development expense is often 
a very large percentage of the total cost ; and on large jobs it 
seldom can be neglected in estimating probable unit costs. 

Development expense has to be estimated for' each particular 
job, by securing freight rates or estimates > for carting, etc. In 
some cases it includes temporary road building, installing pipes for 
water supply, etc. 

Plant expense includes interest, repairs, depreciation and in- 



42 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

surance on all tools, machines, buildings, stored materials, trestles, 
falsework ; and supplies include fuel, oil, etc. 

Materials include only such materials as actually go into the fin- 
ished structure, and the wastage of materials due to breakage in 
handling or sawing and shaping. The cost of materials includes 
freight and hauling to the site of work. 

Labor includes all skilled and common labor, except superintend- 
ents, clerks and office men. 

Superintendence and general expense includes foremen, man- 
agers, timekeepers, watchmen, bookkeepers, supply clerks, rents,, 
taxes, traveling and entertaining expenses, stationery, etc. 

To the experinced contractor an enumeration of these items may 
seem unnecessary, but it is indeed surprising to see how often inex- 
perienced contractors err through failure to consider all of these 
items. Engineers, and not always young engineers, are prone 
to omit development and plant expenses, either in whole or in 
part, from their estimates of cost. 

Returning to the subject of deciding upon bidding prices, make it 
a practice always to check the quantities given in the bidding sheet 
as far as possible. If the contract is a large one, or the work is 
such that you cannot personally do all the checking, employ an 
engineer to do so. It is astonishing to note the number of errors, 
typographically or othei'wise made, that creep into quantity sheets. 
An error of transposition is not uncommon ; thus, the engineer 
may have correctly determined that there are 3,000 cu. yds. of em- 
bankment and 1,200 cu. yds. of riprap, but in the bidding sheet 
the quantities may be transposed so as to read, 1,200 cu. yds. 
of embankment and 3,000 cu. yds. of riprap. In looking over the 
quantities, therefore, always ask yourself whether each quantity 
"looks about right," or not. A shrewd contractor will thus dis- 
cover errors that a whole staff of engineers have overlooked. 
Whenever you see a small, and what appears to be an arbitrary 
quantity, like 10 cu. yds. of concrete or 50 cu. yds. of rock ex- 
cavation, look carefully over the plans and specifications to dis- 
cover if possible where this quantity is shown in detail. If it can- 
not be found that the quantity has been actually measured, it is 
safe to assume that it has been guessed at, and that in conse- 
quence it may subsequently prove to be an under-estimate. Bid 
liberally on such items, but bid not too liberally. More contractors, 
otherwise shrewd, than one would expect to see make the error of 
bidding unreasonably high on such small items. The result some- 
times is that their bids are rejected because they are "unbalanced" ; 
or, if accepted, and later it is found that a larger quantity of the 
unbalanced item exists, the engineers may either change the plans 
or relet the work covering that item. Set it down that seldom 
is it good business policy to bid an unreasonably high price on 
any item even on public works contracts, and it never is wise to 
do so on private contracts. Even though the item is small, and the 
cost of putting up a plant to perform the work is large, still bid 
only a little higher price on the item than you would bid if it 



COST KEEPING. 43 

were many times larger, and distribute the estimated cost of plant 
over the other items. 

A Schedule of Items of Cost. — In preparing an estimate of unit 
cost tliere is always danger of omitting some important item. To 
avoid such an omission I find it desirable to compare my estimates 
with a schedule of items, such as follows : 

1. Cost of temporary roadways 

2. Cost of right of way through farms, etc. 

3. Cost of clearing and grubbing the site. 

4. Cost of snow removal and draining the site. 

5. Cost of the site. 

6. Cost of sheds, barns, offices, etc. 

7. Cost of delivering and installing plant. 

8. Cost of supplies, including explosives, water, fuel, oil, etc. 

9. Plant, interest, depreciation, and repairs. 

10. Cost of shifting plant units from one point of attack to an- 

other, including lost time of workmen waiting during the 
shifting. 

11. Cost of trestles, falsework, bracing, forms and temporary 

supports. 

12. Quarry rent, sand pit rent, timber stumpage, etc. 

13. Cost of materials f. o. b. for a unit of the structure, includ- 

ing wastage. 

14. Freight on materials. 

15. Cost of unloading, hauling and storing of materials. 

16. Cost of delivery and re-handling materials until at the place 

to be used. 

17. Labor of handling, shaping and placing materials, and all 

operating labor. 

IS. Foremen's salaries. 

19. Salaries of watchmen, timekeepers, clerks, bookkeepers, etc. 

20. Office and traveling expenses. 

21. Interest on cash capital other than plant. 

22. Taxes, licenses and insurance of property. 

23. Insurance of workmen and the public against accident. 

24. Premium paid to bondsmen or surety company for bond 

required. 
• 25. Advertising, legal expense, charity. 

26. Discount on warrants, notes or other paper payments for 

work done. 

27. Riot protection and detective work. 

28. Sanitation. 

29. Housing plant during winter. 

30. Providing waterproof garments. 

31. Engineering. 

32. Percentage added to materials and percentage added to 

labor, to cover contingencies. 

33. Percentage for profit. 

Plant Expense. — Plant expense is commonly underestimated. 
First it is necessary to consider the time limit allowed for the 



44 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

work. Then a plant must be figured upon that will perform the 
work at least 20% within the time limit, making also liberal allow- 
ances for bad weather delays, as well as for delays in delivering 
and installing the plant, and delays due to breakdowns. 

Use with great caution the figures of output given in most cata- 
logs ; they are almost invariably based upon ideal conditions, and 
not infrequently are wholly deceptive. Even where the output of a 
machine is correctly stated, remember that such an output may not 
be possible in your case, due to inability to get materials to the 
machine or away from it. Consider always the limiting factor. 
A derrick, for example, may be able to handle 200 cu. yds. a day, 
but if it serves a few men working in a confined space, its actual 
output may not be 30 cu. yds. Time and again this self-evident 
fact has not been evident to the Inexperienced man. 

To give another example, suppose the work is rock excavation. 
Do not guess at the number of rock-drills required ; but estimate 
the probable spacing of the drill holes in the given kind of rock 
and from this calculate the number of cubic yards of rock each 
drill will break daily on a basis of, say, 50 ft. of hole drilled 
per machine per shift. Knowing the time limit, compute the num- 
ber of drills required ; and, knowing the number of drills, com- 
pute the boiler power required. Guess at nothing. If you have no 
other data, secure, by letter, some estimates of output from the 
large and old manufacturing firms, whose estimates are frequently 
very close to the truth. 

Allow liberally for plant that is idle during shop repairs. On 
railways, for example, 8 to 12% of the total number of locomotives 
are constantly in the shop undergoing repairs. 

Having liberally estimated the size and kind of plant required, 
and having secured quotations on the plant, charge the full cost 
of the plant up to the job to be done, and determine how many 
cents per yard, or per other units involved, are thus chargeable to 
first cost of plant. This will give a maximum charge, and it is well 
to know the worst. But if the full cost of a plant is charged to a 
small job, some other contractor will probably get the work. Go, 
therefore, to a dealer in second-hand machinery, and ask him to 
name a fair price on a second-hand plant such as yours will be 
when you are through with it. If you can secure a tentative bid on 
the machinery, you will have a fairly reliable estimate of the sal- 
vage value. In most cases you can form some estimate of the sal- 
vage value, by finding what second-hand plants are selling for. 
If you are still afraid that your charge for depreciation will be so 
high as to lose the job, there is left just one safe way of estimating, 
namely, to secure a rental quotation. There are many firms who 
make a business of renting contracting plants, and such a plant as 
is wanted can usually be rented for a daily or monthly price that 
includes ordinary wear and tear. The longer the plant is to be 
used the lower the daily rate of rent, therefore be careful to secure 
a sliding scale lease. A hoisting engine and boiler may be rented 
for, say, $2 a day, if the period is to be 30 days; but, for each added 



COST KEEPING. 45 

30 days, there should be a i-eduction in the rate, down to, say, $1, 
beyond which no furtlier reduction is given. The reason why such 
a sliding scale can be secured is briefly this : 

The season for contract work is usually limited ; road work, for 
example, is limited to the summer and fall months. Most of the 
tontracts are awarded at an early date, so that if a plant remains 
unrented well into the season, the chance of renting it falls off 
rapidly. Periods of idleness between times of rental soon cut down 
the net income from a plant, yet interest on the investment goes on 
uninterruptedly. If these periods of idleness can be reduced the 
owner of a plant can afford to accept a lower per diem rate of 
rental, yet be a gainer at the end of the year. 

Then, too, there are some seasons when contractors and their 
plants are abundant, and work is scarce. The revenues from such 
plants are then correspondingly small. 

I have found that a roadmaking plant does not average 100 days 
actually worked per year. A 10-ton steam roller costs, say, $2,500 ; 
and, if interest is charged at 6% per annum, we have $150 to be 
distributed over 100 days — not over 365 days, as many engineers 
have done. 

Depreciation, of course, does not go on as rapidly when a plant 
is idle as when working, provided the plant is properly housed and 
cared for ; but the housing and the care cost money. Moreover, 
many kinds of machines become obsolete in a few years, so that 
depreciation cannot be said wholly to cease while the plant is idle. 
All the annual repairs and depreciation and all the cost of hous- 
ing and caring for the plant should be distributed over the average 
number of days actually worked. If, on a 10-ton steam roller, the 
annual depreciation is $200, we have $200 ^ 100, or $2 per day 
worked; and if we add to this the $1.50 per day charged to in- 
terest, we have a total of $3.50 per day worked. Now^ such a 
charge should be made by the contractor even where he uses his 
own roller. 

It may be asked why the interest, repairs and depreciation are 
distributed over the days actually worked. The answer is that the 
output of the plant is usually estimated as so and so many units 
per day, and that, in consequence, all costs should be reduced to 
the same basis. 

In such states as New York there are only about 8 months of 
the year, and about 21 or 22 days per month, suitable for economic 
outdoor work of the class of earth excavation. AVeather records 
will enable any one to predict with reasonable accuracy the num- 
ber of working days per year in any locality. 

Cost of Superintendence and General Expense. — The cost of fore- 
manship on contract work seldom exceeds 15% of the cost of labor, 
and it seldom runs much below 5%. If one must guess, perhaps 10% 
is a fair average. These percentages include the salaries of fore- 
men only. The salaries of general superintendents and office men, 
and all office expenses are preferably called "general expenses" 
or "fixed expenses." General expenses seldom amount to less than 
4%, and on small, intermittent job work they may run much higher. 



46 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In estimating supervision by the percentage method, care should 
be talten to exclude the cost of materials and to base the estimate 
upon the labor only. As an illustration : The General Expenses 
for the average American railway are 3.9% of the total expense of 
operation (including maintenance), distributed as follows: 

Per cent. 

Salaries of general officers 0.826 

Salaries of clerks and attendants 1.372 

General office expenses and supplies 0.263 

Insurance 0.481 

Law expenses 0.452 

Stationery and printing (general office) 0.182 

Other expenses 0.300 

Total general expense 3.876 

This does not include superintendence of "maintenance of way," 
or of "maintenance of equipment," nor of "conducting transporta- 
tion." The first of these items is not reported separately, but we 
shall assume it to be the same as maintenance of equipment since 
the gross expense for maintenance of way is practically the same 
as for maintenance of equipment. 

Per cent. 

Maintenance of way (assumed) 0.561 

Maintenance of equipment 0.561 

Conducting transportation 1.776 

2.898 
This gives a total of practically 3% for superintendence and 3% 
more for general expense if we exclude "insurance" and "law ex- 
pense" from general expense. But this combined 6% is 6% of the 
gross operating and maintenance expense, only 60% of which is 
labor, the remaining 40% being for materials, supplies, etc. Hence, 
the percentage based on labor alone is 10% for general expense and 
superintendence, about equally divided between the two. For 
further study of these, see the Railway Section. 

For data on the expense of engineering supervision of public 
works, see the Surveying and Engineering Section. 

Throughout this book are numerous data on costs of supervi- 
sion, for which consult the index under Supervision. Also con- 
sult the index under General Expense. 

Percentage to Allow for Contingencies. — After estimating the 
probable cost of every item of work as closely as possible, including 
superintendence and general expenses, a percentage should generally 
be added for contingencies. A very common allowance is 10% ; 
but no such rough guessing is indulged in by either a careful engi- 
neer or by an experienced contractor. 

Contingencies is an item used to insure against oversights and 
ig:norance. On work where sub-contracts can be let at once for the 
materials, there is practically no risk taken on materials, hence 
there is no justification, on the part of the contractor, in making an 
allowance to cover contingencies on materials. The engineer who 
designs a structure may be justified in making such an allowance 
to cover possible bills for "extras," but not otherwise. On the 
other hand, it is often wise to make an allowance to cover pos- 



COST KEEPING. 47 

sible inefficiency of laborers, or possible striltes, or possible rise in 
rates of wages ; for, after estimating the average cost of labor on 
a given structure, there is always some risk of exceeding the aver- 
age, for some unforeseen reason. On large jobs both the design- 
ing engineer and the contractor are justified in adding from 5 to 
20% to estimated labor costs to cover contingencies. If the price 
of materials has been steadily rising, then a study should be made of 
price curves extending over several years in order that some rational 
allowance may be made for the probable rise in prices of materials 
before they can be sub-contracted for. If, on the other hand, prices 
are on the downward curve, a contractor may feel justified in 
bidding lower than he otherwise would. The best way to arrive at 
an allowance for contingencies is to keep a full record of the esti- 
mated cost of each item of work, and subsequently compare it with 
the actual cost. In this way it will be found that there is seldom 
a job on which every item of cost can be accurately predicted. 

Percentage to Allow for Profits. — The common method of adding 
uniformly 10 or 15% for profits is open to serious objections, among 
which are the following : ( 1 ) The percentage to add for profits on 
materials should usually be less than the percentage to add for 
profits on labor, particularly when profits and contingencies are 
lumped together ; ( 2 ) the time element and the size of the job 
should always be factors in considering profits, for profits are, 
strictly speaking, the salaries of the contractors; (3) the number 
of dollars' worth of contract work that can be secured and handled 
each average year must be considered, for the reason just given ; 
(4) the percentage for profits is often made to include interest on 
plant and on cash capital invested, and, if so, there is added rea- 
son for not using a imiform pez-centage like 15%. 

That there is need of calling attention to these elementary prin- 
ciples is apparent when one notes erroneous statements found in 
many text-books. 

On materials, such as brick, timber and steel, that can be bought 
by sub-contract immediately after the award of the main contract, 
one may estimate a low profit, say, 10 or 15% ; but on labor the 
profit should usually range from 15 to 25%, or even higher if con- 
tingencies are included in the percentage allowed for profits. 

On contract work that can be done only during a few months of 
the year, and especially on work requiring a large investment in 
plant, such for example as macadam road work, the percenttige of 
profi.ts must usually be above the average of the percentage on work 
that extends over a longer period. If engineers fully realized the 
importance of this fact they would be at more pains to award all 
highway contracts early in the spring of the year, so that a longer 
season would be available than is now the case. 

Causes of Underestimates. — Engineers have been said to be men 
who can be relied upon in every respect save one — ability to pre- 
dict the cost oi work. The reasons why engineers' estimates have 
so often been unreliable may be enumerated as follows : 

1. Students of engineering are seldom trained in the art of cost 
estimating, but left to acquire that art haphazard after graduation. 



48 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

2. Articles descriptive of engineering structures seldom contain 
an analysis of the unit costs. 

3. A subsurface survey is frequently not made ; and, as a con- 
sequence, unexpected materials are encountered in excavating. 

4. A study of the sources of local materials, their suitability 
for the work, and their unit cost delivered, is often not made ; and, 
as a result, specifications are frequently drawn that cannot be 
lived up to except by importing materials at great expense. 

5. The cost of clearing, and draining the work is often under- 
estimated, or ignored entirely. 

6. The cost of temporary bracing, support, roadways and de- 
velopment expenses are frequently underestimated or omitted. 

7. Delays due to bad weather, and delays incident to the shifting 
of plant from place to place are often not considered. 

8. Interest and depreciation of plant, and ' the percentage for 
profits, are usually underestimated. 

9. Inadequate allowance is made for superintendence and gen- 
eral expense. 

10. The cost of inspection and engineering may be underesti- 
mated. 

11. Legal expenses due to the abandonment of the work by a 
contractor, or due to suits brought by those who claim damages to 
life, limb or property, are generally not allowed for. 

12. Changes in the alinement or in the design, made after con- 
tracts have been awarded, may result in large claims for extra 
compensation. 

13. Omissions due to carelessness or ignorance of subordinates 
in the engineering staff may result in further claims for extras. 

14. Rates of wages and prices of materials may rise ; and, if the 
work is large, the work itself may be the cause of such increases. 

15. When high wages are due to scarcity of men, an "independ- 
ence" is bred in the workmen which decreases their efficiency. 

16. A large number of competent foremen frequently can not be 
secured for a large work, resulting in decreased efficiency of work- 
men. 

17. If an estimate is based upon previous contract prices there 
is grave danger of error, due to change In conditions, unbalanced 
bids, etc. 

18. If imit prices are estimated before the specifications are 
drawn, the specification requirements may be made such as greatly 
to increase the cost of important items. 

19. Limiting competition by the drawing of unfair, or indefinite 
specifications, is a common cause of high bidding prices. Severe 
interpretation of indefinite clauses often causes failure of contract- 
ing firms, and the history of such failures operates to limit subse- 
quent competition, and raise prices. 

20. Contractors may combine, especially where the work is let 
in very large contracts, and raise prices. 

Indexing Contract Prices. — In order to fix a bidding price on the 
proposed work, if no actual records of similar work are available, 
it is customary to hunt up bidding prices on similar work, strike an 



COST KEEPING. 49 

average, bid a little below the average — and trust to luck. To 
make this process less of a gamble, it is wise to secure back vol- 
umes of engineering periodicals, and make a scrap book using the 
pnses of the journal that relate to contract prices. Then as the 
scrap book should be indexed, a word as to indexing may be of as- 
sistance. There should be heads corresponding to the items usually 
found in bidding sheets, as follows : Asphalt Pavement, Ballast, 
Bolts and Spikes, Brick Masonry, Brick Sewers, Brick Paving, 
Bridges, Castings, Catch-basins, Cement, Clearing and Grubbing, 
Concrete, Curbs, Earth Excavation, Embankment, Flagging, Flush- 
tanks, Gravel, Gutter, Hydrants, Iron, Lampposts, Lead, Macadam, 
Manholes, Masonry (stone only, and not brick or concrete), Piles, 
Pipe Sewers. Puddle, Railing, Riprap, Rock Excavation, Sidewalks, 
Sodding, Specials, Steel, Stone, Timber, Tracklaying, Valves, Water 
Pipe, etc. As far as possible select headings that denote the kind 
of material used in the structure ; but where this cannot be done 
without confusion select the name of the structure as it ordinarily 
appears in bidding sheets. Do not, as a rule, use such headings as 
the following: Abutments, Filling, Dredged Material, Foundation, 
Vitrified Brick Paving, etc. An abutment often contains piling, 
concrete and cut stone masonry, and in using the index it may not 
occur to you to look under abutment when looking up prices on 
concrete. 

Having decided upon headings, cut up a lot of paper strips about 
an inch wide and four inches long, and proceed to go through the 
printed pages to be indexed. When a bid on Concrete is found, 
write on one of these slips, "Concrete, pavement foundation, p. 80." 
Throw the slips aside as the index entries are made ; and, after a 
volume has been indexed, assort the slips alphabetically, and have 
a typewritten index copied from them. Simple as this method is, 
the inexperienced man is not likely to think of it, and failing to 
think of it he will look upon the job of indexing as being so great 
a task that in all probability no index will be made. Indexes pub- 
lished at the end of the year by the technical journals are, as a rule, 
of no value to the contractor ; furthermore, the current issues of 
construction news should be indexed as fast as received. Especial 
care should be taken to index classes of work that are out of the 
ordinary, for whenever bids must be submitted on similar work no 
better guide than previous contract prices is apt to be found. 

In recording bidding prices, it is well to record not only the lowest 
bid, but the average of all bids, stating the number of bidders. 

In judging the reasonableness of a bidding price, it is of great 
assistance to know the experience of the bidder on the particular 
cla.ss of work in question. Hence a knowledge of the history of 
contractors i^i a decided aid. 

Care should be taken to examine not merely a contractor's bid 
upon the one item that is under consideration, but his bidding 
prices on all the items, to judge whether or not he may have un- 
balanced his bid to conceal his judgment as to a fair price for each 
item. 



50 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Unbalanced Bids. — A bid is said to be unbalanced when too high 
a price is purposely bid upon one or more items, accompanied by 
an offsetting low price on one or more of the remaining items. 
Thus, if a fair bidding price for earth excavation is 25 cts. per cu. 
yd., and for rock, $1.00 per cu. yd., the following forms an ex- 
ample of a bid that is balanced, and one that is unbalanced : 

Balanced Bid. 

1,000 cu. yds. rock, at $1.00 $1,000 

20,000 cu. yds. earth, at $0.25 5,000 

Total , $6,000 

Unbalanced Bid. 

1,000 cu. yds. rock, at $2.00 $2,000 

20,000 cu. yds. earth, at $0.20 4,000 

Total $6,000 

It will be seen that the total bid, $6,000, is the same in both 
cases. In the second case, however, the $2 bid on rock is alto- 
gether too high, and the 20-ct. bid on earth is too low, hence the 
bid is unbalanced. The objects of unbalancing bids may be three; 
(1) To secure an abnormally high profit on any item the yardage 
(or quantity) of which is likely to be increased after the contract 
has been awarded; (2) to secure a large profit on the items of 
work that must be done first, thus skimming the cream of the con- 
tract in the very beginning ; ( 3 ) to conceal from engineers and 
from competitors what each item of work is actually worth. 

To prevent the imbalancing of bids, engineers resort to various 
expedients, among which are the following: (1) Insertion of a 
clause in the "invitation to bidders" warning them that an unbal- 
anced bid will cause the rejection of the bid; (2) requiring a lump- 
sum bid on the work; (3) publishing the engineer's schedule of 
items and an estimated price for each item, then requiring either 
(a) that each contractor shall bid a uniform percentage on all the 
items, or (b) that the contractor shall bid his own price on each 
item, no unit price being in excess of a certain percentage of the 
engineer's estimated unit price. The first of these two methods is 
called the "percentage method of bidding." 

A fourth roethod of preventing unbalancing of bids on small items 
likely to be increased in quantity may be suggested. It would 
consist in naming a definite unit price that will be paid on each of 
the minor items, and leaving the contractor free to bid his own 
prices on the other items. 

The greatest danger from an unbalanced bid lies in subsequent 
change of quantities. Suppose that in the above given example, ac- 
tual work discloses that a far greater quantity of rock exists than 
the 1.000 cu. yds. given in the bidding sheet. Suppose the actual 
quantities in the final estimate are reversed, and that there are 
20,000 cu. yd.s. of rock and 1,000 cu. yds. of earth. "We then have 
these results : 

Balanced Bid. 

20,000 cu. yds. rock, at $1.00 $20,000 

1,000 cu. yds. earth, at $0.25 250 

Total $20,250 




COST KEEPING. 51 

Unbalanced Bid. 

20,000 cu. yds. rock, at $2.00 $40,000 

1,000 cu. yds. earth, at $0.20 200 

Total $40,200 

We see that if the unbalanced bid is accepted the work costs in 
the end almost twice as much as it would have cost had the bal- 
anced bid been accepted; yet the two bids were the same ($6,000), 
according to the preliminary estimate. 

It rarely happens that such an extreme case as this occurs in 
practice, although I have known several quite as bad. The prin- 
ciple, however, is best illustrated by an extreme example. 

It is common practice among paving contractors in many cities to 
unbalance their bids for the sake of concealing their estimates of 
actual worth ; as, for example, among asphalt paving companies. 
Bidding prices must, therefore, be looked upon with suspicion al- 
ways, especially when used as guides for estimating. 

An vnbalanced bid is a two-edged sword. It may actually ruin 
the contractor who makes it. if it happens that he has erred and 
that the quantities on which he has bid too low are greatly increased, 
without a corresponding increase in the quantities on which he has 
bid high. Like all tricky practices, it is a dangerous one. 

Surety Company Bonds. — It is becoming more and more the prac- 
tice to require contractors to furnish the bonds of a surety com- 
pany rather than the bonds of individuals for the faithful perform- 
ance of the work. This is not only good public policy, but it is in 
the best interests of contractors themselves. 

No man should put in jeopardy tha property of his friends by 
asking them to go on his bonds for a contract. It matters not 
how sure he may be of himself and of his ability to execute the 
work at a profit, for he should bear in mind that a strike beyond 
his control may upset all calculations. Furthermore, a young con- 
tractor's own estimate of himself is apt to have an optimistic tint, 
to say the least. A surety company should be consulted, and it is 
well to go to such a company at first with only a small contract for 
which bondsmen are desired. Be prepared to give them in detail 
your experience and your financial resources, exaggerating neither ; 
for, in case of subsequent failure, criminal proceedings may be 
brought against a man who has misrepresented his resources. If 
you have but little cash capital, frankly say so, but be prepared to 
show in detail how you propose doing the work with the funds 
available. Suppose you expect to have a $5,400 earth work job 
to do ; that you will have 12 weeks in which to do it, with two 
weeks margin for delays, etc. ; and that payments of 85 per cent of 
the estimated value of the work done are to be made monthly, 
and you purpose beginning the work the middle of the month. You 
estimate the work to cost $4,800, hence your weekly pay-roll will 
be $400 if the work is done in 12 weeks. You are to pay your men 
every two weeks, hence you need only $800 in cash to carry you 
until the first of the month, and as your contract calls for the 
monthly payment to be made the lOth day of the month, you can 



52 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

count upon receiving $765 (85% of one-sixth of $5,400) in time to 
apply on the next pay roll. Your cash capital to start with is 
? 1,800, or practically twice as much cash as will carry the work, in 
case there are no unforeseen delays, and in case you have not under- 
estimated its cost. If you are able to persuade the surety com- 
pany's representative that your estimate of actual cost of the work 
is reliable there should be no difficulty in securing their agreement 
to act as your bondsmen. 

Reasons Why Contract Work Is the Most Economic Method of 
Doing Public Work. — There are two methods of doing public work: 
(1 ) The day labor, or government force, method ; and ( 2 ) the con- 
tract method. 

By the day labor method the government (county, town, city, 
county, city or federal) hires the workmen and directs their work. 
The alleged advantages of this method are : 

1. It saves the contractor's profits. 

2. It insures better work. 

3. It avoids lawsuits. 

4. It permits beginning work without a complete survey or 
plans, and thus hastens completion. 

5. It gives employment to local citizens and keeps all the money 
at home. 

As to the first alleged advantage there is an evident fallacy, for 
the attitude is one of regarding a contractor's profit as something 
other than a recompense for his skilled services. A contractor's 
profit is his compensation for services — nothing else. Hence when 
a contractor is dispensed with there must be a substitution of some 
one in his place to render the service of manager. It is often urged 
that since a government must supervise a contractor, to see that he 
does his work properly, it is really paying twice for supervision of 
the workmen. This, again, is fallacious for two reasons: (1) 
Supervision that is merely inspection is far cheaper than supervi- 
sion that consists in managing men ; ( 2 ) there should be inspection 
of work done by government employes, and, in my opinion, there is 
need of a much more rigorous and expensive inspection of their 
work than of work done by contract. Government employes are 
prone to depart from plans and specifications, often for the sole 
purpose of partly concealing the otherwise high costs that would 
become evident to all. It is the verdict, too, of practically all un- 
biased and experienced engineers that day labor work does not 
deliver as good quality of product as contract work. This answers 
argument 2. 

As to argument 3, avoidance of lawsuits, we have an advantage 
that is certainly well founded. It does, but the average cost of 
lawsuits is so small a fraction of the total cost of construction 
work done by contract as to be unworthy of serious consideration. 
Moreover lawsuits of this kind are almost invariahhj the result 
either of ambiguous specifications or of changing plans without 
equitable provision for payment arising from a change. The 
remedy for this condition is not an entire abandonment of the con- 
tract system. As well might a surgeon cut off a man's legs be- 



COST KEEPING. 53 

cause he squints. Lawsuits are avoidable and are avoided by the 
best engineers, for they perfect their plans before securing bids, 
their specifications are so framed as to provide perfectly for any 
changes, and, finally, they never vitiate the written contract by 
departing one iota from its provisions. 

There are many so called "contractors' lawyers" in our larger 
cities, who are little else than skilled thieves in league with other 
thieves who get contracts. That these "contractors' lawyers" are 
able to make money for themselves and their clients is due almost 
entirely to the fact that engineers do not adhere rigorously to the 
specifications. For if a lawyer can prove that the specifications 
have been violated, even to no great extent, no contract exists, and 
there is ground for recovery of profits quantum meruit — as much 
as he deserved. This leads to expert testimony as to profits reason- 
ably to be expected, and this usually leads to a verdict that is a 
compromise between the two extremes of testimony. Railways and 
private corporations are not so frequently afflicted with lawsuits 
because their policy is not to award contracts to contractors of the 
kind above mentioned. Public officials should also be empowered 
to reject bids from contractors who have a record as litigants, as 
well as from contractors who can not show sufficient experience and 
financial resources. A remedy for an evil is always preferable to 
the wholesale execution of innocent and guilty alike. 

As to the alleged advantage of beginning work, before plans are 
complete, I deny it to be an advantage. Innumerable increases in 
estimated cost of public work are due to this very thing — beginning 
work in advance of the fullest study of conditions. 

Finally, as to employment of local citizens, this is precisely what 
a contractor does. But — and mark well the difference — a con- 
tractor does not make his organization an old men's home or an 
asylum for the afflicted. The place for such is not on a piece of 
construction where they not only take up valuable room but act as 
the worst sort of examples for the young, ambitious and capable 
workmen. 

Now let us consider briefly why the contract system of doing 
public work is advantageous : 

1. The contractor is paid for his services by his profits, which is 
in strict accord with the fundamental law of management. (See 
page 74). 

2. He is free to pay his superintendents according to his judg- 
ment of their worth, and all his employes according .to the bonus 
system. 

3. The contractor is a manager appointed by no official, elected 
by no "voice of the people" (which is more often the voice of ignor- 
ance than "the voice of God"), selected by no civil service exami- 
nation. He has become a manager by virtue of the law of the 
survival of the fittest, as determined by strife for excellence. 
When this method of selection is to be improved upon by men, it 
may be well to consult the Deity who established it. 

4. A "public servant" is a servant without a master. He may 
have a "boss" who acts as a proxy for the master, but the master, 



54 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the owner of the house — where is he? He is the butcher, the baker, 

the candlestick maker, a thousand, a million, or, maybe, a hundred 

million of him scattered across all the acres between two seas. He 

never is seen by the servant, nor felt, nor heard. This master who 

^ts the bills of those who boost the bills never approaches an 

'ent superintendent and lays a hand upon his shoulder, nor 

■'ee here, my man, unless this ends, you end this. 

actor is a master, and the "servants" see and hear him. 

^le ; no vagne rich Uncle Sam off somewhere, but a 

■'ty on the job ; not a genial personality, with lots of 

^way, nor, on the other hand, a niggard. His aim 

ately to service rendered. He may be crude in 

so, but that at least is his method, which is 

+han any a government uses. 

^eriment with labor saving devices. He 
^ge inventors by his aid. What gov- 
its service? A government super- 
inventive by nature that not the 
■> his ambition. But, as a rule, 
nothing to gain by success- 
ie or process, and having 
'">is job — adheres to the 
-orry." 

his plant in one 

^quently able to 

nearly all the 

-« high cost 

ns illus- 

is can 

<=!n." 



COST KEEPING. 55 

government work will be found to contain the opinions of several 
eminent engineers : 

Thomas Telford on the Day Labor System.* — One of the greatest 
civil engineers of all time, and the greatest of his own time, was 
Thomas Telford, the inventor of the telford road, engineer of hun- 
dreds of large bridges and builder of numerous canals and docks. 
He was the first president (1S20) of the Institution of Civil Engi- 
neers. 

Of all the monuments to Telford's hard, common sense and engi- 
neering skill none is greater than the "Rules for Repairing Roads," 
of which he is author. Rule 7 is entitled "Management of Labour," 
and reads as follows : 

' All labor by day's wages ought, as far as possible, to be dis- 
continued. The surveyors should make out specifications of every 
kind of work that is to be performed in a given time. This should 
be let to contractors, and the surveyors should take care to see it 
completed according to the specifications before it is paid for. 
Attention to this rule is most essential, as in many cases not less 
than two-thirds the money expended hy day labor is usually 
wasted." 

This rule was written a century ago, but time has not altered the 
nature of men nor the soundness of Telford's advice. 

It is interesting in this connection to record Telford's success in 
the building of nearly 1,000 miles of roads in Scotland by contract. 
He let 120 contracts for this work, w.iich extended over a period of 
18 years, and in that time there was not a single lawsuit arising 
from any of these contracts. The work was done with an economy 
unaeard of before Telford's time, and it was small wonder that his 
fame spread beyond the British Isles and led to his being called as 
consulting engineer on numerous engineering projects in Europe. 

Telford had discovered — or, rather, rediscovered — the principle 
that workmen are far more efficient when in the employ of an indi- 
vidual or firm than when in the employ of a government, whether 
it be of county, town, city or state. His success as an engineer 
rested as much upon the application of this principle as upon his 
own genius as a designer of engineering structures. 

The Opinions of Members of the Am. Soc. C. E. on the Day 
Labor System.! — In 1S96 there appeared in the Transactions of the 
American Society of Civil Engineers a paper by Mr. W. W. Follett 
on tne "Cost of Sewer Construction, Denver, Colorado," in which 
were given data intended to prove the economy of day labor as 
■compared with contract work. Doubtless the author was somewhat 

•prised to find not a single out and out supporter of his contention 
<? all the members of the society who discussed his paper. On- 
"•r hand, the day labor system was unanimously condemned 
■■m to be applied in general to city work. Some of the 

nm an editorial in Engineering-Contracting, May 5, 

editorial in Engineering-Contracting , June 2, 



56 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

expressions of opinion are not without interest even now, coming as 
they do from men higli in the profession. We quote : 

Most cities began tlieir public works by the day labor plan, but 
have been forced to adopt the contract system in self defense. — ■ 
Poster Crowell, M. Am. Soc. C. B. 

Contract work is more desirable and cheaper as a rule than work 
by the day. — Henry Goldmark, M. Am. Soc. C E. 

The writer's experience has been that sewer work generally costs 
a city less by contract than by day labor. — William B. Landreth, M. 
Am. Soc. C. B. 

The tabulated results [given in Mr. Follett's article] as to cost 
do not show any striking gain over that of contract work in this 
case. This is one of a few instances where experiments of this kind 
have been successful. In probably seven cases out of ten the politi- 
cal tendencies of boards made up wholly of scheming politicians to 
give sinecures to political hangers on would have largely increased 
the cost of the work. — Andrew Rosewater, M. Am. Soc. C. E. 

It is the writer's opinion that in most cities public work can be 
done to better advantage and at less cost by contract than by hired 
labor. — G. T. Nelles, M. Am. Soc. C. E. 

We may add that Denver sewers, imder discussion, were large 
brick sewers, and that each brick mason averaged 2,080 brick per 
8 hour day, wages being $4, which is far and away better than the 
usual output on day labor construction, but less than half what 
many contractors secure from their brick layers on sewer work. 

It should also be pointed out that a strenuous effort was made 
by the city officials in this case to prove that day labor work 
would be the most economical for all sewer construction to be done 
in the future, and they were not only free to alter the specifica- 
tions to attain their end, but naturally prompted to do so by self 
interest. In discussing this feature of the case, Mr. G. T. Nelles, M. 
Am. Soc. C. E., said: 

"Another important factor in the cost of work done under proper 
supervision in this manner by cities is the fact that they do not enter 
into a binding contract with themselves to do the work in a fixed 
manner and under rigid specifications, as is the case when v/ork is 
done by contract. On the contrary, they are always at liberty to 
make such change in methods or materials as experience may 
prove to be beneficial and economical to the work. Under the con- 
tract system it is rarely possible to make such changes, no matter 
how desirable they may be, without raising a cry of fraud or violat- 
ing some of the terms of the contract. As a consequence when- 
ever there is a choice of materials or methods under the contract 
system, the most expensive to the contractor is usually adopted." 

We have italicized this last clause, for, unfortunately, it ex- 
presses the truth about the tendency on the part of many engineers 
to exact not merely the last pound of flesh, but to call for an 
avoirdupois pound, although the specifications might well be inter- 
preted to refer to a Troy pound. This particular feature of con- 
tract work is perhaps the one most worthy of careful consideration 
by the engineer who aims to secure low bids from reliable firms. 



COST KEEPING. 57 

There is but one way of accomplishing this end — namely : by pre- 
paring specifications with as great care as is given to the work of 
making the drawings. Sewer specifications are, as a rule, par- 
ticularly weak in all that relates to the excavation of materials. 
Generahy no soundings or test pits are made by the engineers and 
no classification of materials other than "earth" and "rock" is 
given. Not only is there no sub-surface survey, but there is not 
even a fair attempt in tne specifications to provide for payment 
based upon what may actually be encountered. Practically all the 
"changes" to which Mr. Nelles refers would be unnecessary were 
proper sub-surface surveys made in advance of making the design 
and drawing the specifications. 

Mr. Franklin Riffle, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. 33 (1895), p. 
590, says : 

"Some years ago, while connected with railroad construction on 
the Pacific coast, the writer took pains to compare the cost of com- 
pany work with the cost of contract work, and was somewhat sur- 
prised to discover that in nearly every case investigated the former 
exceeded the latter, the excess ranging from 25 to 100%. The re- 
cently constructed water works system of Portland, Oregon, fur- 
nishes an instructive example. * * * There was considerable 
work done by day labor, under the mistaken idea that this method 
would ensure the most satisfactory results, but the cost of the work 
largely exceeded the estimate." 

The Metcalf and Eddy Report on the Day Labor System in Bos- 
ton. — This report contains the results of the most exhaustive inves- 
tigation into the relative economy of the day labor and the contract 
systems ever published and is convincing in its demonstration of 
the economy of the contract system. The report is one made in 
1909 to the Boston Finance Commission, important extracts from 
Which were published in Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 25, 1909, 
and in subsequent issues. 

I regard this investigation as the forerunner of many more of its 
kind to be made by consulting engineers for finance commissions in 
other cities. In fact I look to see such finance commissions become 
permanent institutions, whose function it shall be to investigate 
every department of a municipality, with a view to determining 
unit costs. Thus will the public be put in possession of unbiased 
facts about the economic or uneconomic conduct of the business of 
government. 

Mr. S. Whinery's Report on the Day Labor System in Bost»n.* — 
On pages 139 to 142 of his report to the Boston Finance Commis- 
sion, Mr. Samuel Whinery says : 

"(1) The claim that a municipality can execute its public work at 
an actual cost as low as the same work can be done by a contractor 
and thus save the profit that the contractor is entitled to make 
may be true as an abstract theory, but experience has shown that 
it is not generally true in practice. It has in many cases been 



•Abstract from Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 29, 1909. 



58 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

found true in isolated instances or for short periods of time, but 
when the practice has been continued for a considerable period it is 
almost invariably the case that direct work becomes more expen- 
sive than contract work. The reasons for this are not difflcult to 
find. • • • 

"(2) The claim that public work executed directly by the 
municipality is more certain to be of good quality than if done by 
contract is not well founded. 

"It is a plausible proposition that municipal officers, having no 
personal financial interest in the results, will be actuated only by 
the desire to secure to the city the best quality of work, but ex- 
perience has not shown it to be true. There are motives other than 
the mere saving of money that may, and as a rule do, influence city 
officials to cut down the cost of public work done under their direct 
supervision to the lowest figure, with possible detriment to the 
quality of the work done. * ♦ ♦ 

"I have had good opportunity to observe in many cities the 
comparative quality of work done by the municipality direct and by 
contract, and I do not hesitate to say that, as a rule, the former is 
not usually superior to the latter. 

"(3) The claim that it is either better or more economical for 
the municipality to purchase and furnish contractors the supplies 
required for public work is not supported by the facts, * * • 
many of which are obvious. Nor is it true as a rule that a better 
quality of supplies is secured when purchased by the city than 
when they are purchased by contractors under proper city specifi- 
cations and subjected to proper inspection. 

"(4) The claim sometimes made that by doing its work directly 
the municipality can so provide for the employment and control of 
labor as to benefit the city at large or its dependent citizens is 
fallacious in practice. When public work is to be done the neces- 
sary labor must be employed either by the city or by the contrac- 
tor. For doing the same work the city can use no more labor than 
the contractor if the labor employed by each is equally efficient and 
equally well directed. If economical results are to be obtained, 
equal care and discrimination must be exercised in securing labor 
by the one as by the other. If it be said that the city may so 
manage the labor supply as to afford employment to indigent or 
Inefficient laborers (whom no contractor would employ), who would 
otherwise have to be aided from the city treasury, it may be an- 
swered that the city can no more afford to employ that class of 
labor than the contractor, and that it is better and cheaper in the 
end fo pension or otherwise care for the disabled or inefficient. 
Laborers belonging to these classes do not earn the wages paid 
them and a few of them scattered among strong and able workmen 
have a demoralizing effect upon the whole body by setting a low 
standard of accomplishment." 

Experience VA^ith Day Labor on the Chicago Main Drainage Canal 
and at Panama.* — We now have the annual report of the Isthmian 



*Engineering-ContracUng, Dec, 4, 1907. 



COST KEEPING. 59 

Canal Commission, teeming witli arguments in favor of continuing 
tiie day labor system. "We quote : 

"Omitting profits derived from subsistence and general stores and 
assuming tire hours of labor the same in both cases, it stands to 
reason that the government, when warranted in making the neces- 
sary outlay for plant, can do work cheaper than a contractor, for 
no question of profits enters into the consideration." 

It does not stand to reason that any government can do work as 
cheaply as a private party. Indeed, to make such a claim is going 
contrary both to reason and to experience upon which all reasoning 
Is founded. The Isthmian Commission goes on to explain that on 
jobs of less magnitude than the Panama Canal it does pay to do 
the work by contract because in such cases the government has 
neither the plant nor the organization to do the work. In the case 
of Panama, however, the government has both. The grave fallacy 
in this argument lies in the assumption that it is economic to 
award contracts only because a suitable plant and an organized 
force of men can be secured quickl3^ These, it is true, are factors 
In favor of a contractor, but if they were the only factors, govern- 
ment contracting would have disappeared entirely fifty years ago. 
The government could well afford to own a sufficient plant to do 
all its construction work, and it would not take long to build up an 
organization to handle the plant. But plant and organization are 
merely the tools. Back of these tools must be a great incentive if 
work is to be done economically with this plant and this organiza- 
tion. Plant is nothing, organization is nothing, unless the brain 
that directs both is keenly bent upon saving every penny and en- 
tirely free to bring every resource to bear in effecting economy. It 
is this lack of sufficient incentive and of sufficient freedom of action 
that makes every government manager of work far inferior to the 
ordinary contractor. A government employe knows that his salary 
will go on regardless of the cost. Earth work may be costing the 
government 50 cts. a yard that would cost a contractor 30 cts., but 
Col. Goethals will draw his salary just the same, and so will 
every other emcloye clear down to the water boy. It is true 
that the chief engineer is actuated by the vague desire to make a 
"good record," but he is also well aware that his "record" can not 
be measured by any standard except the accomplishment of his 
two predecessors. The great desire to make wealth for himself Is 
wholly absent. His brain is warmed to mild glow by the hope of 
being able to "make good," but there is no fire under his boiler that 
sets the steam valve popping. But granting him even a consider- 
able amount of feverish desire to "make good," we find him bound 
hand and foot, not by red tape but by the indifference of the vast 
majority of his employes. Why should his lieutenants sit up 
nights devising ways of reducing costs? Why should they go about 
jumping on the workers by day to sting them into action? The one 
act may break down health, they will tell you, and the other will 
surely make enemies of the men. What recompense will there be 
for these two losses? A share in the saving effected? No. A part- 
nership In the business? No. An Increase in salary? No, for 



60 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

governments do not pay on the scale of what a man saves but 
upon the scale of what he spends. There are no bonuses, no special 
salaries for excellence in service, no partnerships — nothing but a 
mild hope that, if one does not die at the bottom, promotion to a 
higher rank will come some day as a result of death at the top. 
That is government work, and that is why a contractor's profit 
represents not additional cost to the government but merely a 
small fraction of the saving effected by a capable man driven by 
the fierce desire to make that saving as large as possible. 

To illustrate what happens even to a contractor when this In- 
centive is removed : On the Chicago Main Drainage Channel the 
firm of MacArthur Bros, was put in charge of excavating a section 
of glacial drift on a percentage basis. They furnished the plant 
and organization, but did not pay for the labor or supplies out of 
their own pockets. That was paid for by the Sanitary District, and 
MacArthur Bros, received 15% for use of plant and supervision. 
After a considerable amount of the earth had been excavated at a 
cost of 86y2 cts. per cubic yard, the Sanitary District gave up this 
day labor method in disgust. In a report on the work Chief Engi- 
neer Isham Randolph said: "This work may be regarded as an 
object lesson, clearly demonstrating from an economic standpoint 
the unwisdom of entering into any arrangement for carrying on the 
construction work of the Sanitary District by the direct employ- 
ment of labor." (Hill's "Chicago Main Drainage Channel," page 33.) 

"We cite this case because the MacArthur Bros, are among the 
most competent contractors in the country, but even they could not 
combat the irresistible tendency of men to loaf the minute they 
know that a government is going to foot the bill and not a con- 
tractor. 

Subletting Work and Purchasing Materials.— There Is seldom a 
contract that does not involve subcontracting, even when the origi- 
nal contract specially prohibits subcontracting. Every purchase of 
materials for which cash is not paid at once is a subcontract. The 
term subcontracting, however, is commonly applied to the awarding 
of a contract by the contractor, the subcontractor being one who 
undertakes to furnish the labor and materials necessary to perform 
a given portion of the original contract. 

Whether it be a purchase of materials or an award of a subcon- 
tract, there Is one thipg the contractor should never neglect to do 
and that is to attach a copy of the original specifications to his 
letter or to his subcontract. In his letter or his subcontract he 
should make definite reference to the attached specifications, stating 
that the materials or the work, or both, must conform to those 
specifications. Failure to do this may lead to serious misunder- 
standings and loss. For example, in ordering paving bricks from a 
manufacturer if the contractor fails to say that they must be subject 
to the inspection and tests of the engineer and if a large per- 
centage of the bricks are "culled" (rejected), the manufacturer may 
refuse to supply other bricks to replace the "culls." 

Another point that should never be overlooked Is to have a 
written contract (an exchange of letters will suffice) for any mate- 



COST KEEPING. 61 

rials or work Involving a sum in excess of the sum specified in the 
Statute of Frauds of the state in which the material is purchased. 
In some states this sum is less than ?100 and in others it is $500. 
Any verbal contract, no matter how many witnesses may be brought, 
is voidable if the sum Involved is in excess of that prescribed In the 
Statute of Frauds. Once the materials ordered under verbal con- 
ti.ict have been delivered and accepted, the verbal contract as to 
price becomes binding. 

It is poor practice, in my judgment, to buy or rent anything by 
word of mouth, and foremen should be required to make all pur- 
cliases by written order, keeping a carbon copy. All renting of 
tools or plant should be recorded in writing, by an exchange of 
letters or otherwise, so as to have the terms of the rental signed by 
both parties. I have had the verbal rental of a plow by a fore- 
man cost me $100 In lawyers' fees, etc. 

A fev suggestions regarding the subletting of work: Subletting 
should not be forbidden in the original contract. Repeated sub- 
letting of the same part of a job may be, and often is, pernicious 
In its effect upon the quality of the work. One subletting often re- 
sults in lower cost of work, for a subcontractor who gives all his 
attention to a small job can usually get the workmen to do more 
work than a large contractor who has m.any things to attend to. 
The subcontractor is really a superintendent or foreman whose 
salary is paid in profits, and he has the best possible spur to secure 
the gi-eatest possible economy. 

The letting of several independent contracts for the different 
parts of a structure often leads to delays and claims for extras due 
to delays. One independent contractor may purposely delay an- 
other. All this is avoided by awarding the whole structure to one 
contractor, who can usually manage several subcontractors much 
better than several independent contractors can be managed by an 
engineer. 

On the other hand, it is not an uncommon mistake to let a con- 
tract too great in size to secure active competition from several 
contracting firms. One of the best managed large pieces of public 
work was the Chicago Main Drainage Canal, contracts for which 
were let in sections of moderate size, with the result that there 
were many able competitors who named low prices. 

Instructions to Superintendents and Foremen. — Some of the most 
successful contracting firms have sets of rules and instructions 
printed for the use of foremen and others. Certain of the "rules" 
are inflexible and must be obeyed ; others are more in the nature of 
suggestions intended to guide the foreman in doing his work, 
handling his men, purchasing materials, and the like. 

Gilbreth's "Field Ss'stem" is a book of rules used by him in 
managing his contract work. His "Bricklaying System" is another 
such book. 

I will give a list of instructions that is by no means exhaustive, 
but varied enough to give some hints as to the character of a set 
of instructions. Rules such as these can be mimeographed on 



62 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

small sheets of paper and bound together with clips, so that they 
■ can be carried in the pocket for reference. 

1. When a foreman arrives at a place where he is to have charge 
of work, he must notify the home office at once by postal card, 
giving the address of his boarding place and his office address. 

2. A daily report must be sent to the home office on the blanks 
provided. If no work is being done, still a report must be sent in 
stating that fact and giving reasons for delays, etc. 

3. Each foreman must keep a small diary in which to jot down 
the principal events of the day. Such a diary may be of great value 
m case of a law suit. 

4. Each foreman must write all orders for materials, supplies, 
etc., in the book provided for the purpose, so that a carbon copy 
of every order will be kept. He must be careful to insert the day 
of the month. When a foreman wishes grading stakes or instruc- 
tions from engineers in charge of work, let him send a written order 
to the engineer stating exactly what is wanted. This precaution 
may save misunderstandings and delays, and the carbon copy of 
such an order is often useful to check the memory. The sooner a 
foreman learns to be methodical in such small matters, the sooner 
will he be fitted to handle larger matters. 

5. No superintendent, walking boss, engineer, time keeper, or 
other employe of this firm is permitted to give an order direct to 
any workman, except in case of great emergency. Not even a 
member of this firm is exempt from this rule. The foreman in 
direct charge of a gang of men is the only man permitted to in- 
struct his men what to do. He is the officer in charge, and his 
superior officers must not intentionally or unintentionally degrade 
him in the eyes of his men by issuing orders over his head. 

6. A foreman is not permitted to work with his men. He is em- 
ployed to use his wits, not his hands. Occasionally he must in- 
struct a man how to do his work, but he must teach the man and 
not attempt to take the man's place. It may take a foreman longer 
to teach a man than to do it himself ; nevertheless it is cheaper in 
the long run to teach the man. 

7. Do not use laborers to do the work of masons or carpenters, 
but provide a sufficient number of laborers to assist the skilled 
workmen. A 15-ct. man can lift as many pounds of wood or stone 
as a 50-ct. man. Exercise your wits in keeping each class of men 
busy at their particular class of work. 

8. In rainy weather keep all steady pay men busy overhauling 
machines and tools, sharpening tools, branding tools, splicing ropes, 
etc. 

9. Rush all percentage or force account work exactly as if It 
were part of the regular contract. The reputation of this firm is 
worth more money than can ever be made by "making work last." 

10. Small jobs of extra work are usually taken on a basis of 20% 
profit on both materials and labor. This leaves but a small margin 
of profit after deducting general expenses. It is particularly de- 
sirable to work as many men as possible on a small job, so as to 
reduce the percentage of general expenses. 



COST KEEPING. 63 

11. Keep the addresses of good workmen. 

12. Do not be a "good fellow" with the men under you after 
working hours, or you will lose their respect. Remember the old 
adage, "Familiarity breeds contempt." 

13. In case of any accident to a workman or to a spectator notify 
the home office at once by letter. If the accident is fatal, notify by 
telegraph or telephone. We are insured against such accidents, but 
by the terms of our policy we must notify the insurance company 
within 24 hours. 

14. The best and cheapest Insurance against accidents is care. 
Provide barricades, warning notices and red lights wherever an 
excavation is made. Even a small hole unprotected may cause the 
loss of a life, for which the courts may hold this firm responsible. 
When a street is closed by barricades, do not permit an outsider to 
enter even at his own risk, for should an accident occur a law suit 
is certain to follow regardless of the rights involved. 

15. Accept no orders for extra work except in writing, and for- 
ward such orders at once to the home office. 

16. Fill in your expense account blank every Saturday night and 
send to the home office. 

17. When plans are received indorse your name upon them, with 
the day of the month and year. Write on blueprints with a red 
pencil. 

18. Avoid all controversy with an engineer or inspector. A small 
quarrel often leads to a big loss. Notify the home office in case of 
unfair or unreasonable orders. 

19. When a car arrives, record its number and character of con- 
tents. Remember that a demurrage is charged on all car freight 
held more than 72 hours; but on most roads demurarge is estimated 
by averaging. Thus, if one car is held 24 hours before unloading 
and another is held 96 hours, the average is (24-f-96)^2, or 60 
hours. 

20. Pile lumber with the boards slanting so that water will drain 
off. Lay as few boards or timbers directly on the ground as possi- 
ble. See that the top layer of boards is turned over occasionally to 
prevent warping. 

21. Insure all lumber and timber work against flre. 

22. Count and measure all sticks of lumber to check the bill. To 
calculate the number of feet board measure (ft. B. M. ) in a sawed 
stick of timber, multiply the width in inches by the thickness in 
Inches, divide this product by 12, and multiply the quotient by the 
length of the stick in feet. 

23. See that all shipments of materials are counted or measured 
and recorded. 

24. For convenience in estimating the weight of materials remem- 
ber the following : Cu. ft. per ton 

Material. of 2,000 lbs. 

Water ( 62 Vj lbs. per cu. ft.) 32 

Sand or gravel 20 

Broken sandstone, limestone or granite 22 

Broken trap-rock 20 

Solid blocks of granite 12 

Coal, broken 40 



64 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Green white oak is heavier than water and weighs more than 5 
lbs. per ft. B. M. (there being 12 ft. B. M. per cu ft). Green 
southern yellow pine weighs 4% lbs. per ft. B. M. Kiln dried oak 
weighs 3% lbs. per ft. B. M. and kiln dried yellow pine weighs 3 
lbs. per ft. B.' M. In any case, by floating a block of wood in water 
and measuring the total depth of the block and the submerged 
depth, the weight can be calculated by simple proportion, thus : 

Depth of block submerged : Total depth of block : : The weight per 
iL. B. M. : 5.2. Thus if the block is 6 ins. deep and 4 ins. are sub- 
merged when it floats, we have : 

4:6::x:5.2. 

Whence we find that x is nearly 3% lbs. per ft. B. M. 

Familiarize yourself with other rules useful in computing weights, 
etc. 

25. On short hauls where dump wagons are not available provide 
extra wagons which can be loaded while the full wagons are going 
to the dump and returning. Extra wagons can usually be rented, 
and in some cases it will pay to buy them, for the lost team time 
soon eats up the price of a wagon. Extra wagons are especially 
useful where a small gang of men is unloading brick, stone or 
timber from a car onto the wagon. When a team comes up with an 
empty wagon, unhitch from the empty, hitch to the full wagon, and 
with a tail rope pull the empty wagon up to place as the full wagon 
moves ahead. 

2C. In erecting a derrick or pile driver remember that a gin 
pole or mast can often be used to advantage. Gin poles are not 
used as often as they should be for this kind of work. 

27. In erecting a trestle for falsework, frame and bolt the bents 
together on the ground, then up-end them. 

28. Use round timber for legs of temporary trestles, for trench 
braces, and wherever struts are needed. Round timber can usually 
be bought for much less money than sawed stuff. 

29. In buying brick consider the size of each brick; bricks vary 
greatly in size. Large bricks are worth more per M than small 
ones. If 2x4x8-in. bricks are worth $6.50 per M, every % in. in- 
crease in the length adds 10 cts. per M to the value, and every in- 
crease of Ys in. in thickness adds 25 cts. per M. 

30. In buying cement, consider the size of the barrel and the 
amount of cement paste that can be made with a barrel. There is 
a great variation in the product of different factories. 

31. Buy cement in wooden barrels for use on small jobs that are 
liable to lag. Buy cement in cloth bags for most work. Pack the 
bags in bundles of 50, and ship to factory. Cement improves with 
age up to a certain point, if the air is not too damp. Use the oldest 
cement first. 

32. Dynamite must never be thawed in any way except with a 
hot water thawer of the kind furnished by this firm. Never thaw 
in front of a fire, or on a hot stone removed from a fire, or by 
piling sticks on a boiler, or in an oven. We know of fatal acci- 
dents due to each of these methods. There may be safe methods 



COST KEEPING. 65 

other than the one above ordered, but we can not afford to experi- 
ment where lives are at stake. 

33. Never store dynamite, or acid, or gasoline in a tool box. The 
dynamite may be exploded ; the acid vapors will eat into ropes and 
rot them ; the gasoline vapors may explode or spilled gasoline may 
result in a fire. Use sand to put out a gasoline fire. Hemp rope is 
weakened not only by acid vapors, but by saturation with oil. All 
rope should be kept dry. 

34. In using steam engines, steam drills and derricks, the follow- 
ing precautions should be observed : 

Daub grease over all bright parts before storing, also in wet 
weather. Oil the derricks, crushers, wire ropes, and all movable 
parts of machines every day. Cheap black grease is usually daubed 
on wire ropes ; but where the ropes are moving over sheaves almost 
continuously, provide an oil drip cup to feed oil, drop by drop, onto 
the moving rope. 

Do not permit men to wash their hands in the water barrel or 
tank that supplies water to a steam boiler, for the grease from their 
hands will cause "priming." 

Boiler flues are frequently "burned" because water is allowed to 
get too low in the boiler. Aside from the danger of a boiler explo- 
sion in such cases, there is the certain cost of repairs. See that 
the steam cocks are blown off several times daily, and do not rely 
upon the water glass. 

A lazy or ignorant fireman will pile on coal and then rest until it 
has burned low. See to it that a thin bed of fuel is kept steadily 
burning. On large boilers use an automatic pressure recording gage 
to make the firemen attend to their business properly. It will not 
only save coal, but result in greater output of engines and steam 
drills. 

Cylinders of engines and steam drills are frequently cracked in 
cold weather by suddenly letting in steam. To avoid this open drip 
cocks and cocks on steam chest and blow in steam for a few min- 
utes to warm up the cylinder before starting the machine. A 
broken cylinder may delay work for a week. 

Do not let a friction clutch get wet, for it may slip if it does. 

Lower the boom of each derrick at night, so that it can not be 
dropped by some one for fun or for spite. Lay down short logs at 
intervals to keep the hoisting rope clear of the ground. 

The foregoing will serve as examples of instructions and hints 
issued by a contractor. As they stand they possess the disadvan- 
tage of not being classified into instructions that must be obeyed and 
hints that may be followed. 

Each contracting firm will have certain classes of work in which 
it specializes, and will find it advisable to prepare mimeographed or 
printed instructions not only of a general nature but of a special 
nature. Thus a firm engaged in building construction may give 
sketches of scaffolding and instructions as to its erection. A firm 
engaged in bridge building may prepare a set of rules to guide the 
foremen in coffer damming and in false work building. 

System is fast taking the place of the hit or miss style of direct- 



66 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ing work. A well prepared set of instructions to foremen is an 
essential part of any complete system of management. 

The Ten Laws of Management.* — The managing of industrial en- 
terprises, such as construction work in the field, is still an art, and 
there are few who realize that it can be reduced to a truly scientific 
basis. Nevertheless there are certain underlying principles of 
effective management of men which may be expressed in the form of 
laws. Application of these laws leads invariably to a greater out- 
put on the part of workmen, and this invariability of result proves 
the scientific basis of the laws. The most important of them can 
be grouped under ten general headings, which are as follows : 

1. The law of subdivision of duties. 

2. The law of educational supervision. 

3. The law of coordination. 

4. The law of standard performance based on motion timing. 

5. The law of divorce of planning from performance. 

6. The law of regular unit cost reports. 

7. The law of reward increasing with increased performance. 

8. The law of prompt reward. 

9. The law of competition. 

10. The law of managerial dignity. 

Below are given the main characteristics of each : 

1. The Law of Sub-Division of Duties. — Men are gifted with fac- 
ulties and muscles that differ extremely. One man will excel at 
running a rock drill, another is better at lifting loads, a third is 
clever in the application of arithmetic, a fourth is a born teacher — 
and so through the gamut of human occupation. Moreover, prac- 
tice serves to accentuate these inborn differences. It is clear, there- 
fore, that the fewer duties any one man has to perform, the easier 
it is to find men who can do the task well. But give a man many 
duties to perform and he is almost certain to do at least one of 
them poorly, if, indeed, all are not miserably attended to. Hence 
the following law of management : So organise the work as to give 
each man a minimum number of duties to perform. 

This law needs little emphasizing as to its general truth, but it 
Is nevertheless ignored frequently by those who have not applied a 
scientific treatment to management. Thus a foreman is often 
charged with a multitude of duties. He is expected, for example, 
to watch the workmen and spur them to action when slothful, to 
teach his men how to do their work in a more economic fashion, 
to discover and remedy defects in the machines and tools employed, 
to plan the arrival of materials at the proper time and in the proper 
amount, to keep records of daily performance, etc., etc. 

Mr. Fred W. Taylor was the first, we believe, to urge the sub- 
division of the duties of foremen and to have what he calls "func- 
tional foremen." One foreman, for example, is the machinery and 
tool foreman. It is his sole duty to study the work done by ma- 
chines and tools, to effect improvements, to reduce delays, and to 
supervise repairs. 



*These ten laws of management were first published in "Cost 
Keeping and Management Engineering," by Gillette and Dana. 



CO 57' KEEPING. 67 

Another foreman is the gang foreman. His function is to organ- 
ize the gangs, to direct tlieir operation, and to instruct tliem in the 
performance of their work. 

A material foreman is employed on large jobs. His function Is 
to confer with other foremen and ascertain what materials, ma- 
chines and supplies will be needed. He orders the materials, ar- 
ranges for their shipment, and follows up the manufacturing and 
railway companies to secure prompt delivery. If necessary, he 
sends men to the factory, to the stone quarry, or to the freight 
yard to see to it that deliveries are made with dispatch. Such a 
man is often invaluable, for upon him may depend the entire 
progress of the work. 

According to the magnitude of the contract there may be different 
kinds of foremen, all coming in contact with the same men perhaps, 
but all performing different functions. Such an organization as this 
differs radically from a military organization, wherein each man 
reports to only one superior officer on all matters. 

Most industrial organizations today resemble military organ- 
iiiations, with their generals and intermediate officers, down to 
corporals, each man reporting to but one man higher in rank. There 
is little doubt that the present tendency in industrial organizations is 
to abandon the military system to a very large extent, and for the 
following reasons : 

A soldier has certain duties to perforin, few in number and 
simple in kind. Hence the man directly in command can control 
the actions of his subordinates easily and effectively. Control 
moreover should come invariably from the same officer, to avoid 
any possibility of disastrous confusion and to insure the instant 
action of a body of men as one single mass. On the other hand, 
industrial operations do not possess the same simplicity, particular- 
ly where men are using machines, nor is there the necessity of 
action in mass. The military organization, therefore, should be 
modified to suit the conditions ; and one of these modifications is 
the introduction of two or more foremen in charge of certain 
functions or duties of the same men or groups of men. 

On contract work it is often impossible to subdivide the duties 
of men to as great an extent as can be done in large manufacturing 
establishments. The smaller the contract, the less the subdivision 
of duties possible. In such cases an approach to the ideal system 
of subdivision is secured not hy employing different men for dif- 
ferent purposes hut by a systematic assignment of duties to the 
same men to be performed at specified hours of the day or days 
of the week. Thus a small gang of carpenters is engaged in 
building forms for concrete, in repairing wooden dump cars, and 
in framing and erecting trestle work. By timing the men and by 
planning their work upon the timing records and the requirements 
of the work this carpenter gang can be assigned certain hours or 
days for each class of work. Thus is avoided the intermittent and 
uncertain shifting of the gang from one class of work to another, 
involving not only a loss of time in frequent shifting but a loss of 
interest in work that is done piecemeal. Moreover a methodical 



/ 



68 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

change of occupation permits a methodical record of the number 
of units of each class of work performed, and thus leads to the 
use of the bonus system of payment. 

2. The Law of Educational Supervision. — It is not alone suflSclent 
to give instructions to workmen and foremen from time to time by 
word of mouth, but the gist of all important instructions should be 
reduced to written or printed form. Among contractors the pioneer 
observer of this law is Mr. Frank B. Gilbreth, whose "Field 
System" is a 200-page book of rules for his superintendents, fore- 
men and others to follow. His "Bricklaying System" is another 
set of rules for the guidance of his brick masons and foremen. 

Among manufacturers there are many examples of those who 
have prepared more or less elaborate sets of rules to be followed, 
but the most interesting of these compilations that have come to 
our attention is the one furnished to its salesmen by the National 
Cash Register Co. In this book are gathered a vast number of 
useful hints and practical suggestions and arguments to be used 
in selling National cash registers. Each possible objection that a 
prospective purchaser may raise is met with one or more specific 
answers. This company not only provides its salesmen with a text 
book but has a school for training salesmen. At regular intervals 
all the salesmen meet together and discuss their respective methods 
of selling cash registers. Any new suggestions that are good be- 
come subsequently a part of the book of instructions. Thus the 
combined wisdom of hundreds of salesmen is preserved and de- 
livered to every salesman that the company employs. This plan is 
followed also by many of the life insurance companies. Railway 
companies have long made it their practice to furnish their civil 
engineers with printed sets of rules for railway location, as ex- 
emplified in McHenry's "Railway Location." All these are forms 
of educational supervision, and some are very elaborate. The small 
contractor need not necessarily have a printed book of rules of his 
own making, but he can supplement some such book of rules and 
hints by a typewritten or mimeographed set of sheets containing 
the most important of his own instructions. In this manner the 
repetition of a costly blunder by a foreman or workman can be 
avoided by a special rule or hint, while a labor saving "trick" can 
be passed on to other men in the contractor's employ. 

In developing a system of educational supervision the greatest 
assistance can be obtained from articles in engineering and con- 
tracting periodicals, for there will be frequently recorded labor 
saving methods well worthy of trial by other contractors. In a 
long article it may be only a small hint that is worthy of being 
abstracted and placed among the hints for foremen. 

In preparing a set of rules and hints, take pains to distinguish 
sharply between what is a rule always to be followed and what is 
a hint to be followed optionally. It is well to have a set of rules, 
each with its specific number, and a separate set of hintSj also 
numbered. 

The second law of management is briefly this: 



COST KEEPING. 09 

Secure uniformity of procedure on the part of employes by pro- 
viding written or printed riiles, supplemented by educational sug- 
gestions or hints to guide them in their work. , 

3. The Law of Co-ordination. — So schedule the performance of 
each gang of men that they will work in perfect coordination with 
other gangs, either adjacent or remote. 

Perfect coordination involves the working of each man to his 
capacity all the time. Tliis necessitates not only the organization 
of gangs of just the right size but the prompt arrival of standard 
supplies and materials, and freedom from breakdowns of plant. 

An examination of almost any piece of construction work in 
progress will disclose the fact that most of the men spend a con- 
siderable portion of their time waiting either for somebody else to 
do something or for materials to arrive, before they can proceed. 
The cause is improper coordination of the work. One gang may 
have too many men and therefore may be able to work considerably 
faster than another, and be continually catching up with it. They 
will then adopt a slower pace, keep seemingly busy, and manage 
to kill a large percentage of their working time. These delays are 
chargeable to lack of coordination, although a careless inspection 
of the work may seem to indicate that everything is going smooth- 
ly. A job can look smooth and at the same time be so badly co- 
ordinated as to be uneconomical. 

The necessary adjuncts to proper coordination of work are 
briefly as follows: 

1. A carefully drawn schedule of performance. 

2. Regular arrival of material and supplies. 

3. Prompt and proper repairs to equipment. 

4. The proper qualits^ of supplies. 

The best method that has so far been devised for making things 
happen on time is first to prepare a time table, and then to live 
up to it as far as the interruptions of the weather and the limita- 
tions of human nature will permit. To prepare a time table 
properly it is necessary to know how fast work can be done under 
the conditions which are to govern it. At the best there will be a 
considerable variation to be accounted for by Ignorance on the 
part of the planning department on the one hand and by the in- 
terference of the elements on the other. A form of chart, made 
on tracing cloth, with various symbols to indicate the kinds of 
work to be done, has been found very useful. As the work pro- 
gresses the performance can be checked off on the chart, and thus 
indicate whether the "work is proceeding on time. Where the 
work is such as that of building construction and there is but 
little storage capacity for materials, it is best to have the chart 
prepared a considerable time in advance so that materials will 
arrive when they are needed and yet not so much in advance of the 
proper time as to require large storage capacity at the site of the 
work. 

4. The Law of Standard Performance Based on iVlotion Timing. 
— Neai'ly every operation performed lay a workman involves several 



70 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



motions, although at first sight it may often seem that there is but 
one. 

Mr. Frank B. Gilbreth has coined the term "motion study" to 
denote his method of observing the number and kind of motions 
made by a man — a brick layer, for example — in performing a given 
operation. His plan is to analyze the motions, assigning a name 
to each motion. His next step is to endeavor so to arrange the sup- 
ply of materials, the position of tools, etc., as to reduce the num- 
ber of motions and the distance of each motion to a nninimum. 

Table VII. 
Cableway No. 2, Handling Concrete. 

1908. . Efficiency. 

Observa- Min. Ave. Max. Standard Per 

Process tions. time. time. time. time. cent. 

RI 40 ft 30 6.0 10.5 17.3 6.0 40.0 

Tl 470 ft 33 31.0 47.3 63.0 31.0 65.5 

Fl 123 ft 37 22.0 30.8 44.7 22.0 71.5 

D 37 16.8 61.7 140.4 16.8 27.2 

Re 123 ft 36 19.4 23.7 29.3 19.0 80.4 

Te 470 ft 36 26.5 37.2 64.5 26.5 71.1 

Fe 40 ft 35 11.0 42.9 96.0 11.0 25.6 

L 28 12.0 73.2 234.0 9.4 12.8 

144.7 327.3 689.2 141.7 
Totals, 1,266 ft. 

Table VIII. 

Cableway No. 3, Handling Concrete. 

1908. Efficiency. 

Observa- Mln. Ave. Max. Standard Per 

Process tions. time. time. time. time. cent. 

Rl 40 ft 18 8.0 13.6 18.2 6.0 44.1 

Tl 470 ft 17 35.5 39.3 68.0 31.0 78.0 

Fl 123 ft 21 25.0 39.4 77.0 22.0 55.9 

D 22 20.0 62.5 119.0 16.8 26.9 

Re 123 ft 22 19.0 28.5 36.0 19.0 66.8 

Te 470 ft 22 30.0 46.6 102.0 26.5 56.9 

Fe 40 ft 20 18.0 29.1 48.0 11.0 37.8 

L 16 38.0 75.6 220.0 9.4 12.4 

193.5 334.6 688.2 141.7 

Mr. Fred W. Taylor was the first, we believe, to adopt the prac- 
tice of invariably studying each motion by the aid of a stop- 
watch. A large number of stop-watch observations not only give 
the average time of a motion, but, what is of far greater im- 
portance, they indicate what the minimum time for each motion 
may reasonably be expected to be. It then follows that the sum 
of these minimum times for the different motions represents a 
standard time of accomplishment of the entire process. Hence our 
law of motion timing: 

In the performance of every process the sum of the minimum 
times observed for each motion gives a standard of performance 
possible of attainm,ent under sufficient incentive. 

Mr. Harrington Emerson calls this standard of excellence 100%, 
and has developed the plan of rating all actual performances in 
percentages. Thus if the standard time for drilling a 10-ft. hole in 
a certain rock were 60 minutes and, if the actual time were 90 
minutes, this performance would be rated at 60-f-90=66.67%. 



COST KEEPING. 71 

In establishing a standard time of performance, the first step is 
to ascertain the unit times upon the work as ordinarily performed. 
The next step is by study of tlie time elements and the local con- 
ditions to eliminate as many motions as possible and to reduce 
the time of others, either by shortening the path of motion or by 
accelerating the velocity of the motion. 

To illustrate by an example we give the following time study, 
which was made by Mr. Dana some time ago on some 
cableway work. Since this was done the Lidgerwood Mfg. Co. has 
completely redesigned its cableway engine and fall rope carriers 
and has introduced new features in control (notably in the Gatun 
oablewayg in Panama). Tlierefore, while the data are correct as 
history, they must not be taken as indicating the limit of present 
possibility. A considerable number of studies was made, but one 
only is given for purposes of illustration. (See Table VII, p. 70.) 

The first column gives the abbreviations of the processes, dis- 
tances, etc. ; the second gives the number of recorded observations 
on each process ; the third gives the minimum observed time in 
seconds for each process in that table ; the fourth gives the aver- 
age ; the fifth gives the maximum time ; the sixth gives the mini- 
mum of all the observed times for each process. While this is by 
no means tlie shortest possible time in which the process could be 
accomplislaed, it is the shortest one observed, and has here been 
taken to represent standard (100%) efficiency. By dividing the 
standard time by the average for each process the average effi- 
ciency as observed is obtained. This is shown in the seventh 
column. 

As a result of this time study, it was possible to make an esti- 
mate of the probable increase in efficiency that could be obtained 
by rebalancing the engines. A further improvement was discov- 
ered in the method used in signaling to the operator, and an esti- 
mate of the saving to be obtained in this manner was made. A 
further improvement in regard to the position of the operator was 
discovered. A collateral improvement was perceived in the line of 
altering the design of the towers, so that the cost per unit of han- 
dling materials could be reduced, and further suggestions of a con- 
fidential nature, which we are not at liberty to discuss here, were 
made. 

5. The Law of Divorce of Planning From Performance. — As a 

corollary to the law of the subdivision of duties, we have the law 
of divorce of planning from performance, first formulated by Mr. 
Taylor. 

According to the old style method of management, each foreman 
is left largely to his own resources in planning methods, in addition 
to his other functions. This multiplicity of duties can be properly 
oerformed only by a foreman possessed of a multiplicity of talents. 
«ince few men can comply with such a specification for brains, it 
follows that good foremen of the old style are rare indeed. The 
modern system of management consists, as far as possible, in tak- 
ing away from the foremen the function of planning the work, and 



72 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in providing a department to do the planning. Under planning we 
include inventing, that is, the improvement of existing methods and 
machines. 

A common error in management is the assumption that the man 
on the job in direct charge of the work is the man best fitted to 
plan and improve. Nothing is further from the truth. Rare, in- 
deed, is the man possessed of a trained inventive faculty, and it 
requires such a faculty not only to develop new methods and ma- 
chines but to plan the use of any machine with greatest economy. 
Nearly every piece of contract work presents new conditions, and 
this solving of new economic problems is beyond the power of any 
but the trained and skilled economist. But even where the prob- 
lems remain identical, the necessity of a divorce of planning from 
performance exists, as we shall indicate. 

The brain is an organ that requires frequent exercise in doing 
the same thing before it becomes proficient enough not to suffer 
great fatigue. Thus, the man who is learning to ride a bicycle 
linds that half an hour's lesson has tired him more than ten hours' 
work at his accustomed occupation. Attempting to do something 
new is wearisome beyond measure, except to the mind whose 
training has been in solving new problems. Hence the ordinary 
man finds much fatigue and little pleasure in attempting to do his 
work in a fashion that differs at all from that to which he has long- 
been accustomed. The mental inertia that resists a change in 
methods of performing work is almost beyond comprehension, and 
it is found not only in the lowest type of workman but in the 
highest. 

Repetition develops skill, and skill gives pleasure. To a strong 
man used to his work there is actual pleasure in mowing hay, as 
Tolstoi has admirably pictured in one of his novels. Conversely, 
fatigLie merges into pain and is repulsive. 

In addition to these fundamental reasons why men adhere to 
precedent in their performance, there is the fear of ridicule in 
case of failure to succeed in any new attempt. The child learns to 
speak a foreign language more rapidly than an adult not only be- 
cause of a more "flexible tongue" but because it does not fear 
laughter at its blunders. Partial failure is expected of the child, 
and it is not ridiculed. But an adult seems witless if he does not 
immediately learn the new word and its pronunciation ; hence the 
laughter. So it is with every new performance. .Furthermore, a 
serious mistake may lead to the loss of a position, thus adding 
another reason for sticking to the "good old way." 

Finally, there is no method so fruitful in effecting improvements 
in methods and machines as a study of the time required to per- 
form each movement or operation. A workman or foreman rarely 
studies his own work in this manner. Hence his experience, upon 
which he is wont to brag, is like the experience of the swallow 
building its nest — an unchanging adherence to precedent, regardless 
of possibilities of improvement. 

It is a significant fact that nearly all the great inventions have 
been the product of brains divorced from the actual performance 



COST KEEPING. 73 

of the machines that they have invented. Eli Whitney, inventor of 
the cotton gin, was a lawyer, and not even a southern planter. 
Smiles' "Self Help" is a volume full of instances of important in- 
ventions made by men remotely, if at all, connected with the class 
of industry in which their machines are used. Nothing, therefore. 
Is more ridiculously illogical than the common belief that the "men 
behind the gun" are either capable of being the inventors of the 
gun or the ones most likely to improve it. Yet it is this illogical 
belief that prevents railway companies, manufacturers and con- 
tractors from making hundreds of radical economic improvements. 
Summing up, we have this law : 

For maximum economy of performance, the planning of methods 
of doing work should he the sole function of a manager who is not 
a loorkman himself nor in direct charge of the toorkrnen. 

6. The Law of Regular Unit Cost Reports. — Having planned a 
method of performance, it becomes necessary to secure daily, week- 
ly and monthly reports of such completeness that a manager can 
tell, almost at a glance, what the actual and relative performances 
are. This systematic reporting is more fully treated under the head 
of cost keeping. The success of nearly all large corporations, such 
as the Standard Oil Company, is due. in large measure, to a system 
of regular reports that put the various managers in constant touch 
with the performance of the men under them. Reports to be of 
much value must come at short, regular intervals, must be in the 
same form, and must show quantitative results that admit of in- 
stant comparison with previous reports. To. permit comparison there 
must be either similarity of conditions, or there must be a reduction 
to units that are themselves practically identical. For example, a 
weekly record of the number of yards of earth excavated and hauled 
at a given unit cost is usually of little or no value to the manager 
unless there is a further subdivision of units of cost. The cost of 
loading per cubic yard should be segregated from the cost of haul- 
ing, so that the cost of hauling can itself be expressed in the unit 
of the yard-mile or ton-mile hauled. 

The law of regular unit cost reports may be formulated as fol- 
lows : Report all costs in terms of units of such character that 
comj}arison becomes possible even binder changing conditions, and 
let these reports he made daily if possible, weekly in any event, 
and with a monthly summary. 

It is in the adherence to the terms of this law that managers of 
contract work in the field will find their greatest difficulty. First, 
there is the difficulty of selecting suitable units upon which to re- 
port costs. In pavement work, the square yard is a convenient unit 
and the number of units is easily measured daily. But in rein- 
forced concrete building construction, there is needed not merely 
the cubic foot or cubic yard unit, but many others, some of which 
are not easily ascertained every day. 

For example, the pound of steel reinforcement is one unit upon 
which reports should be made, for the number of pounds of steel 
per cubic yard of concrete differs widely. The thousand feet board 



74 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

measure in the forms is another necessary unit, and the square 
foot of concrete area covered by tlie forms is still another. Yet 
tliese and other units must be used to admit of any rational com- 
parison of performance from day to day and week to week. 

Furthermore, such units must be properly selected for the still 
more important purpose of paying the workmen according to any 
bonus system. In another chapter we discuss this problem of se- 
lecting units of measurement at considei'able length, for upon such 
selection depends the success of contract work under the modern 
method of management. 

7. The Law of Reward Increasing With Increased Performance. 
— All payments for work should be proportionate to the work done. 
This is the fundamental law of economic production. When this 
law is ignored — and it is partly ignored to-day on practically every 
class of work — the producer ceases to take keen interest in his 
work. Under the common wage system of payment, one brick mason 
receives as much as another, regardless of skill and energy. In- 
dividual incentive is lacking, save as it is supplied bj'' fear of dis- 
charge. When laborers, working under the wage system, are put at 
the task of shoveling earth into a wagon, each man seeks to do as 
little as his neighbor, and the slowest becomes the pacemaker for 
the rest. Such ambition as any individual may possess is stifled 
by the knowledge that his increased output will never be known 
by his employer, and consequently never rewarded. Moreover, an 
ambitious man in such a gang is chided by his fellows who warn 
him not to set a "bad example" by working himself out of a job. 

The wage system is responsible in the first place for lack of suf- 
ficient incentive to good performance, but its vicious effects have 
been greatly augmented by the stupid actions of many labor unions, 
such as the restriction of daily output, the limiting of the number 
of apprentices, the demanding of wages that have no relation what- 
ever to the output of individuals, the refusal to work under fore- 
men who are not also members of the union, the refusal to do any 
sort of work except that prescribed by the union, and the like. In 
the long run, all such restriction of output, whether due to the lack 
of sufficient incentive, or to the rules of labor unions, or to the cus- 
toms of a country crystallized into caste such as exists in India, 
lead to a reward commensurate with the output. Summing up : 
The wage received becomes ultimately proportionate to the output. 
The high wages prevalent in America are due neither to labor 
unions, as some profess to suppose, nor to abundance of natural re- 
sources, but to the fact that in America labor unions have not thus 
far greatly restricted the output of individuals except in a few 
trades, and more particularly to the fact that they have not opposed 
the introduction of labor saving machinery. In addition, American 
managers are far in advance of all others in their recognition of 
the fundamental law of management — namely, that the reward 
should be proportionate to the performance. Hampered though they 
have been by the wage system, American managers have been lib- 
eral in their policy of payments for work performed. In recognition 
of his share in the greater output of earth excavation, the steam 



COST KEEPING. 75 

shovel enginemen in the United States receives ?125.00 to $175.00 
a month. 

Witliin the past decade still further strides have been made by 
American managers toward a more effective recognition of this 
fundamental law of proportionate rewards. Various systems of 
payment, known as the bonus system, the differential piece rate sys- 
tem, and the like, have come into more general use, and even the 
old piece rate system has received a new lease of life, all tending 
wonderfully to stimulate the energy and wits of workmen, because 
they are in accord with the law of proportionate reward. 

8. The Law of Prompt Reward. — Any reward or punishment Isv,..^^ I 
that is remote in the time of its application has a relatively faint |- 
influence in determining the average man's conduct. To be most I 
effective, the reward or punishment must follow swiftly upon the j 
act. Hence a managerial policy that may be otherwise good is like- / 
ly to fail if there is not a prompt reward for excellence. Most / 
profit-sharing systems have failed, principally because of failure to f 
recognize the necessity of prompt reward, as well as because of 
failure to recognize the necessity of individual incentive. 

The lower the scale of intelligence, the more prompt should be 
the reward. A common laborer should receive at least a statement 
of what he has earned every day. If, in the morning, he receives a 
card stating that he earned $2.10 the previous Aay, he will go at 
his task with a vim, hoping to do better. But if he does not know 
what he has earned until the end of a week, his imagination Is not 
apt to be vivid enough to spur him to do his best. 

A daily or weekly statement of earnings, folloioed ty prompt pay- 
ment, is a stimulus essential in securing the maximum output of 
workmen. 

9. The Law of Competition. — The pleasure of a competitive game 
lies in conquering an opponent, and this follows logically from the 
fact that competitive games are an evolution from the primitive 
chase or battle. Work conducted as a competition becomes a game, 
and thus stimulates those engaged not only to strive with great en- 
ergy biit to derive keen pleasure from the contest. The business 
man who continues to pile up millions, long after his wealth is suf- 
ficient to satisfy every possible want, does so from pure joy in the 
contest to excel others engaged in the same business. He is follow- 
ing the law of competitive work. 

By pitting one gang of workmen against another gang, the spirit 
of contest is easily aroused. But it is impossible to maintain this 
spirit indefinitely without following the seventh law of manage- 
ment of men — namely, by making the reward proportionate to the 
performance. When, however, this seventh law of management is 
observed, an added spirit is given to men by pitting one gang against 
another. Thus, in laying concrete by hand for a pavement, the best 
method is to have two distinct gangs working side by side, each 
gang concreting from the center of the street to the curb. When 
this is done under a bonus system of payment, the output is aston- 
ishing 

Where competing workmen cannot see one another's output, a bul- 



70 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

letin board should be used, whereon the number of units of work 
performed by each man or each gang of men should be posted. 

Convert work into a competitive game by organising competing 
gangs of men and hy posting their performance. 

10. The Law of Managerial Dignity. — That there should be any- 
thing like caste among managers seems, at first, repulsive to demo- 
cratic principles of government, whether the government be politi- 
cal or industrial. Nevertheless, a study of the personality of the 
most successful managers usually discloses a characteristic of firm- 
ness coupled with a sort of austere dignity. The best manager is 
never "one of the boys." 

Managerial control reaches its acme of excellence in the army, 
and there we find class distinctions most scrupulously observed. 
The officers do not "mess" with the men, nor do they form close 
friendships with the soldiers in the ranks. 

Familiarity breeds contempt, or it breeds at least a feeling that 
the great man is not so great after all. All managers are under 
the constant fire of criticism of their subordinates, whether they 
realize it or not. The best shield that a manager can wear is dis- 
tance. His little foibles — and all men have them — may thus be 
kept concealed. It is essential that they be concealed, for men of 
less mental endowment, will always seize upon the little defects of 
greater men's character or attainment as evidence of lack of any 
real superiority. The eye of criticism is a microscope for human 
frailties. Being a microscope, it is wise to keep beyond its 
range, so that the whole character may be viewed by the naked eye 
in its true perspective. 

Discipline in an industrial army is as essential as in a military 
organization, and it is best secured by military methods. This in- 
volves : ( 1 ) The social separation of the officers from the men ; and 
(2) a sequence of responsibility from the man in the ranks to the 
highest officer. 

For every act on the work every man should be responsible to 
some particular man higher in authority. There should never be 
any doubt as to whom a man is responsible ; but it does not follow 
that a man should be responsible to only one person, except for cer- 
tain acts. As we have previously shown, an industrial organization 
may have several classes of foremen, to each of whom each work- 
man is responsible for certain acts. "What we now emphasize is the 
importance of not dividing the responsibility for any particular act. 
A contractor, for example, should rarely give any orders to a work- 
man. All orders should come through the proper foreman. To do 
otherwise results not only in reducing the workman's respect for 
the foreman, but it frequently angers the foreman, who feels that 
he has lost dignity in the eyes of the workmen. 

It is often wise to change foremen from one gang to another, in 
order to preserve the class distinction between foremen and men. 
As foremen become acquainted with the men, they generally want 
to be regarded as good fellows, and will then permit infractions of 
rules and a general decrease in activity. Who has not noticed that 



COST KEEPING. 77 

short jobs usually move with a "snap" that is not always character- 
istic of longer jobs? 

We may sum up thus: 

Discipline is best secured by managerial dignity, and dignity is 
best preserved by social separation of managers from subordinates 
and by an invariable sequence of responsibility. 

Measuring the Output of Workmen.* — Before men can be paid 
according to their performance it obviously is necessary to devise 
methods of measuring the number of units of work done, but it is 
not always so obvious what units to select nor how to measure them 
readily after the selection of units has been made. Indeed, this dif- 
ficulty accounts in large part for the slowness with which piece rate 
and bonus systems have been adopted. 

Subdivision of Units into Other Units. In engineering construc- 
tion the cubic yard is a very common unit upon which contract 
prices are based, but the cubic yard itself is frequently a very un- 
certain unit of performance, for it is a composite of other units. 
Thus, in rock excavation there are several distinct operations in- 
volved, which may be enumerated as follows : 

1. Drilling. 

2. Charging and firing (or blasting). 

3. Breaking large chunks to suitable sizes. 

4. Loading into cars, carts, skips, or the like. 

5. Transporting. 

6. Dumping. 

The important item of drilling depends largely upon the spac- 
ing of the drill holes, which varies in different kinds of rock, and 
in different kinds of excavation, trenches and tunnels requiring close 
spacing. Clearly, then, the lineal foot of drill hole is a unit of 
work that must be adopted by the rock contractor in measuring the 
output of his drillers, and not the cubic yard. 

Transportation is largely a fimction of distance, hence the unit 
of transportation cost should be the ton (or yard) carried 100 ft. 
or 1 mile, and not the cubic yard without the factor of distance. 

Our first rule to be applied in seeking units that truly express the 
amount of work done is as follows : Divide the contract price tmits 
into sub-units, selecting the "foot-pound" of work as the sub-unit 
wherever possible. 

A foot-pound is the unit of work used in theoretical and applied 
mechanics. It is the amount of work required to lift 1 pound a 
height of 1 foot. All forms of work are capable theoretically of 
being expressed in foot-pounds, but it is often very difHcult to do 
so in practice. For example, it is not an easy matter to ascertain 
how many foot-pounds of work a man performs in shoveling earth 
into a wagon, for there is not only the number of foot-pounds in- 
volved in lifting the earth but in pushing the shovel into the earth. 



*The following pages relating to the measurement of the output 
of workmen have been abstracted from "Cost Keeping and Man- 
agement Engineering," by Gillette and Dana. 



78 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In lifting the shovel, in lifting the upper part of his own body, and 
In overcoming the Inertia of earth, shovel and body. However, the 
theoretical ideal unit is the foot-pound, and, in selecting the actual 
unit to be used, the effort should be made to secure a unit that is 
as closely equivalent to the foot-pound as possible. Thus, in drill- 
ing, there are certain units of work done by the drill in pulverizing 
the rock in the drill hole, and this work is quite closely represented 
by the number of lineal feet of drill hole in any given kind of 
rock. Hence the most practical unit of work in drilling is the foot 
of hole drilled. 

The second point to consider in selecting suitable units of work 
is the different processes involved. Bach process on field contract 
work usually involves a different class of men. In rock excavation 
ths six items above given usually involve six separate gangs of 
men. Although all contribute their part to the final contract unit 
upon which payment is received — the cubic yard — yet the work of 
each may be, and usually is, better measured in terms of some other 
unit. We already have seen that the lineal foot of drill hole — and 
not the cubic yard — is the unit to select for the drilling gang. The 
pound of explosive charged in the drill holes is a good unit by 
which to measure the work done by the blasting gang. The cubic 
yard of rock usually is the only practical unit of breaking large 
rock chunks. So, too, the cubic yard becomes the unit for loading 
and for dumping, whereas the yard-mile, or ton-mile, is made the 
unit of transportation. Still further subdivisions of some of these 
six processes are often desirable, yielding still other units that more 
closely approximate the foot-pound iniit. 

Therefore, our second rule is as follows : Since construction usu- 
ally is divided into processes, and since a separate gang usually 
performs each process, select sub-units based upon the work done 
by each gang. 

In order to apply this rule it frequently is necessary to reorgan- 
ize the work so that each process is performed by its special gang. 
Where the work is not of sufficient magnitude to keep distinct 
fjangs busy on each separate process, it is still often possible to 
work the same gang a few hours at one process and then shift it 
to another process, instead of working the same men in a heterogen- 
eous fashion on two or inore processes at the same time. 

Units for Concrete Work. — The cost of a cubic yard of concrete 
varies between about $3.00 for cheap pavement sub-base to about 
$20.00 for certain parts of a reinforced concrete building. A hasty 
generalization drawn from such variations as this has led many 
an engineer to scout the usefulness of cost data, particularly such 
data as have not been gathered by the individual who attempts to 
draw conclusions from them. However, when the cubic yard of 
concrete is divided into proper sub-units of cost, it is astonishing 
to note the fading away of all seeming difficulties, either in esti- 
m.ating costs of concrete or in securing data upon which to judge 
the efficiency of workmen. 

The labor processes in concrete may be classified as follows; 
1. Receiving and storing materials. 



COST KEEPING. 79 

2. Delivering materials to the mixer (loading and hauling). 

3. Mixing concrete. 

4. Transporting concrete. 

5. Placing concrete. 

6. Ramming concrete. 

7. Finishing the surface. 

8. Framing the lumber for forms. 

9. Erecting forms. 

10. Shifting and cleaning forms. 

11. Taking down forms. 

12. Shaping the reinforcing steel. 

13. Placing the reinforcing steel. 

Some of these processes may be still further subdivided, and fre- 
quently it is desirable to do so. "While the cubic yard of concrete 
is usually a satisfactory unit for items one to six, it is clear that 
the square foot or square yard is a unit that must be used for item 
7. Items 8 to 11 should be expressed in terms of the 1,000 ft. B. 
M. as the unit, and it is usually desirable also to use the square foot 
of concrete surface covered by forms used as another unit for 
estimating the cost of work on forms. Items 12 and 13 should be 
expressed in terms of the pound of steel as the unit, since the num- 
ber of pounds of steel per cubic yard of concrete varies widely. 

Two or More Units fcr the Same Class of Work. — As just indi- 
cated, it is frequently desirable to use more than one unit of meas- 
urement. The unit on which the contract price is based is usually 
a desirable one in which to express all items of cost. In addition 
to this, the cost of each item may be expressed in other units, such, 
for example, as the 1,000 ft. B. M. and the square foot of area for 
form work in concrete construction. Such units should be select- 
ed as will permit comparison not only of one day's work with an- 
other, but of one job with another, and frequently it is desirable to 
select units that may be used in comparing two entirely different 
classes of work. 

Uniformity in Units of Measurement. — The economic importance 
of uniformity in units of measurement cannot be over-estimated. 
To illustrate : The common unit of concrete work is the cubic yard, 
but it is customary to measure cement walks in square feet. Now 
tnis leads to many blunders, not only in estimating the cost of 
walks, but in effecting reductions in cost. Not only does the thick- 
ness of cement walks vary widely, but the proportion of cement to 
sand in each layer of the walk is variable. Therefore, to say that 
it takes so many barrels of cement to make 100 sq. ft. of walk 
means next to nothing unless the plans and specifications for the 
walk are also given. For purposes of accurate estimating it is 
necessary to prepare tables of cost of mortars and concretes in 
terms of the cubic yard ; then by remembering that 100 sq. ft. 
having a thickness of 1 inch are almost exactly 0.3 cu. yd., it is a 
simple matter to convert costs per cubic yard into costs per square 
foot. 

Not only in computing costs of cement walks, and the like, but in 



•80 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

reducing costs, does it aid us to use the cubic yard as the unit, for 
it enables us to malce comparisons, and tliereby discover ineffi- 
ciency of workers. Elsewhere in this book a case is cited 
where the labor cost of the face mortar for a concrete wall 
was out of all proportion to what it should have been. Had the 
contractor estimated the cost of this mortar in cubic yards, he 
would have discovered that it was excessive. The labor of mixing 
mortar should not be much greater than the labor of mixing con- 
crete per cubic yard, nor should the labor of conveying the mortar 
in wheelbarrows be greater. The labor of placing it in a thin 
layer is obviously greater than for placing concrete in thick layers ; 
but, in the case mentioned, the contractor was losing his money in 
mixing and conveying the mortar. He had not recognized the fact 
because he had not reduced the cost to dollars per cubic yard of 
mortar. 

In like manner, one may often see money wasted in making and 
delivering mortar to bricklayers and masons, because the cost of the 
mortar itself, in terms of the cubic yard of mortar (not of ma- 
sonry), has not been calculated. 

The cost of labor on forms and falsework should always be re- 
corded in terms of 1,000 ft. B. M., as the unit ; for that is the 
common unit of timber work, and, being so, ready comparisons can 
be made only in dollars per M. ft. B. M. 

It is surprising how few managers of men have realized the 
value of reducing the cost of each item of work to units that are 
comparable ; and by this we mean units in terms of which entirely 
different classes of work may be compared. Thus, in a brick pave- 
ment there is grout used between the joints. This grout is a tliin 
cement mortar, and it averages, let us say, 6 cents per sq. ft. of 
pavement. Now, what does it average per cubic yard of grout? 
Probably not one paving contractor in a thousand knows ; but, until 
he does know, he cannot compare the cost of grouting with the 
cost of other kinds of cement work. Many a time have we had 
our eyes opened to unsuspected losses and inefficiencies only by 
reducing the costs of the elements of work to units comparable with 
the units of similar work in other fields. 

The ton is a very convenient unit to use when comparing the 
cost of loading and handling materials of all kinds. The ton of 
brick, the ton of gravel, the ton of timber, the ton of cast-iron pipe, 
are loaded upon wagons by hand at a cost differing not so much, 
one from the other, as might at first be supposed. When reliable 
data are not available for estimating the cost of handling any given 
material, by reducing it to tons an approximate estimate can usu- 
ally be made that will be satisfactory, at any rate far more reliable 
than a guess. 

Units of Transportation. — On contract work, distances of trans- 
portation are usually so short that the percentage of time "lost" 
by cars, carts, etc., while being loaded, becomes a very large part 
of the total day's time. Hence the unit of transportation must not 
be simply a unit of weight, or of volume, transported a unit dis- 
tance. For example, a wagon may be loaded with earth in 4% 



COST KEEPING. 81 

minutes, transported 100 ft., dumped and returned in 1% min- 
utes, or less: total, 6 minutes. Of this time less than 25% is 
spent in transporting the earth. On the other hand, if the haul is 
6,000 ft, the time spent in transporting may be 'dZ%. The cost 
per 100 ft. transported is almost four times as much in one case 
as in the other. Therefore, unless the hauls are so long that the 
time lost in loading and unloading is an insignificant part of the 
total time, it is essential to divide the work of transportation into 
three elements : 

1. Time lost loading. 

2. Time lost transporting. 

3. Time lost unloading. 

Often this third item is so small that it may be disregarded. On 
contract work it is often necessary to have a fourth item : 

4. Time lost during the shifting of tracks, and other changes 
in plant location. 

In brief, the lost time, of whatsoever nature, must be deter- 
mined and deducted from the total time, before the number of 
units of transportation performance can be divided by the correct 
number of hours. 

Transportation, therefore, must be divided into two main units 
of cost : 

1. Non-productive (lost time loading, dumping, shifting plant, 
etc. ) . 

2. Productive. 

The total cost of the non-productive time is divided by the total 
number of yards or tons moved to get the unit non-productive cost 
of transportation. 

The productive cost of transportation is the ton-mile, the cubic 
yard-mile, the ton-station (station =100 ft.), or the lilve. 

The distance of transportation is usually computed from a map, 
but it is often desirable to attach an odometer to one, if not all, 
of the wagons, locomotives or the like. 

Odometers of the kinds used on automobiles and bicycles can be 
advantageously used in a great many places on contract work, a 
few of which are as follows : On wagons, on wheel scrapers, on 
locomotives, on traction engines, on road rollers, on derricks (to 
record the number of swings), on hoisting engines, on cableway 
carriages, etc. Indeed, wherever a machine or tool has a revolv- 
ing or reciprocating part, an odometer or counter can be used to 
record the number of reciprocations or revolutions, and from the 
data so recorded the amount of work can often be calculated with 
great accuracy. 

Recording Single Units. — There are many classes of work in 
which the only practicable unit to be used is the single or individ- 
ual unit itself ; thus, the telegraph pole erected, the pile driven, the 
door hung, etc. Obviously records of units of this sort are so read- 
ily made as to require almost no comment. 

A punch card is a convenient record of single units. Some con- 
tractors prefer a tally board on which each unit is marked or tal- 



82 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

lied with a pencil. Others use a board like a cribbage board, having 
holes in which plugs are put to record the number of units. Still 
others give out tickets to the men for each unit of work delivered. 

Record Cards Attached to Each Piece of Work. — In doing ma- 
chine-shop work it is often necessary to have one piece of metal 
pass through the hands of several different workers. For example, 
one man may drill holes of a certain size, another man may drill 
holes of another size, still another man may thread the holes, and 
so on. In such a case it is common practice, where careful cost 
records are kept, to provide a card that is attached to each piece or 
each lot of pieces. In blanks provided on the card, each worker 
enters his number, and the number of hours and minutes spent by 
him in doing a specified kind of work on the piece. A modified form 
of this method is to attach a card or a brass check to each piece, 
giving a serial number and letter to the piece. Each workman on 
the piece notes its number on his own record card, and opposite 
this number be enters the amount of time spent on the piece. 

While this method of recording output cannot be as frequently 
used in engineering contract work as in machine shop work, it 
should not be overlooked by the general contractor. It might well 
be applied to timber work where one gang of men bores the holes, 
another gang saws and a third gang "daps" or adzes the sticks, and 
so on. It is desirable always to assign different kinds of work to 
different men, not only because the time usually lost in changing 
tools may be saved, but because men become more expert when 
they do one class of work only. The record card facilitates the 
differentiation of labor into classes, and is, therefore, a great aid 
in increasing the output of a given number of men. 

Measurements of Length. — For a gi'eat many kinds of contract 
work the lineal foot is the best unit to use. Track laying, fence 
building, pipe laying, setting curb, etc., come under this head. 
Many other classes of work are commonly measured only in terms 
of the lineal foot, when, to permit of true comparisons, some 
other unit or units should also be adopted. Sewer work, for ex- 
ample, is commonly recorded only in terms of the lineal foot ; 
but the amount of excavation varies greatly per lineal foot in differ- 
ent sewers and often in the same sewer ; hence the excavation 
should be measured with the cubic yard as the unit. 

Tunnel excavation should also be reduced to the cubic yard 
standard. A contractor has no very definite idea • whether the 
"mucking" (loading of cars) in a tunnel is being done economically 
or not until he has determined how many cubic yards each man is 
loading daily. 

Measurements of length are often best made by driving a line 
of stakes 100 ft. apart, calling each stake a "station." The start- 
ing point or station is called Station o. The next station, 100 
ft. from the start, is Sta. 1 ; the next station, 200 ft. from the 
start, is Sta. 2 ; and so on. Hence the mark on any given station 
stake gives the number of hundreds of feet from the starting 
point. Points intermediate — that is between any two stations — 



COST KEEPING. 83 

are called "pluses." Thus, a point 40 ft. in advance of Sta. 2 
is called "two plus forty," ani is written Sta. 2 + 40, by which it 
is clear that it is 240 ft. from the start. 

Having driven a line of station stakes, properly marked with 
their station number, a foreman or timekeeper can quickly ascer- 
tain the station and plus at which the day's work has been com- 
pleted. 

In many instances, measurements of length are best made by 
counting the number of pipe lengths laid, or the number of rail 
lengths. 

IVIeasurements of Area.— Paving, painting, roofing, plastering, and 
many other classes of construction work are best measured in 
terms of the square yard, square foot, or "square" (100 sq. ft.) 
as the unit. Since areas are usually measured with ease, it is 
noticeable that area work is generally done with much greater 
economy than mass work, which is usually more difficult to meas- 
ure and consequently not measured every day on most jobs. It 
is sometimes not easy to measure the number of thousand feet 
board measure in concrete forms, in which case it may be prefer- 
able to measure the area of concrete covered by the forms, from 
which, if desired, the amount of lumber can be calculated approxi- 
mately. 

Measurements of Volume. — This class of measurements is usually 
the most difficult to make for purposes of daily output reports. 
Excavation, for example, is not easily measured, as a rule, except 
by a surveyor. Of massive masonry the same is true. Hence there 
are few contractors who know accurately how many cubic yards of 
this sort of work should be accredited each day to each gang. 
Record should be kept of the number of car or wagon loads of 
excavated material ; but, to derive much benefit from such records, 
care must be taken to have cars and wagons of uniform size uni- 
formly loaded, or to keep record of the capacities of the different 
veliicles. "Where daily measurements of volume are difficult to 
secure, some one or more of the following methods may be adopted. 

Measurements of Weight. — Loaded cars or wagons can be weighed 
on track scales or on portable platform scales, and this can be 
profitably done far oftener than it is. Loaded skips and buckets 
can be weighed with spring balances attached to the hoisting 
rope of a derrick. It is sometimes very difficult to measure volumes 
of certain quantities in the field and it then becomes of advantage 
to weigh them. It is not easy to tell how much rock there is on 
a skip load without weighing the loaded skip either by placing 
It on scales or by putting a spring balance on the derrick. Spring 
balances of that character can be purchased of a capacity up to 
2,600 lbs. and costing about $150. Another form of rock measuring 
apparatus is in the nature of a balance, costing about $115. A 
great advantage of a spring balance on a derrick is that it takes 
no extra time for handling, and, while the first cost seems rather 
high, the information obtained on a large piece of work is well 
worth its cost. 



84 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In a good many of the Hudson River Trap Rock Quarries the 
stone is handled in cars which are pushed along on the tracks for 
purposes of weighing and the men are paid for performance ac- 
cording to the weights on the cars. This is a very accurate and, 
where it is practicable, a highly satisfactory method of measuring 
output. 

This method has long been in use at coal mines where every 
car is numbered, and is weighed before dumping. 

On contract work, such as macadamizing, for example, each 
wagon load may be weighed, if tlie amount of the work warrants 
the purchase and use of platform scales. It is usually considered 
sufficiently exact, however, to measure the size of a few loads, 
and simply count the number of loads. However, loads often 
vary so greatly in size that this method of counting loads becomes 
very unsatisfactory. This holds true particularly of loads of 
quarried stone, of earth loaded by steam shovels, and the like. In 
such cases the contractor should seriously consider the advisability 
of weighing each load. 

One of the most difficult classes of construction work to measure 
daily is rubble masonry. Yet we have found two very satisfactory 
methods of recording the work done by each derrick gang. One 
way is to use wooden skips that are loaded at the quarry with 
stone, put upon cars and transported to the . work. Each skip is 
provided with a clip for holding a brass check. The checks are 
numbered serially, and the weight of stone corresponding to 
each number is entered in a book ; for before delivery to the 
masonry derricks each skip is lifted by a derrick, placed on scales 
and weighed. It is sometimes preferable to provide a large spring 
balance for weighing, instead of using scales. The mason in 
charge of the derrick gang removes the brass check from the skip 
and keeps it, entering its number on a card which is turned over 
to the timekeeper at night, together with the brass checks. Thus 
It is possible quickly to ascertain the number of tons of rubble 
laid by each gang. 

Functional Units of Measure. — Under this head we class all 
measurements of units that are functions of the desired units. 
Thus, in any given mixture of concrete, the number of barrels or 
bags of cement is a function of (i. e., it bears a definite relation 
to) the number of cubic yards of concrete. Hence a record of the 
amount of cement used each day will enable making a close approxi- 
mation to the number of cubic yards of concrete. 

In rubble or cyclopean masonry, a record of the number of 
buckets of mortar will enable making a close calculation of the 
yardage of masonry. If spalls are liberally used to reduce the 
amount of mortar, as they should be, then the number of buckets 
or skips of spalls should also be recorded. 

The number of gallons of paint used is ordinarily a fair criterion 
of the area of surface painted. 

By the use of packets for handling bricks, Gilbreth has de- 
veloped a system of measuring the work done by each bricklayer, 
for count is made of the empty packets stacked up by each mason. 



COST KEEPING. 85 

Since each packet is loaded with a definite number of bricks, this 
gives an accurate record of each man's output. 

Stockpile Measurements. — There are certain kinds of construction 
tliat are best measured indirectly by ascertaining what has been 
removed each day from the stock piles. Thus, in erecting 
a frame building, the different kinds and sizes of lumber 
can be piled in stock piles of regular size, easily meas- 
ured. Rolls of paper, bundles of shingles, etc., can be stored 
in such manner that a daily inventory of stock on hand is readily 
made. By subtracting the amount shown by the inventory at the 
end of each day from the amount on hand the previous day, an 
accurate record is obtained of materials that have gone into the 
building. Since a carpenter's work is usually best measured in 
terms of the 1,000 ft. B. M., the square of shingles, and the like, it 
Is evident that stock pile measurements can be used to great ad- 
vantage in determining the number of units of certain kinds of 
work performed on a building. 

The measuring of material is greatly facilitated by using a 
standard method of handling. Gilbreth's rule for cement (see his 
"Field Sj-^stem") is to place the bags one on top of the other in 
piles of fifty. 

One of the most difficult of the materials to check regularly is the 
reinforcing steel for concrete. If this is handled in plain bars 
they can be weighed and wired in bundles of 100 lbs., this being 
a suitable size for two men to carry. The bundles are, of course, 
nearly always more or less than 100 lbs., and when the steel is 
wired it is a good plan to attach to each bundle a tag giving its 
weight, which tag can be left with the storekeeper for record as 
the bundles are removed to the work. The difficulty of obtaining 
these records is caused by the fact that the material is usually 
placed in a haphazard way wherever it happens to be most 
convenient for the men placing it without any systematic regard 
for its use on the work. 

Key Units of IVIeasure. — It is always desirable to relieve the 
foreman or timekeeper of the work of computing the number of 
units of work done daily, wherever such computation involves either 
many measurements or much labor in computing. A foreman can 
readily report the number of "stations" of road graded or macadam- 
ized, leaving to the office force the work of deducing the number of 
units of work performed. 

A further step in the same direction is the use of key letters and 
numbers to designate sections of work whose dimensions the fore- 
man may not know but which are recorded in the office, and from 
which the number of units of work performed can be readily ascer- 
tained. For convenience we call these units key units, since they 
are designated by key letters or numbers. 

Key Units on Drawings. — Any given structure can usually be 
divided into "sections" identical in shape and character of work. 
Thus, in a concrete building, there are a number of columns of 
identical size, a number of beams also identical, a number of 



8G HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

identical floor slabs, and so on. To each of these "sections" a key- 
letter or number, or a combination letter and number, may be 
assigned and written on the drawing. 

If numbers from 100 to 199 are reserved for "sections" on the 
first floor, and the letter C is used to denote columns, then C 100 
will designate a particular kind of column on the first floor ; while 
C 200 will designate a corresponding column on the second floor: 
Having assigned keys to all "sections," the foreman or timekeeper is 
furnished with blueprints on which the "sections" with their re- 
spective keys are marked. In some instances it is preferable to 
furnish only a few large blueprints containing many "sections" on 
each print, but it Is usually desirable to supplement these large blue- 
prints with small ones of notebook size, which, if preferred, can be 
punched and bound in a loose-leaf binder. 

The foreman or timekeeper reports daily tlie number of each class 
of "sections" built by each gang, using the proper key to desig- 
nate each "section." The office force, having computed the number 
of units of work in each section, is then able to record the total 
number of units of worlc done, with accuracy and with rapidity. If 
a full "section" is not completed, the foreman or timekeeper esti- 
mates the percentage completed, and reports accordingly. 

Keys Marked on Separate Members. — On certain classes of work 
a modification of the above plan is preferable. Instead of pro- 
viding the foreman or timekeeper with drawings having keyed 
"sections," a key number or letter is painted, or otherwise marked, 
on each separate member of the structure before it is put into 
place. Thus, each block of cut stone is measured in the stock 
yard and a "key" is painted upon it. Tlien, when the foreman 
reports that block A 105 has been laid In the wall, the office force 
can determine its volume from the recorded measurements. Tlie 
authors have found this to be the most satisfactory method of re- 
cording cut stone work, for it is thus possible not merely to tell 
the total amount laid each day by several derrick gangs but to tell 
precisely what each gang has done, for each boss mason can be 
required to record the key number of every stone laid under his 
direction. The office work of computing the volume of each stone is 
Insignificant in amount if tables are used for computation, such as 
Nash's "Expeditious Measurer" ($2.00). These tables give the 
volume of any block, progressing in size by inches up to 4 ft. 9 in. 
X 6 ft. 4 in. X 1 ft. 1 in. The tables also give surface areas, pro- 
gressing by inches, up to 4 ft. 1 in. x 8 ft. 5 in. in size. 

Structural steel members can be marked with key letters ; so, 
too, can heavy timbers, moveable sections of forms and falsework, 
and many other classes of materials used in construction work. 

Conclusion. — Upon the ingenuity of the management engineer 
who devises ways of recording the daily output of work done 
rests the success or failure of any effort to introduce modern 
methods of m.anagement on complicated contract work. The prob- 
lem before him is often one to tax his ability almost to the elastic 
limit, for It is not sufficient to devise a method of measuring daily 



COST KEEPING. 87 

output after a fashion. He must devise not only an accurate method 
but one that permits of application at the hands of men com- 
paratively unskilled mentally, and under the varying conditions that 
characterize field construction work. Many a contractor has given 
up in disgust his attempt to install a modern system of cost keep- 
ing and has charged his failure to the folly of "new-fangled no- 
tions." Such failures are usually the outcome of trying to teach old 
dogs new tricks without so much as hiring a competent teacher. 
Eventually, it will be recognized that management engineering is a 
science not to be picked up and mastered at one reading of any 
article or book, but that it requires study extending over a con- 
eiderable period of time. 

Cost Keeping. — The following pages on cost keeping' have been 
taken from "Cost Keeping and Management Engineering," by 
Gillette and Dana. In this brief summary here given it is obviously 
Impossible to give more than general principles. For further eluci- 
dation of the subject by specific examples, the reader is referred to 
the book from which this abstract has been made. 

The two primary objects of cost keeping are : 

1. To enable a manager to analyze unit costs with a view to 
S2curing the minimum cost possible of attainment under existing 
conditions. 

2. To provide data upon which to base estimates of the probable 
cost of projected work. 

As a result of the analysis of unit costs, followed by a com- 
parison of the items with corresponding cost items of similar work 
previously done, a manager may discover : 

1. Excessive use of materials in erecting a given structure. 

2. Excessive use of supplies (coal, etc.) in operating a plant, 
whether due to ignorance, carelessness or theft. 

3. Inefficiency of workmen. 

4. Inefficiency of foremen. 

5. Padded payrolls. 

6. Excessive loss of time due to: (a) plant breakdowns, (b) 
plant shifting, (c) waiting for materials or supplies, etc. 

7. Improper design of plant. 

Cost keeping also leads to the introduction of piece-rate or bonus 
systems of payment, whicli may, in fact, be said to be one of the 
ultimate objects of cost keeping. 

Cost keeping secures many incidental advantages, like the fol- 
lowing : 

1. Fewer "bosses" are required on certain classes of work, for 
the report card is a more persuasive stimulus than the eye of a 
taskmaster. 

2. One skilled manager can direct many more men, and with 
much greater effectiveness than is possible where a cost keeping 
system does not exist. 

3. Systematic analysis of costs leads inevitably to a study of 
reasons for differences in costs, and this study of reasons is the first 
step toward inventing new machines and new methods for reducing 
costs. 



88 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost Keeping Defined. — For the purpose of the discussions In 
this book, a distinction must be drawn between bookkeeping and 
cost keeping. 

Bookkeeping, as we treat it, is the process of recording com- 
mercial transactions for the purpose of showing debits and credits 
between different "accounts." These "accounts" may be individuals 
or firms, or they may be arbitrary accounts, the latter being an evo- 
lution in bookkeeping that came after individual accounts became so 
large or so complicated as to be insufficient to show the status of 
the business and the profits derived from any given transaction. 

Cost keeping, as we treat it, is the process of recording the num- 
ber of units of work and the number of units of materials entering 
Into the production of any given structure, or into the perform- 
ance of any given operation. To these units of work or materials, 
actual or arbitrary wages or prices may or may not be assigned. 
The object of cost keeping is primarily to show the efficiency of per- 
formance ; hence actual money disbursements need not be recorded, 
as in bookkeeping. This distinction is vital, and will be discussed at 
greater length. 

Differences Between Cost Keeping and Bookkeeping. — Bookkeep- 
ing was first devised and subsequently developed by merchants. 
Cost keeping was devised and developed by engineers. The mer- 
chant is a student of profits ; the engineer is a student of costs. 
Although profits depend upon costs, there is a vast difference in the 
point of view of the merchant and the engineer. 

In the study of costs, as we have previously pointed out, the aim 
of the engineer is to reduce all costs to a unit basis, selecting such 
units as most closely conform to the theoretical unit of work — the 
foot-pound. This study often necessitates the use of several differ- 
ent units for the same class of work. It necessitates the recording 
of conditions, and the making of measurements — all of which is 
more or less foreign to the fundamental idea of bookkeeping. Yet, 
in groping toward methods of cost keeping, it has become the prac- 
tice of most contractors, manufacturers, railway companies, etc., 
to endeavor to develop a cost keeping system In the bookkeeping 
department. Hence we have to-day systems of bookkeeping that are 
wonderfully complex, and, withal, show very little that they attempt 
to show as to unit costs. 

Take, for example, the accounting department of an American 
railway. Here we find skilled accountants loaded up with a mass 
of work called for in distributing the costs to different accounts. 
Calculating machines that carry the cost of railway spikes out to 
the third decimal place are clicking away from morning to night. A 
prodigious amount of figuring is done so that scores of distribu- 
tions may be made, without the error of a cent in the balancing 
of accounts. Yet, with it all, what do these railway accounts show 
as to unit costs? Next to nothing worthy of the name of cost 
keeping. The authors have in their possession a mass of railway 
accounting records ; some of it of great value, but most of it 
valuable only to show bookkeeping gone mad. The accounting de- 
partment of the average railyfay has no true record of unit costs. 



COST KEEPING. 89 

The average railway engineering department is even worse off, as 
shown by the ridiculous estimates often submitted. After a struc- 
ture is built, the auditor of the railway takes the superintendent 
of construction to account for having exceeded the engineer's esti- 
mate. The engineer is put on the rack and calls the superintend- 
ent inefficient — which is usually true. The superintendent retorts, 
in his letter to the accounting department, that the engineer does not 
know how to estimate correctly — which, also, is usually true. Figures, 
figures, figures, but not a single unit cost ! This is typical of rail- 
way accounting costs to-day. We emphasize it because it is also 
typical of the accounting departments of many contracting firms. 
..A.nd we emphasize it again because it illustrates so well our con- 
tention that bookkeeping and cost keeping must be divorced if there 
is to be a simple, effective system of ascertaining the efficiency of 
workmen, and permit of such study of their performance as will 
result in greater efficiency. 

We shall now give in concise form some of the various reasons 
why cost keeping records should be kept entirely distinct from 
bookkeeping records. 

1. Since the primary object of hookheeping is to show debits and 
credits, all accounts must be summarized in one book — the ledger. 
Since the primary object of cost Tceephig is to reduce costs, no 
book corresponding to a ledger is needed. Indeed it is often de- 
sirable to have cost records of different classes of work kept in 
different books, in different ways, by different men, in order to 
localize responsibility as well as to apply different units as stand- 
ards of comparison. 

2. Cost keeping should partake of the nature of daily reports 
by which a superintendent can gage the daily performance, and 
discover inefficiency at once. Bookkeeping §.ccounts may not be, and 
usually are not, posted promptly or completely until some time sub- 
sequent to any performance. 

3. Bookkeeping records must balance to a penny. Cost keeping 
records need not be kent with mathematical precision, except in 
so far as bonus payments to workmen are involved. The object of 
cost keeping is to show efficiency, and this may usually be shown 
by approximations fully as well as by hair splitting exactness. 
Hence cost keeping records may be devised that will require far 
less clerical work than is necessary when mathematically accurate 
boolikeeping is used. 

4. Bookkeeping is a clerical function ; cost keeping is an engi- 
neering function. It is a rule of successful management not to ask 
one man to exercise many functions, particularly when they are 
diverse in nature. An engineer is not interested in recording 
debits and credits, or in the rendering of bills— functions of the 
bookkeeper. On the contrary, a bookkeeper knows nothing about 
construction methods and not only has little interest in 
construction costs, but lacks the necessary engineering training to 
Interpret cost records and to devise methods of reducing costs. 

5. A contractor who has an effective and simple system of 
bookkeeping naturally objects to a change to a more complex sys- 



, 90 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

tem, such as is necessary when cost keeping is added to the book- 
keeper's duties. 

6. When cost keeping is begun, it is well to start in a small 
way, taking some particular kind of work, like teaming, and apply- 
ing a system of daily reports. When this phase of the work has 
been analyzed and organized, some other feature is taken up, and 
so on, thus developing a cost keeping system gradually. Resist- 
ance to change is bound to be encountered, and the way to overcome 
it is in this manner, a little at a time. Bookkeeping cannot be 
changed a little at a time. A new system of bookkeeping means 
an entire revision all at once, for accounts are interdependent. 

7. Cost keeping records should state conditions, such as weather, 
distance of haul, etc., which are essential to interpretation of results. 
Sketches showing design of structures should form part of per- 
manent cost records. Such things are entirely foreign to book- 
keeping, and, if placed upon bookkeeping records, simply serve to 
confuse them. 

8. The bookkeeper enters bills for materials as they are re- 
ceived, crediting the firm that furnishes them. A barrel of spikes 
may be followed by a dozen picks on the bill. It is not the book- 
keeper's function to trace the spikes to their place in the work, 
and, when the work is finished, to ascertain the total number of 
barrels of spikes used in a particular structure. That is the func- 
tion of the cost keeper on the ground. The bookkeeper must show 
Chat John Smith Co. has been credited with the spikes. The cost 
keeper, on the other hand, cares nothing as to the particular firm 
credited. He is concerned only with the quantity of spikes and the 
use to which they have been put. It is hopelessly confusing to try 
to show in one set of records both credits, and unit costs. 

9. In studying cost records to ascertain efficiency. It is often nec- 
essary to have several different units as standards. On reinforced 
concrete work, foi- example, the primary unit is the cubic yard, but 
there should be at least three other units, namely, the pound of 
steel (for comparing costs of handling and placing the steel rein- 
forcement), the thousand feet B. M. (for comparing costs of forms), 
and the square foot of exposed surface (not only for comparing 
costs of form work but costs of surface dressing). Cost records 
must be sufficiently detailed for these purposes, if not in every case, 
at least in some cases of concrete work. Bookkeeping records be- 
come hopeless of Interpretation unless they are uniform, and, to be 
uniform, they must have few units of comparison. In brief, book- 
keeping is not flexible. To generalize further, cost keeping costs 
must be divlaed by units of work done, so as to secure unit costs 
for comparison, which is a process foreign to bookkeeping. 

10. Since cost keeping has as its primary object the reduction 
of costs, since comparison of results secured by different men or 
different machines or different methods are necessary, it follows 
that standard wages and standard prices of materials must be used. 
It may happen that on one job the cement may be purchased at 
different times at prices ranging from $1.20 to $1.50 per barrel, 
and that common laborers may receive from $1.50 to $1.75 a day. 



COST KEEPING. 91 

In comparing unit costs a standard price of cement should be as- 
sumed, as $1.30 per barrel, and a common labor standard wage, as 
51.50 per day Then comparisons become possible. A bookkeeper 
cannot assume any rate of wage or any price ; he must give the 
actual wage or price. A cost keeper usually finds it desirable to 
use standard wages or prices which approximate the average, or 
actually are the average. 

Time Keeping Defined. — Time keeping, in its old fashioned sense, 
is a part of the bookkeeping system, and the timekeeper is charged 
with the task of ascertaining what time each man has worked 
during the day, week or month, according to the arrangement under 
which he is employed, and what amount of money is due him 
on pay-day. The timekeeper was not concerned with how much 
work a man did or on what process his time was spent, so long 
as the general distribution of the work was obtained. Of late years 
the timekeeper's distributions have become much more elaborate 
and now he is often charged with considerable cost keeping re- 
sponsibility. When he does cost keeping work, the records should 
ordinarily be kept on separate blanks from the time keeping. 

If a timekeeper, unaided, attempts to distribute the labor accord- 
ing to the work done, his records become complex and are rarely 
reliable, for, due to his going from place to place, he must rely 
upon what others (like foremen) tell him as to the performance of 
different men. In his attempt to balance the statements made to 
him with the total time, he usually "fudges" his distributed records. 

Daily Cost Reports, By Whom Made. — Daily cost reports may 
be made by: (a) individual workmen, (b) foremen, or (c) time- 
keepers, or by all three of these classes of employes. 

Individual workmen are not always competent to fill out reports 
properly, but, if the report is simple in form and relates to work 
done by "skilled workmen," it is usually possible to get very satis- 
factory results. Certainly the individual report is to be encour- 
aged wherever it can be applied, for it heightens the individual's 
interest in his work. 

On field contract work the foreman is the man usually required 
to make the daily reports. His constant presence on the work 
enables him to make a more accurate report than a timekeeper can 
make, if the timekeeper is required to cover considerable territory, 
as is usually the case. 

In addition to his duty in keeping the time of the men for pur- 
poses of rnying them properly, the timekeeper is often able to attend 
to filling out the daily cost reports, or one or more special time- 
keepers may be appointed for the special purpose of rendering daily 
cost reports. If the tim.ekeeper is not able to be present constantly 
where a gang is at work, it is often wise to prepare certain blanks 
upon which he receives reports from the foreman of the gang, and, 
from this foreman reports and reports of individuals, combined with 
his own observations and measurements, the timekeeper is able to 
fill out the complete report. 

No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to the best persons 



92 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to whom report making is to be entrusted. Tl:ie character of the 
workmen, the size of the job, and other conditions govern the choice. 

Written Card vs. Punch Card Reports. — Daily cost reports are 
best made on forms or blanks, and these forms are preferably cards 
In which the blank spaces are marked either in writing or by punch- 
ing holes with a conductor's punch. The written card possesses the 
following advantages over the punch card : 

1. It is more flexible, because the punch card is limited in the 
scope of the record to what has been foreseen in the office plus 
what can be written in a small space reserved for remarks. The 
pad and pencil are not so limited. 

2. A man can usually go ahead filling out blanks in a written 
card without any previous directions, while he has to have some 
Instruction in the use of the punch. 

3. Erasures are possible with pencil and pad but not with a 
punch card. This is not always an advantage on the side of the 
written card, however. 

The punch card possesses the following advantages over the writ- 
ten card : 

1. By folding the card, or by superimposing one card on an- 
other, a duplicate record is secured without the use of the carbon 
paper necessary to secure duplicates with written cards. This dupli- 
cate record cannot be altered or erased, and one copy may be kept 
by the superintendent for his record in discussing the work with 
the home ofiice, the other being sent in as a regular report to the 
proper department. 

2. A dirty thumb can greatly interfere with the legibility of a 
written record. Moreover the average foreman or time keeper does 
not write a particularly clear hand. Punch card records are abso- 
lutely clear and legible. 

3. It is sometimes expedient to have records from two or more 
men on the same card. By having no two punches alike on the job 
and having each man's punch charged to his name on the records it 
is possible to have a clear and complete record of who made the 
record without wasting time and space for signatures. 

4. The hole made by the punch is usually less than one-eighth of 
an inch in diameter, and consequently a much larger number of 
facts can be recorded upon a small card by the punch than by writ- 
ing, the number of groups of facts, however, being somewhat 
limited. 

5. To punch a hole in a card takes much less time than to make 
the average pencil record, especially where duplicate records are 
made. "Where a time keeper has to keep track of a large number 
of men this is a very valuable feature. 

6. A hole can be accurately punched while riding on a hand-car, 
wagon or locomotive, when the vibration would greatly distort a 
man's handwriting. 

7. Punch cards can be made on blue print paper from a tracing, 
which is an advantage where a mimeograph is not available for 
making white cards to be filled in with pencil. 



COST KEEPING. 93 

Time Cards that Show Changes of Occupation. — In field contract 
work there is usually more or less change of occupation constantly 
occurring. A gang of workmen may be engaged in grading for a 
while and then may be shifted to track laying ; or at least some 
individual in the gang may be thus shifted from one class of work 
to another. Hence it is usually desirable to have daily report cards 
arranged so as to record the exact amount of time spent by each 
individual on each class of work. This may be accomplished in 
either one of two ways : First, by having a separate card for each 
workman ; or, second, by having a gang card on which each work- 
man's name or number appears, and so arranged that his time may 
be placed opposite or under the tabulated class of work that he has 
performed. 

The individual card (a card for each workman) is often pref- 
erable when the bonus system, or its eouivalent, is employed. On 
most contract work, however, the bonus system is not yet in opera- 
tion, and gang cards, filled in by the foreman, will serve the pur- 
pose of showing the total performance of the gang and the times 
spent by the various individuals on different work. There are 
several ways of recording the individual times spent by men work- 
ing in a gang, among which the following are typical. 

Each employee is given a number, and the numbers are arranged 
In a horizontal line across the top of a time sheet, as shown in Fig. 
4. The different classes of work are printed in a column at the 
left, one line being assigned to each subclass. If team No 1 works 
from 7 to 9 a. m. plowing, the record is made by the foreman, who 
writes 7-9 opposite "Plowing" and under No. 1 ; since this is 2 hours' 
work, the figure 2 is subsequently written directly below the 7-9. 
If team No. 1 is then transferred to work connected with rolling 
subgrade, and is thus engaged from 9 to 11 a. m., this fact is indi- 
cated, as shown, by writing 9-11 under No. 1 and opposite "Rolling 
Subgrade." 

Another method involves the use of "key letters" to indicate each 
■class of work, the proper key letter being placed opposite the em- 
ployee's name and under the nearest half hour when he began doing 
the class of work represented by the key letter. Fig. 5 shows that 
employee No. 1, whose name is Smith, began work at 7 a. m., the 
key letter A being under 7, and that he was engaged in excavation, 
since A is the "key" for excavation. He continued on excavation 
until 10:30 a. m., when he began backfilling, as shown by the key 
letter C entered under 10 and in the lower square. The upper 
squares indicate the even hour, and the lower squares indicate the 
half hour. At 3 p. m. he was transferred to concrete work, as shown 
by the key letter F under 3, where it will be seen that the number 
of hours worked by each man on each class of work is recorded 
under a column headed with a combination of key letters that indi- 
cate the class of work. 

Wherever men are being frequently shifted from one class of 
work to another, some method of recording the time of shifting, at 
least to the nearest half hour, should be used, as outlined in the 
different ways above given. If a foreman does not make an imme- 



94 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



diate record of such shifting, but relies upon his memory to fill 
in his report blanks at night, he is almost certain to make serious 



Rl,,ft 


Date 190 


No. OF EMPLOYEE 


1 


2 


3 , 


OEADINO 


Plowing 


1-9 

e 








EzcBvatlDg 










Boiling Sabgrade 


,,j 






OONCBBTE 
BASE 


Hauling & Loading Concrete Gravel 


IHii 
1 








Hanllng & Loading Concrete Stone 










Hauling ft Loading Ooncreto Sand 










Laying Concrete 










Hading A: Unloading Cement 








BEICK 


Hauling & Unloading 


5 








Laying Brlcfc 




/-if 
1 






Malting CuBhion 




r 






Hanllng & Loading CusMon Sand 










OulUnfi Brlcfc 




'-^ 






Boiling BrlclE 






1 

I 


FIU-SB 


Putting In Filler 










Hauling ft Loading Filler Sand 










Putting In Expanalon Joints 








BEWEBAGE 


Putting In Sewerfl ft Inlota 










Putting in Oatcb Basins 










Putting in ManboleB 








BAND 


Screening Sand 








OUBBtHa 


Hanllng ft Loading Oravel or Stone 










Hauling ft Loading Sand 










Hauling and Unloading Cement 








STTNTSIES 


Hauling ft leading filling Oravel 
or Sand 






/ 




Cleaning up 










General 








UACASAK 


Boiling Stone 










Spreading Stone 










Total Hours 


10 


IQ 






Bate Per Hour 


35 


20 




All remarks 


must appear on the otlier side 



/ 




Cllu 1 




1 


27 

s 


2S 


29 


30 


31 


32 


33 


Total 
Hoo,. 


1 














































































































• 




































































































































































































































































































































































































- 


orem^ 







Fig. 4. Time Sheet. 



mistakes. Moreover, it is not unusual for a foreman to "fudge" the 
reports thus made, and even to falsify them grossly, for the pur- 
pose of showing a seemingly high efficiency of the men on certain 











COST 




KEEPING 










c 
.S 

1 

u 

.s 

z ■ 
2 '■ 
a • 

CD 

s • 
5 : 

Q \ 

u 
t] 
■Ji 


-S( 






1 


( 1 1 1 1 


•4 






1 


■ 








M 






1 


1 








►-,•000 asnOH 






• 1 


; 








t ooo a 






i 


) 








a sms^a 3 






1 


\ 








O -Xeq adijj 




1 


\ 








Pi, ajajouoo 




1 


■ 








a siajuao 




1 










Q snidmg 




1 


\ 








a II!J 13^3 




< 








CO 3UI193HS 




1 










<aoijBABoxa 




1 


\ 1 








'""2 2 


2 

3 
O 

a: 
S 

s 

a 
Q 














1 


< 




2 

3 
O 

a 


1 
Q 

I 


1 

i 

c 














)_ 


— 


























1 


j^ 


T 














1 


£3 

a-: 


o 

o 

E 
.5 


(K 












{ 




- 














) 
















) 




2 

= 














( 




^5 J 














) 




2. 


« 1 






\ 
















00 










\- 


-j- 


< 








c 

K 

a 
c 

Q 


> 

E 

•> 

■ > 
: £ 


?l 


o 




-smon ,.ao J ni V)3^3 tsnni 
IIOH X'sa pire noijnqiJieia 




•» 




















1 


















1 


5l 

o o 










\ 






1 

Q 












\ 
















■■ 


', 


















































: 


















' 


















\ 






T 

g 






•2 
1 


1 






i 




n 
■3 


e 




i 




-^ 








i 









95 



96 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

classes of work ; but, if a blank must be filled in during the prog- 
ress of the work, and not at night, a foreman risks discovery of 
any attempted deceit, since his record card may be examined at an 
unexpected time of the day. 

Gang Report Cards.— These are usually made by the foreman in 
charge of the gang. If the gang is always engaged on the same 
class of work, it is not necessary for the foreman to keep a time 
record of each man's occupation, in the manner just described; for 
the foreman can fill in the daily report card from memory. In 
this case the timekeeper records each workman's name and 
hours of work, while the foreman concerns himself only with report- 
ing the total number of men engaged on each class of work and 
their day's performance. 

A gang report card should usually show most of the following 
things : 

1. Number of contract. 

2. Location of the job. 

3. Character of the job. 

4. Date of the report. 

5. Kind of weather. 

6. Name of the foreman. 

7. Classification of work, or "key letters." 

8. Total hours labor under each class. 

9. Rates per hour. 

10. Total pay. 

11. Number of units of each class of work done. 

12. Units of material and supplies used. 

13. Units of materials received. 

14. Units of material in stock. 

15. Delays, time and cause. 

16. Time machines are actually working. 

17. Kind of machine or tool used and its condition. 

18. Remarks. 

Obviously there are many classes of work that do not require a 
daily statement containing all these 17 facts; but in preparing a 
daily report card it is desirable to have this list at hand, to make 
sure that no omissions occur. 

The space reserved for "Remarks" is usually so small that it is 
rarely used. Special conditions that would naturally be recorded 
under "Remarks" had better be recorded in a loose leaf diary kept 
by the foreman, of which more will be said later. 

In designing a gang report card, the most difficult feature is the 
classification. This, however, is greatly simplified if done accord- 
ing to the following system : 

1. Select for the general class heads the items upon which the 
unit contract prices are based, such as excavation (cu. yds.), ma- 
cadam (sq. yds.), curb (lin. ft.). 

2. Divide each of these pay items into the operations involved. 
Thus excavation involves (a) loosening, (b) loading, (c) trans- 
porting, and (d) dumping. 

3. Divide each operation into as many subheadings as there are 



I 



COST KEEPING. 97 

classes of workmen engaged upon it. Thus, the operation of loosen- 
ing earth may involve (a) teams plowing, and (b) men holding 
plow. 

Summing up we would have the following subclasses under the 
class Excavation : 

Excavation — 

Loosening : Men holding plow. 

Teams plowing. 
Loading : Men slioveling. 
Transporting : Teams. 
Dumping : Men. 

The next thing to consider is whether the men are of the same 
class, receiving the same rates of wages ; for, if they are not, there 
must be a further subdivision. For example, on cement curb con- 
struction, the classification would be as follows: 
Curb — 

Trenching : Laborers. 

Placing cinders : Laborers. 

Mixing and placing: Laborers. 

Setting forms : Skilled laborers. 

Finishing: Skilled finishers. 
Helpers. 
There are many kinds of pay items, such as macadam, that often 
involve processes that are performed at widely separated places. 
Thus, quarrying and crushing are processes far removed from 
spreading, rolling and sprinkling the macadam. Whenever this is 
the case, it is usually unwise to attempt to show all the processes 
on one report card. A good general rule to follow is to group to- 
gether on the same report card only those processes that come 
directly and constantly under the eye of one foreman. Therefore 
one report card should show the quarrying and crushing, another 
should show the grading of the road ; and possibly the spreading, 
rolling and sprinkling of the macadam should also be placed upon 
the same card with the grading, but not unless the grading gang 
Is to be always a very short distance in advance of the ma- 
cadamizing. 

The commonest mistake in designing report blanks is to endeavor 
to reduce the number of the blanks. It is far better to have more 
blanks and to distribute the work of reporting, for it not only sim- 
plifies the blanks, but, by giving each foreman less to report, greater 
accuracy is secured. In fact, there are many operations that can 
best be reported by the workmen tliemselves. Thus, to continue the 
illustration of the macadam road work, each of the teamsters haul- 
ing broken stone should carry an individual report card which is 
punched or marked by workmen at each end of the trip. 

We have said that the pay items should be analyzed according 
to the operation involved, but care must be taken not to select 
operations upon which men are engaged for but a few moments con- 
tinuously. To illustrate: In mixing concrete by hand, there are 
usually the following operations: (a) loading wheelbarrows, (b) 



98 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

wheeling, (c) mixing, (d) loading, (e) transporting, (f) spreading 
and ramming. Some gangs are so organized tliat a few men are 
kept constantly busy loading wheelbarrows with sand and stone, 
while the rest of the gang spends a few minutes wheeling, a few 
more mixing, and so on. Clearly it would be foolish to subdivide 
the operations on the report cards where the organization is of this 
character, for most of the men are changing their operations so 
frequently that a foreman would have time left for doing nothing 
but to record their clianges. 

"We see that the designer of a report blank should know ap- 
proximately what the organization of the gang and what the 
methods of operation are to be, before he can design a report blank 
that will be concise, and complete, but with no superfluous headings. 
Since there are almost innumerable methods of doing woi-k, it is 
obviously impossible to furnish a set of printed report cards that 
will exactly serve all cases, unless the classification headings used 
are very general. However, the designing of a report card is a 
comparatively simple matter once the organization and methods of 
doing the work are known, provided the foregoing system is used. 

A tentative report blank can be designed either by using some 
existing report card for similar work as a guide, or by referring 
to some book that gives, in detail, the costs of construction work 
similar to that for which tlie report blank is intended. From 
the items of cost given in published records, a classification can be 
prepared that will be of decided help in planning the report card. 

In order to economize space on a report blank, it is not always 
necessary to print the classes or subclasses in full. Abbreviations 
and key letters may be used. Sometimes the mere recording of 
the rate of wages opposite a class will show the subclass. Thus, 
under the class of "Forms" (building wooden forms for concrete) 
if a wage of 20 cts. per hour appears, also a wage of 35 cts. per 
hour, it will be understood that the latter refers to the carpenter, 
while the former refers to the carpenter's helper. 

Having decided upon the classification of operations and em- 
ployes, the next thing to determine is the character of- the perform- 
ance report wliich is usually to be recorded on the same card. 

We have discussed the difficulties of reporting daily performance, 
and have indicated ways of overcoming tlie difficulties. It is evi- 
dent that a foreman or timekeeper should not be expected to report 
the number of units of each class of work performed if any con- 
siderable amount of difficult measurement is involved. Hence, it is 
usually futile to provide for a daily report of the number of cubic 
yards of earth excavated. On the other hand, the number of 
wagon loads, or car loads, may usually be reported, and the blank 
used for excavation should usually provide for such a report. 

If some of the excavated material is shoveled directly into the 
embankment or hauled by scrapers, while some is hauled by 
wagons, it will be futile to provide for a daily report of loads 
hauled. In such cases, it is often advisable to report merely the 
number of lineal feet of work done daily. Thus, in road work, 
where the excavation Is shallow and mostly from ditches, the 



COST KEEPING. O'J 

report should show the station and plus up to which the grading 
is completed at the end of the day. It is then the function of the 
office force to determine tlie yardage from tlie office records. 

The amount of concrete and cement work of all kinds can 
be reported with considerable accuracy by stating the number of 
bags of cement used during the day. 

The amount of supplies, like coal, used each day, can usually 
be reported if some system is devised for recording consumption 
or for readily inventorying the stock on hand each night. It Is 
generally wise to require coal to be measured in boxes or in 
wheelbarrows of uniform size, uniformly filled. Then each fire- 
man reports the number of cubic feet (or boxes) of coal used 
during the day. 

Empty dynamite boxes are often convenient for purposes of 
measurement, as they hold exactly % cu. ft. each. 

Individual Record Cards. — Wherever individual workmen are 
paid by the bonus or price rate systems, it is usually best to pro- 
vide a separate record card for each workman, for it is difficult 
to make a compact record on one card that will show not only the 
occupations of a number of men, but the performance of each 
man. Tliis is particularly true where the men are repeatedly 
sliifted from one class of work to another. 

Where one man operates a machine, like a rock drill, it is 
usually wise to provide him with his own individual record card, 
upon which he is required to record his day's performance. A 
modification of this plan is to let the foreman carry the individual 
records of all the men, and fill in each card himself. 

The engineman on a dinky locomotive should be required to 
make and fill in a daily report, showing the number of train 
loads hauled, time lost, etc. 

A teamster should usually be required to carry a card whereon 
are recorded the times of arrival or departure at each end of each 
trip. 

A steam roller engineman should be required to fill in a card 
report showing number of lineal feet of road rolled, and the num- 
ber of miles traveled by the roller. The latter should be recorded 
by an odometer. 

Kind of Punches to Use. — If punch card reports are to be used, 
an ordinary conductor's punch will serve for small cards; but it is 
generally desirable to have large cards, which necessitates the use 
of a special punch having a 2-in. reach. Such special punches 
are made by L. A. Sayre & Co., of Newark, N. J., and by other 
railroad supply concerns. 

Size and Kind of Daily Report Cards. — It is usually desirable to 
have report cards of a size that will be suitable for filing in the 
standard card index files. A size that will be found satisfactory 
for general use is 5x7% ins. 

If reports are to be written and made out in duplicate, the 
report cards should be made up in pads of alternate thin and thick 
cards, so that a carbon paper may be inserted between a thin card 
and a thick one. 



100 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



It is generally wise to have the cards tinted one color for the 
original and another color for the duplicate. It is also a good 
plan to designate the kind of report card by a key letter, or com- 
bination of letters, which may be stamped in red in one corner 
of the card. Thus the letter T may be used to designate the daily 
report card of teamsters. Instead of using mnemonic key letters, 
Bome contractors prefer to use different tints for different classes 
of report cards. 

This works well when there are only a few classes, but becomes 
confusing when there are many, and is worthless as a means of 
distinguishing cards at a glance when there are very many 
classes. 

Where a great deal of information must be crowded on one card,, 
it is often desirable to rorovide for writing the report on both 



Team Day 


6 





5 


10 


15 


20 


E5 


•50 


35 


40 


45 


50 


55 


7 




♦ 






















8 










+ 
















9 


























10 


























II 


























12 


























1 


























2 


























3 


























4 


























5 


























6 


























\ p.nn+ln o"F Haul 




1 








— 'O 
















-J 



Fig. 6. Punch Card For Teams. 



faces of the card. This is objectionable, however, because it makes 
It impracticable to produce a duplicate by the use of carbon paper. 
It is also inconvenient to examine such a card after It is placed 
In a filing case. 

Foreman's Diary. — The foreman or the superintendent should 
usually be required to keep a daily diary in which should be 
entered : 

1. Verbal orders received from engineers and owners. 

2. Verbal requests made to the engineers for grade stakes, etc. 

3. Weather conditions. 

4. Remarks as to hardness of digging, poor quality of materials 
and supplies, slowness of their delivery, general inefficiency of the 
men available, and such other conditions as bear upon the eco- 



COST KEEPING. 101 

nomic performance of the work but can not be shown in the dally 
report. 

The ordinary field foreman will not keep a diary of much value 
unless its pages are inspected daily. This requires that it shall be a 
duplicate loose leaf diary, the original leaf being sent to the office 
with the daily cost report, and ihe duplicate, or carbon copy, being 
retained by the foreman and bound in a loose leaf binder. 

Designing Punch Card Reports. — We have already enumerated 
the advantages of the punch card for certain kinds of daily reports. 
One of the earliest punch cards devised for this purpose is shown In 
Fig. 6, and was designed by one of the authors for recording the 
daily work done by each team in hauling broken stone for ma- 
cadam. Each teamster carries a card which he presents for punch- 
ing at each end of the trip. The diamond punch hole indicates 
that the loaded team left the crusher bin at 7 :05 a. m. The cross 
punci: holes shows that it dumped its load on the road at 8:20 a. m. 
A new card is issued to each teamster each day ; but, if it is de- 
sired to provide one card that will serve for a full week, one is 
easily designed. 

A more elaborate form of individual punch card is shown in 
Fig. 7, and is designed to show the daily performance of each rock 
drill in great detail and in duplicate. Note that the upper half of 
the card is to be folded back on the lower half, so that the hole* 
are punched in duplicate. 

The punch holes in tnis particular card show : 

1. That the holes were spaced 4 ft. one way and 5 ft. the other. 

2. That + bits were used. 

3. That the drill was in good condition. 

4. That the drill was No. 2. 

5. That a 3-in. starting bit was used. 

6. Tiiat 54 ft. of hole were drilled. 

7. That there were 4 holes, Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, whose depths 
were 15, 14, 13 and 12 ft, respectively. 

(Note: A hole, No. 0, is provided, in case a partly drilled hole 
of the previous day has to be completed, for, in that event, the num- 
ber of feet drilled to complete the hole is punched above hole 
No. 0.) 

8. That the date was July 16. 

9. That work beean at 7 :02 a. m., and hole No. 1 was com- 
pleted at 9 :44 ; that work was stopped at 12 m. and begun again at 
1 p. m. ; that hole No. 2 was finished at 1 :18 p. m., hole No. 3 at 
2:36, hole No. 4 at 4 :52. 

It is not usually necessary to record rock drill operations to the 
nearest even minute, as the nearest 5 minutes will ordinarily suffice ; 
but It Is sometimes desirable to have the drillers record the time 
of starting one hole and of starting the next hole. In that case 
this card, which provides for a time record on 2-min. intervals, is 
more satisfactory than one designed for 5-min. intervals. Drillers 
are often very slow in shifting drills from one hole to the next, 
which is well shown up if the time of finishing one hole and of 
starting the next is punched. Punching two holes In the card In one 



102 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



square (punching double), can be used to indicate time of starting 
a hole, while punching one hole indicates its time of completion. 

Note that in designing punch cards, space can be economized by 
the arrangement shown in the upper left hand corner of Fig. 7 



fzh2UB\S2\bzM^\M 


OZ i^ 9 9 


01 


?/ 


iH 


91 9tOZ3Zf^^^7^ 


?£|*Ct9C|8c| 


^#|Z^/j7^lfl^ 


S? 


«i«^f1gfl^ 


f,l 


Z IZZZ^VZ £ 


o 2> 9 e 


01 


Zi 


a 


9/ « 02 22 « 9^ S2 3£ ZelK 9r X »# 2# Wp^ ?fr ?S Ji' fcTgf ST 


c 


£lir 


lflfli./9l Z 


o 2 * 9 ff 


01 


zt 


hi 


9/ 9/ 02 2Z iS2 92 72 DC 2£k « 8£ Oi^ 3* #^ ?* ff* af JP fef ?f 2f 


2 


I. £ 


\ G 01 II ^1 1 


?Z i- 3 e 


01 


Zl 


>/ 


91 m 0ZZZi^'}Z?ZO£Z£\l'C:'XQ£(^Zi'-^9i-9i'0S ^S yS'iS If 


/ 


/ -c 


' r :^ J^ 9 ?/ 


22*90 


01 


Zl 


w 


9l9l02ZZi^9Z3Z0£ 


?cHC|9CfeC|(/*|2#t!^ 


s^ffiHQ^Ms^ 


3/ 


/% 


' //(^^ 2^5? // 


z-t^ ^ e 


01 


21 


*■/ 


9191 0Z7Zt'Z^Z9ZO£^£i^%9CcH'Z*HJ9i!'9i- 


«M«W^ 


// 


/W?, 


<■ i}/>V IdJS^ 01 


C 2 * 9 9 


01 


21 


*■/ 


'^l9lOZZZK'}2eZ0i:2iiS%3£:9i'Z*i'i''»9toS?St^9iif 


01 


Ur/t 


'' /fjv ^/;/ 6 


£7-2^9 9 


01 


Zl 


w 


'Jl 9IOZ72n'^2SZX3£t£%9i<H^-i-M'HPi'7S?Pi^^SSf 


G 


/Vt/l 


''K/y yt^n^ g 


2-t^3_9 


01 


zt 


■w 


eiBi 02 zzirZjsgioS.zQ K%g£ 


ommw* 


S^A«1«1K1ffl 


^^ycr\L\ 


o'^-i'S 9 


01 


Zl 


■M 


91 91 02 22 mz ■320^2iK%9t. (H^Ai^i^A<X\2i^^ 


^ 


3>/o// y 


s-yv 


.r>2 BO-Z sjooi/dna 

owDjy iiiya 

TO^AyjS'NOIIOniJlSNOD 


3cui^ ifoun/ oui 'ii-io/u Si///^l/i6j^ 


f 


_Wf±s^3.^ 


S e 01 OD 


01 * 


mm m 0101 


01 01 01 N 


b 




1 A^J"j3 


/l»ICll!-LPl9klff|6|o/ 


.c # 


>S^P ^ S' ^ s 


i^ PP i 


• 




ii.'-'a J" °^ 


£• £ 


• PC e Pi? 


£> c e 5 


z 


- 1 -•■ 1 


-x ^ ^ 


■Z 2 


■z nm z zz 


zz z 1 


1 


-f.i0 j:° Pi-i 


!M II MO y° UOJ./ipUOQ 


/ / 


9*1111 


III ^ 


3 
"7 


.^99JI/l^-3/o//Jol 


TUiJodS' g 
























(493J) ^/Of/:^° 


i^-l'faa 


^ 


-T 




s. 
























O 1 


z e-»F 9 ^ 


3 &\o fjiun 


Z 




z 
























1 z 


ci^^9^g 


6 ooi ^uzL 


-t' 


m 


:7 


























au lO J39J 1X210/ 


z 




9 


























k-i ■> 


FZ^T 3T 


y- 1 s>S 


e 


i 


I*- 


i! 


s 


A 


a. 


Ji 


z 


jj 


9 


T^ft,! feat- of Ho/es J}ri//cd 


3 i ' 


?- r ^x e T 


^i.^lk 


P 


Y 


Hf 


7" 


P° 


T 


FT 


7 


p? 


Vf 


rai 


i 




6 
























1 I 


.3^*676 


r 3 too Tens 


4 


• 


2" 
























o / 


Z 3 * S 6 7 


' 8 ^\o Units 


i 




7 
























J]epfM of Hole, (r 


««/> 




V 


S 




3L 
























1 1 


* / / / 1 


1 / 1 \ 


X 


y^pacing of Holers 1/ 


7 feet Q 
























2 c 


' 2 ■ • 2 2 2 


'22 2^ 


1 


f^ind of Bi' 


t Condition of X)ri// 


a : 


5 #3 33 3 3 


333 ^ 


2 


- \ ^ \ 


X * /^ a 


Si 


f 5 J>5 5-5 J 


> 10 10 10 ^ 


• 




/V-fi of Dfi/I 


10 n 


t m m m 10 loic 




\lVCut£ 


/\»\3\4-\S\6\7i0\3\IO 


1 


» » S* J"6 7 


* 5 '°COh 


w/fucrmj'f/mfco. ^ 

DffILL RfCORD ' 

7/na/ 2-ta Z<S^<J'/\ -^ 


''unc/t J}ou£/e H^cn sUtr/i'n^ 
(fuM'iy M/-<»v4r, inc^ /unch fi'me. 
'^anch ■*Si/y/e for time of 
far Any '¥ f/hi^iny /)o/e. 


/V^ of /io/t 


Oni 


J^ 


A7-£- 7 


\^ 65 


10 


IZ 


l^ 


iGiai 


Y22a4aS2£30 


3Z34X3t 


■« 


■fZ 


<^ 


fi 


)<<S 


^ 


Sc. 


^ 


J6 


£ 


7 


Jy^A 


< 7^B z^/? 8 


2^ 6 fl 


10 


IZ 


li- 


1i,l82 


VZZZ4ZiZd30 


32>i3^3fl 


4C 


fZ 


## 


ti 


IB 


J2 


iZ 


^ 


SI 




a 


^p/ 


?. /t^y ju//^ 9 


2466 


10 


IZ 


lt 


i(>iai 


022 2-» 26 24 30 


32WJ63fl 


-w 


ft 


«r 


% 


« 


.« 


sz 


^ 


JE 


3E 


9 


i/<« 


Y Aua Sspr. lo 


2 4- 6 S 


10 


IZ 


It 


I(,I81 


22242624 3(3 


32J^a63f 


f^ 


« 


#? 


fi 


f-s 


SC 


J2 


St 


ie 


« 


A? 


Oc 


r Nov: B^r:. U 


Z4 (> 6 


10 


IZ 


't 


iGiei 


022 24 26 24 3fl 


32 34 36 3a 


w 


« 


#f 


u> 


«■ 


SD 


S2 


^ 


36 


« 


// 


1 


Z 3 4 S 6 12 


§2-? 6 e 


10 


IZ 


M 


iGisi 


0Z2Z4Z62BX 


3234363fi 


^ 


« 


« 


«, 


fW 


50 


SZ 


^ 


^ 


SB 


12 


7 < 


5 ^ 10 II IZ 1 


%2^6 e 


10 


IZ 


'i 


IGlSi 


0ZZZ4Z(,Zt3C 


323<36]3fi 


p 


<fZ 


(»S« 


K> 


fW 


SC 


32 


-^ 


S6 


Sb 


1 


131 


^1.5 K, 17 IB Z 


2^68 


10 


IZ 


'f 


l(>lS.'c 


S.Z2Z'^^Z8X 


32 3^36 34 


fO 


« 


«¥ 


¥< 


(W 


SO 


Si 


» 


J6 


« 


Z 


13c 


'J2ZI2£.Z5e4^3 


2^^ 8 


10 


IZ 


H 


I6ISZ 


022242624 w; 


32 31 36 3£ 


tc 


« 


ft 


«(£ 


1f> 


fO 


SI 


St 


.£ 


« 


3 


25|aJ|27l?6|2^»lJ/l4 


OZ-^68 


10 


IZ 


14 


I^ISi 


>02ZZ^l(,ZtX 


32 »i 36 34 


fo 


« 


2 


»<^ 


IS. 


SC 


« 


s 


36 


» 


4- 



Fig. 7. Duplicate Punch Card. 

where the upper line indicates "tens" and the lower line Indicates 
"units." 

On some classes of work, particularly shop work, it Is often de- 



COST KEEPING. 



103 



slrable to have a separate punch card for each class of work, 
Instead of recording several classes of work on the same card. 
Fig. 8 illustrates such a card that has been used by the National 
Switch & Signal Co. and was described by Mr. Chas. Hansel and 
published in the "Complete Cost Keeper," 1903. Bach workman 
perforates the 5-min. time card for each job on which he Is em- 
ployed, simply piercing the card at the 5-min. points most nearly 
representing his times of beginning and ending work on the job in 
hand, the appropriate order number being entered on the card by the 
foreman. When the workman enters the shop in the morning, he 
ia furnished with one time card, which he hangs on the upper hook 
of his Individual time board, after perforating it at his beginning 
time. If the foreman gives the workman a second job before the 
first Is completed, he fills in the order number on a second card. 



TIME CARD 


Workman's No 


Date 


Date Commenced 

Order No 


H 


Min. 


7 

8 

9 

10 


5 
5 
5 
5 


10 
10 
10 
10 


15 
15 
15 
15 


20 
20 
20 
20 


25 
25 
25 
25 


30 
30 
30 
30 


35 
35 
35 
35 


40 
40 
40 
40 


45 
45 
45 
45 


50 
50 
50 
50 


55 
55 
55 
55 


Catalog No 


11 
12 


5 
5 


10 
10 


L5 
15 


20 
20 


25 
25 


30 
30 


35 
35 


40 
40 


45 

45 


50 
50 


55 

55 


Number Pieces 


1 

2 


5 
5 


10 
10 


15 
15 


20 
20 


25 
25 


30 
30 


35 
35 


40 
40 


45 
45 


50 
50 


55 
55 


Operation No 


3 

4 


5 
5 


10 
10 


15 
15 


20 
20 


25 
25 


30 
30 


35 
35 


40 
40 


45 

45 


50 
50 


55 

55 


Date Finished 


5 
6 


5 
5 


10 
10 


15 
15 


20 
20 


25 
25 


30 
30 


35 
35 


40 
40 


45 
45 


50 
50 


55 
55 


Approved 






Foreman 



Fig. 8. Punch Card. 

and hangs this second card on the upper hook. Thus the workman 
may have any number of jobs before him, each order being given 
on a separate card. When any job is completed its card is trans- 
ferred to the lower hook. The time cards on the lower hook are re- 
moved by the timekeeper each morning, cards on the upper hook 
being left undisturbed. 

Record Cards Accompanying Each Piece of Work. — In doing ma- 
chine shop work, it is often necessary to have one piece of metal 
pass through the hands of several workers. For example, one 
man may drill holes of a certain size, another may drill holes 
of another size, still another may thread the holes, and so on. In 



104 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Buch a case a record card may be attached to, or accompany each 
piece or lot of pieces. In blanks provided on the card, each worker 
enters his number and the amount of time spent in doing a specified 
kind and amount of work on the piece. 

Using Several Record Cards, One For Each Piece of Work A 

method that is usually preferable to the one just described for shop 
work, is to give each workman several record cards. As each new 
piece of work comes to him, he enters its "order number" on a 
record card, and records the time he spends on the piece. When 
finished, he uses another record card for the next piece. 

Store Keeper's Reports.— The store keeper's duties include the 
following : 

1. He must receipt for and take charge of all material delivered 
for temporary storage. 

2. He must see that all of this material is properly accounted 
for and none lost or stolen. 

3. He must take charge of the Issuing of materials and sup- 
plies to the men and see that they are issued in proper quantity 
and that there is no waste. 

4. He should see that needed material and supplies are Issued 
without loss of time. 

To accomplish these objects it is necessary that some one be 
on hand at the store house at all times when material Is likely to be 
delivered or called for. This includes the noon hour as well as 
other times. Considerable economy results from sending to the 
store house in the noon hour to obtain articles that are needed in 
the afternoon. 

The second duty of the storekeeper is often interfered with by 
men going to the store house for articles needed in a hurry and not 
leaving receipts for them. Tlie only way, then, that the storekeeper 
can account for his materials would be by periodical inventories, 
and then at the best there is nothing whereby the periodical in- 
ventory can be checked. The perfunctory inventory is generally 
useless. All the men in the field in the position of authority or who 
are likely to require to have materials issued to them should be pro- 
vided with small requisition blanks, and the storekeeper should 
require a requisition slip as a receipt for all material issued. 

At the end of the month these receipts for material issued 
should tally with his inventory and list of material received. 

Reports on Materials and Supplies. — Fig. 9 is a card for report- 
ing supplies received. It includes the oil, waste, powder, caps and 
fuse supplied to the various field organizations, such as drillers, 
pumps, various steam shovels, dinkeys, cars, shovels, and also 
shows the amount remaining on hand. This is for steam shovel 
work In rock. 

Fig. 10 is material card designed to be used daily by the fore- 
man on concrete work for recording the materials received. The 
size of various loads of cement, gravel, sand, screenings, stone, and 
the number of feet board measure of lumber are shown on one half 
of the card, and on the other half are the amounts of glass, steel. 



COST KEEPING. 



105 



SUPPLY 


n'EpmiT 


wn 1 








190 1 










Drillers. 


Pumpsi 


Ko. 1 
Bhovol. 


No. 2 
Shoveli 


HO. 1 
fcinitey, 


No. 2 
Dinkey. 


No. 3 
Dinkey. 


Cars. 


Shop. 


Little 
Hill. 


Oa Eand. 


























Kne. " 
























Blk. " . . . . 














































Powder. ... 
























Dynamite. 
Kiploders. 




































































Fuse....... 

















































Fig. 9. Supply Report. 



Job No. 


MATERIALS RECEIVED 




Date 


190 


foreman 


Blze or Brand 


From Wbom BeceiT«d 


Blze or Brand 


Freon Wbom Received 


bb!s. 


Cement 


fcblsv 


Glass 


bags 


•• 


bars 


Steel 


Ids. 


iaravel 


'• 


f« 


•• 


Band 


M 


" 


«• 


Boreenlngs 


" 


M 


lbs. 


Stone 


lbs. 


Lampblack 


" 


" 


M 


Oakum 


Ids. 


Band 


m 


Ralls 


«. 


Lumber 







Fig. 10. Materials Report. 



106 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

lampblack, oakum, nails, etc. On the back of the card an entry is 
supposed to be made of all material sent away from the shop or re- 
maining on the work at night, thus giving a check upon the quan- 
tity of materials used. 

Checking the Accuracy of Reports. — Systematic checking of the 
accuracy of reports made by individuals or foremen is of para- 
mount importance, for, unless this is done, there is apt to be gross 
falsification of the reports in order to make a favorable showing, 
of performance. Thus, if a drill runner is not checked occasionally 
as to his report of number of feet drilled, he is apt to add several' 
feet to his actual performance. 

On one railway with which the authors are familiar, the master 
mechanic is in the habit of reporting the time of men spent in 
building new cars as if it were spent in repairing old cars. The 
object in doing this is to make a creditable showing of the cost 
of making new equipment. While it is true that this seems like 
robbing Peter to pay Paul, it must be remembered that there is 
usually great difficulty in determining just what is a reasonable 
cost of repairing a car, whereas there is no difficulty in fixing upon 
a reasonable cost of making a new car. 

So many men are dishonest, particularly in ways that are not 
actually criminal, that implicit trust should not be placed in re- 
ports that are not verified by systematic investigation at unexpected 
intervals of time, if they are not subject to constant checking. 

On construction work it should be the duty of someone to make 
reports that will check the reports made by individual workmen 
and by foremen. The timekeeper is usually the man upon whom 
part of this checking devolves. Thus, the timekeeper may be re- 
quired to make certain measurements at the close of the day, from 
which a foreman's report of performance can be checked, as, for 
example, the number of drill holes and the depth of each. The time- 
keeper may also be required to visit each part of the work fre- 
quently, noting the number of men engaged in each class of work 
at the time of each visit. Frequent visits are often made possible 
by providing the timekeeper with a horse or a motorcycle. 

Checking the distribution of the men of a gang, as well as ob- 
serving the energy with which they are working, may frequently 
be done to advantage by means of a telescope or field glasses in the 
hands of an observer located in a tower or on some high point of 
ground. 

By requiring different foremen and different individuals to report 
on the same performance, an excellent check can often be secured. 
Thus, the dinkey locomotive engineman should report the number 
of trains hauled, and either the dump foreman or the steam shovel 
engineman should render a similar report. 

The monthly estimates of engineers should, of course, be used to 
check the daily reports of foremen, as far as possible ; and on 
large jobs it is often desirable for a contractor to employ engineers 
to cross-section and measure the work once a week, if not more 
frequently. 



COST KEEPING. 107 

Where the gang under a foreman is frequently shifted from one 
class of work to another, the foreman should always record the time 
that the change is made, in one of the ways already indicated. 
When this is done, the superintendent or walking boss should exam- 
ine the foreman's record occasionally, during the day — not neces- 
sarily every day — to assure himself that the foreman is posting 
the record properly and at the time each change is made. 

There should always be some system of recording the receipt of 
daily reports at the ofRce. This is sometimes effected by having 
a tabular list of all the reports that should be received, and by 
placing a check mark opposite the name of each report (or each 
foreman or individual making the report) under the day of the 
month to which the report relates. A glance at such a tabulation 
shows whether any report is missing. 

If it is the practice to plot or chart the returns shown by each 
report daily, then no further check may be needed to show that 
the report has been received. 

One of the advantages gained by divorcing cost keeping from 
bookkeeping is the check thus obtainable on both. The aggregate 
weekly payroll shown by the timekeeper's report should check fairly 
well — not necessarily with great precision — with the aggregate pay- 
roll deduced from the foreman's reports. Incidentally this check 
makes it more difficult for a timekeeper to "pad the payroll," that 
is to enter fictitious names upon the payroll or to credit a man with 
more time than he is entitled to. Many a contractor has been 
robbed in this manner. 

If the distribution of costs shown on the books corresponds with 
the distribution derived from the daily report cards, a fairly close 
check is obtainable. 

It is generally wise to have accounts for each of the main items 
of materials and supplies, such as lumber, cement, coal, explosives, 
etc. Then the total consumption of coal, for example, as deduced 
from the foremen's daily cost reports, should check fairly well 
with the amount purchased, as recorded by the bookkeeper. Like- 
wise the bookkeeper may divide the payroll into certain general 
classes of labor and assign an account for each class, which should 
check with the cost records turned in by the foremen. But, in our 
opinion, it is a serious mistake -to encumber the bookkeeper with a 
multiplicity of accounts intended either to show detailed costs or to 
check the various details of cost deduced from the daily cost reports. 

Cost Charts. — For showing relative performance or relative unit 
costs, no method is so satisfactory as a diagram or chart. A 
glance at the unit cost line plotted on a chart shows the manager 
whether there is cause for congratulation or alarm. The up and 
down waves of a cost line are far more impressive than columns 
of figures ever are. 

A chart of daily performance has the incidental advantage of 
affording an automatic check on whether all the daily cost reports 
have been turned in or not, for without the reports the lines on the 
chart cannot be plotted. 

Progress Charts. — It is generally desirable to record graphically 



108 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



the progress of each particular class of work on a contract. This 
is best done by means of a progress chart similar to that shown in 
Fig. 11. 

This chart relates to excavation. The first column is a percent- 
age column. The .second column gives the length of the excavation 
(trench, ditch, or the like). The third column gives the number 




Fig. 11. Progress Chart. 



of cubic yards. The fourth column gives the estimated cost. The 
fifth column gives the actual cost; a sixth column of actual cost is 
provided in case it overruns the estimated cost. The total length 
of the excavation to be done is 775 ft., which is written opposite 
the 100%. Then the length column is divided into 7% parts, each 
representing 100 ft., or a "station." 

The total yardage in this length of 775 ft. is 1,600 cu. yds., which 



COST KEEPING. 109 

is also written opposite the 100%. Tiien this yardage column is 
divided into 16 parts, each representing 100 cu. yds. The work has 
been estimated to cost 50 cts. per cu. yd., therefore tlie total cost of 
the 1,600 cu. yds. should be $800, which is written opposite the 
100% ; and the estimated cost column is divided into 8 parts, 
each representing $100. 

This work on section of excavation is scheduled to begin June 3, 
as indicated in the space to the left of the per cent column and at 
the bottom ; and it is scheduled to be finished in three weeks, as 
indicated. 

The work is begun on schedule time, June 3, as indicated by the 
entry to the right of the last column, and at the end of the first 
week (beginning of the next), June 10, the progress and cost are 
shown by the hatched portion below the heavy black line. It will 
be seen that the excavation has been completed to station 1 + 50 
(=150 ft.), as shown in the second column; and that 350 cu. yds. 
have been excavated, as shown in the third column. The esti- 
mated cost of the 350 cu. yds. is $175. as shown in the fourth col- 
umn. The actual cost has been proved to be the same as the esti- 
mated cost, or $175, as shown in the fifth column. The yardage 
completed up to June 10 is 22% of the total, as seen by comparing 
the first, or percentage, column with the third, or yardage, column ; 
whereas, to have lived up to the estimated schedule, 33% of the 
yardage should have been excavated by June 10. 

The performance of the next week is similarly shown by the heavy 
black line opposite June 17, which shows that 47.5 ft. of length 
(reaching therefore to Sta. 4 + 75) and 900 cu. yds. have been 
completed. The total actual cost is now $400, as compared with an 
estimated cost of $450, showing that the work is being handled 
satisfactorily. 

If the chart is plotted on tracing cloth, blue prints are readily 
made. Instead of cross-hatching the performance area of each 
week, paints of different tints may be used. 

On jobs of long duration, a similar chart showing progress by 
months is usually desirable, in addition to a weekly progress chart. 
Then it is often desirable to paint the area on the monthly prog- 
ress chart, using colors of paints to designate the different months. 

Methods of Payment in Proportion to Performance. — The funda- 
mental law of management involves that payment for work done 
shall be proportionate to performance — that is, an increased number 
of units of work done by a man shall result in his receiving in- 
creased pay. The ordinary wage system is based upon this law, 
but only in a very crude manner, since it tlirows men into large 
groups or classes, individuals of which receive the same pay, or 
practically so. 

We shall now consider some of the various methods that aim to 
recompense a workman in proportion to his performance. 

Profit Sharing. — According to the method of profit sharing, each 
individual receives not only his wage but a pro rata of any profits 
that arise from the business. Either quarterly, sevmi-annually, or 



110 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

annually, the profits of the business are estimated, and a certain 
percentage of these profits is distributed to the workmen and their 
managers. Often this distribution of profits is confined to the man- 
agers only. 

While this is an improvement over the wage system, it violates 
the eighth law of management — namely, the law of prompt reward. 
The imagination of the ordinary workman is not enough to main- 
tain his interest in his work at the high pitch necessary to enable 
him to do his very best. Moreover, any community interest in a 
commercial enterprise lacks sufficient stimulus. It requires a more 
direct, personal interest in the outcome to arouse a man to action. 

Profit sharing, whether by the payment of profits direct, or in the 
form of dividends on stock held by the workman, is, at best, only a 
moderate step in advance of the ordinary wage system so far as the 
average workman is concerned. 

Piece Rate System. — According to the piece rate system, each 
workman is paid a certain stipulated amount per unit of work done 
by him. If all managers were fair in their dealings with workmen, 
and if all workmen were reasonable, the piece rate system would be 
almost ideal as a method of paying men wherever the work is of 
a character that admits of measuring individual performance. Due 
to hoggishness on the part of managers and unreasonableness on 
tne part of workmen, the piece rate system usually fails to accom- 
plish the desired end. 

Having established a piece rate of, say, 10 cts. per cu. yd. for 
shoveling earth into wagons, on the assumption that 15 cu. yds. per 
day per man is a fair output, it requires more than ordinary fore- 
sight and liberality not to cut the rate when laborers begin to load 
25 cu. yds. a ^ay. The typical contractor will then begin to reason 
about as follows : "These men have been soldiering on me in the 
past. I always thought so ; now I know it. "Well, now that I do 
know it, and they know I Know il, they will have to work at this 
rate hereafter or get out. ■ What's more, I am not going to be 
gouged out of an extra dollar a day, either. If they make 25 cts. 
extra a day, it's more than they ever got before, and it's all they 
are entitled to, so we will just drop that 10-ct. rate down to 7 cts. 
That will satisfy them." But the trouble is that it doesn't. The 
men immediately become angry, and rightly so. If they do not quit 
entirely, they lose all further ambition and desire to increase their 
output, knowing full well that the piece rate will be .so cut as to 
enable them to earn only a slight advance over their original day's 
wages, 

This experience has been so general that nearly all labor unions 
have put a ban on the piece-rate system. Bear in mind, however, 
that the piece-rate system is not inherently at fault, and that it is 
tised with great success in many places where the management has 
been liberal and far-sighted. 

On piece-rate work that involves the use of machinery, it is mani- 
fest that any improvement in the machinery which enables the men 
to turn out more units daily, should be accompanied by some re- 
iluction in the piece rate. Workmen, however, are usually unrea- 



COST KEEPING. Ill 

sonable and oppose any reduction in tlie rate. This unreasonable- 
ness disgusts the manager as much as a manager's hoggisliness dis- 
gusts the workmen. If the manager goes to tlie expense of buying 
and operating improved machinery, he is entitled to his share of the 
increased profit, but the workman is not quick to see things in that 
light. 

Obviously, any piece-rate system is productive of more or less 
friction between managers and men, yet no system is free from some 
friction. Probably the chief function of the labor unions of the 
future will be to protect workmen in agreements with managers, 
and to be parties in arriving at what those agreements shall be. 

The Bonus System. — This system involves paying each workman 
a daily wage plus a piece rate on each unit in excess of a stipulated 
minimum. This piece rate on excess product is called a bonus. 
For example, a laborer receives $1.50 a day for shoveling earth, 
and on each cubic yard in excess of 15 cu. yds. shoveled per day 
he receives a bonus of 7 cts. If he shovels 25 cu. yds., he receives 
$1.50+ (0.07 X 10) =$2.20. 

The bonus system is really a piece-rate system with a guarantee 
of a certain minimum wage. Slight though this difference from 
the piece-rate system is, it is generally viewed with more favor by 
workmen. 

The Differential Piece Rate System — The principle of this system 
is to pay a certain piece rate up to a certain output per man, and a 
higher rate (but still a piece rate) above that output. Applied to 
drilling, for example, the drill runner would be paid, say, 6 cts. 
a foot up to a performance of 50 ft. per day, and 8 cts. a foot for 
every foot above 50. The helper might still be paid $2 a day 
straight, but it is wise always to give him also a contingent interest 
in the result of his work. 

The Differential Bonus. — This is based on the same principle as 
the differential piece rate while guaranteeing to a man a fixed mini- 
mum of wages. We have applied it in drilling work, offering the 
men 2 cts. per foot drilled for every foot above 70, and 3 cts. for 
every foot above 80 per day, while at the same time paying them 
their regular rate of wages. 

Task Work With a Bonus. — Mr. H. L. Gantt, one of Taylor's 
pupils, invented a system of differential payment known as "Task 
Work with a Bonus," which has been very successful in practice 
and has great flexibility of application under varying conditions. 
The workman under this system is paid his regular day's wages 
in any event and a certain lump bonus if he succeeds in accom- 
plishing the standard task. The amount of this bonus is usually 
about one-third of his regular wages. Mr. Taylor says that this 
system is especially useful during the difficult and delicate period 
of transition from the slow pace of ordinary day work to the high 
speed whicli is the leading cliaracteristic of good management. 
During this period of transition in the past, a time was always 
reached when a sudden leap was taken from improved day work 
to some form of piece work ; and in making this jump many good 



112 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

men inevitably fell and were lost from the procession. Mr. Gantt's 
system bridges over tliis difficult stretch and enables the workman 
to go smoothly and with gradually accelerating speed from the 
slower pace of improved day work to the high speed of the new 
system. 

The Premium Plan. — This is the term used by Mr. F. A. Halsey 
to describe what Mr. Taylor calls the Towne-Halsey system. It is 
based on the proposition of paying a bonus for achieving an esti- 
mated performance, the means to be employed and the methods 
being left to the ingenuity and initiative of the men, rather than to 
the management. 

Principles Governing the Fixing of a Piece Rate or Bonus. — ^We 

are probably well within limits when we say that the average 
workman engaged on construction work under the wage system Is 
capable of increasing his output 70% if given sufficient incentive 
to do so, and this without the least physical injury to himself. 
When it is desired to ascertain how much work men are capable 
of doing, one of the best plans is to conduct a contest between two 
or more men, or two or more groups of men, a substantial prize 
being offered for the best performance. Such a contest should usu- 
ally extend over several consecutive days, so that it will not be a 
mere sprint, but a fair endurance test. 

If a competitive contest to disclose the workmen's abilities Is not 
practicable, the authors assume that the output probably can be 
increased 60 to 70% over the output under the wage system, wher- 
ever the output depends mainly on the skill and strength of the 
workmen. In drilling rock, for example, if the average output of 
each drill is 60 lin. ft. under the waere system, then, in all likeli- 
hood, it can be increased to nearly 100 ft. under a bonus system. 
The driller who receives $3.00 a day under the wage system is really 
earning 5 cts. for each of the 60 lin. ft. If it is planned that he 
shall increase his income 50%, he will receive $4.50 for the as- 
sumed 100 lin. ft. of hole. Hence his piece rate would be 4% cts. 
a foot, or his bonus would be $1.50 on 40 lin. ft. (60 lin. ft. being 
taken as the standard minimum performance), which is equivalent 
to a bonus of 3% cts. per lin. ft. on every foot in excess of 60 ft. 
to be added to a daily wage of $3.00. At first sight it seems that 
the contractor gains only 1% cts. per lin. ft. for the 40 lin. ft. on 
which a bonus is paid, or only % ct. per lin. ft. on the entire 
100 ft. The fact is that the contractor gains much more, not even 
considering the wages of the driller's helper, for the daily plant 
charges on the drill remain almost constant, regardless of the out- 
put. If fuel, fireman, interest, repairs, depreciation, foreman, etc., 
are $4.00 per day per drill, these fixed charges amount to 6.66 cts. 
per lin. ft. of hole when the output is only 60 lin. ft. a day, as 
compared with 4 cts. per lin. ft. when the output is 100 ft., or a 
saving of 2.66 cts. per lin. ft. Wherever a plant of any consider- 
able value is used, it is clear that it would be profitable to double 
the pay of the workmen if they could double the output of the 
plant, for the imit saving in plant charges alone would amount to 



COST KEEPING. 113 

a handsome profit. This is upon the assumption that the fuel bill 
remains practically unchanged by the increased output, and it sel- 
dom is materially affected by increased output on contract work. 

Benefits of the Bonus System.*— Strife develops the best that is 
In a man, whether it be strength of muscle or the power of the 
mysterious marrow of the skull. 

The evolution of all species and genera, up to man himself, is 
based upon this law, yet there are millions of misguided men who 
are striving to abolish strife. They show more pity for the second 
best in the race than praise for the first. They seem not to see 
that in the industrial race even the loser wins, and that there is no 
such thing as being beaten out of "place." A part of the purse 
goes to everyone that enters. 

But there are many kinds of races, and miany entries in each. 
The most popular race, judged by the number of entries, is the slow 
race. In it you will find men of all classes — clerks, farmers, brick 
masons, draftsmen, iron workers, and, indeed, tlie great majority 
of men working for wages. The one who can make the job last 
the longest wins. He wears the blue ribbon, and is proud of him- 
self In a sneaking sort of fashion. But the part of the purse for 
the winner in tliis race is no greater than for the loser. There Is 
merely the blue ribbon for the prize winners. 

Entered in the running race are all men working in competi- 
tive businesses. Here are the merchants, manufacturers, contract- 
ors, etc. 

Then there is the trotting race, not so swift nor so trying, but a 
contest well worth watching. Here is where- careful training counts. 
This is the race for men educated in the profession of law, medi- 
cine, architecture and engineering — each in his class. 

What marks the distinction between these three different kinds 
of runners? Why does the wageworker go slow? Why is the pro- 
fessional man more energetic? Why is the business man the per- 
sonification of energy? The answer is found in the relative freedom 
of competition, and the relative size of the prizes to be won. 

The wageworker has, from time immemorial, striven to limit com- 
petition. In China and India he has succeeded to perfection. There 
he has developed a system called "caste," which is but a perfected 
form of our English and American "apprentice system." In India 
a man belonging lO a certain "caste" will swing a wet blanket over 
you all night to keep you cool ; but no amount of money would 
tempt him to black your shoes or go to the postofRce for your mall. 
He does not belong to the "caste" that does those things. Hence 
you must hire ten or a dozen servants if you expect to be served 
In all your wants. "It makes work," don't you see? It has the 
Blow runner beaten to a standstill. 

How can waereworkers be rescued from their own follies, not 
merely in India, but in America? How can they be induced to 
enter races for the swift, where the swiftest wins most, but all win 
more? There is but one, just one, way to bring this end about, and 



* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 6, 1907. 



114 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

that is to extend the contract system to individuals and to groups of 
Individuals. When men are paid directly in proportion to what they 
do, then they DO. 

This is the true secret of the economy of performing public work 
by contract instead of by day labor. And it can be carried a step 
farther. The contractor can make his men sub-contractors, if he 
will exercise a little ingenuity and patience in working out a plan 
for paying them by the piece. 

There are many men who are not gifted with the ability to man- 
age workmen where the plain wage system is in use, but who would 
succeed admirably in getting a big output from men under a bonus 
or a "piece-work" system. It can be done not only in the field and 
factory, but in the office, not only where laborers are hired, but 
where engineers are hired. It is being done with great success in 
surveying and drafting — two classes of work where the difflculties 
of applying a bonus or contract system are very great. 

When you are told that the bonus system cannot be applied to 
some particular class of work, because of its unusual nature, place 
little reliance in the dictum but put your brains at work. Let others 
enter the race ridden by the jockey Impossible, if they will, but that 
jockey never bestrode a winner since time began. 

Time Cards and Time Books. — ^Through any stationery store time 
books can be bought that are ruled and lettered to suit most classes 
of contract work. The timekeeper enters the name of each man 
and assigns him a number in the book. On large jobs it is wise also 
to provide a brass check that can be pinned to the clothing of each 
workman, so that his number is visible at a glance. The home 
addresses of common laborers are seldom entered in the time 
books, but it is desirable always to record home addresses of all 
men, and particularly the permanent addresses of skilled workmen 
and foremen. A few postal cards will thus enable one quickly to 
gather together a gang of skilled men for a new job. It is wise 
also to have a directory book for entering the names of good fore- 
men, whether they be men that you have employed or not ; and a 
few brief remarks concerning each man's fitness for particular 
classes of work shold be entered.. This assists also in identifying 
men whose names have slipped the memory. 

Time books are very often ruled so that the job the men are 
working on cannot be entered opposite each man's name. It is nec- 
essary then to reserve separate pages for each job. Then if a man 
does several different kinds of work on one job. as many different 
lines are reserved under his name so that the hours and fractions 
spent by him on each kind of work can be recorded. In that case 
the foreman is provided with a time book from which the time- 
keeper makes abstracts when he goes the rounds. 

In order to avoid disputes on pay day, I devised the form of 
card shown in Fig. 12. Each workman is provided with one of 
these cards which he keeps until pay day. This card was devised 
for work on which pay day came every second week. The rate of 
wages is punched with a conductor's punch, likewise the number 
of hours and the nearest half hour of each day. The timekeeper or 



COST KEEPING. 



115 



foreman punches every man's card at the end of the day, and at 
the same time enters the number of the man and his hours in the 
time book. If any dispute arises as to the number of hours worked 



, I declare that I am a citizen of the United States. 
NO 




to 

CI 


'IBS 


« 


t-< 


N 


eo 


^ 


to o 


t- 


os 01 


O 
1 






'Pi 


:« 


rH 


N 


05 


•>«< 


10 (C 


1" 


«> 


03 


o 






•JtlTlI 


is: 


iH 


O 


CO 


■* 


10 c 


t- 


00 


05 


O 




•peAi. 


:*; 


rH 


(N 


eo 


•■f 


10 a 


> I- 


M 


05 


o 






•eanx 


is: 


r-l 


e^ 


05 


■* 


10 tt 


t- 


00 


03 


o 






!5 
O 

M 

u 

8 
o 


•d 
a 

i 

M 
o 
m 

M 




























•noji 


^ 


H 


(M 


05 


■* 


10 tc 


> c- 


00 


03 


o 

1-4 






•OTIS 


-■: 


t-( 


(N 


05 


■* 


10 <£ 


5 t- 


a 


03 


O 
1-4 






1 

a 

M 


1 


3 
o 

n 

(D 
© 
1 


is 

lO 


05 




cq 


O 
03 




O 


t- 

05 




t- 


o 




10 


CO 

1 














•JBB 


i^: 


H 


« 


05 


-* 


10 g 


B I- 


X 


03 


O 
I-l 
































a 

M 


i 1 

: i 

\ I 

i 

5 


> 


•\I£i 


ii!: 


i-l 


cq 


05 


■* 


10 ij 


t- 


00 


03 


1-1 






•antii 


iR 


H 


CT 


05 


^ 


10 ; 


t~ 


00 


03 


o 
I-l 






•P9AV 


:is: 


iH 


« 


05 


1 


10 c 


f 


00 


03 


o 




































u 

i 

^ 


a 

1 


•seni 


^ 


rH 


M 


05 


■>* 


10 c 


D t- 


00 


03 








•noK 


:<: 


rH 


IM 


CO 


'^ 


10 c 


D t- 


00 


05 


O 
1-4 






'nng 


:« 


W 


M 


05 


■* 


10 c 

1 


f 


00 


03 


o 
fl 







the dispute must be settled then and there, for on pay day no 
claims for extra time will be listened to. This does away entirely 
with pay day disputes, which is a very satisfactory feature. The 



116 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

card also serves to check the timekeeper's records. Moreover, it 
makes "padding" of payrolls more difficult, and facilitates detective 
work if "padding" is suspected. The card also serves as a dis- 
charge slip ; for, when a man is discharged, the foreman punches 
the hours that he has worked and he also punches a hole through 
the word "discharged." When the man presents the card at the 
ofHce he is paid ; the card is kept as a voucher, and a hole is 
punched through the word "paid." 

Recording Work by Minute Hand Observations. — It has often 
been said that short time observations prove nothing as to the 
efficiency of men or machines. This statement has been exceedingly 
misleading to those who have accepted it as a self-evident truth. 
When a short time observation does not include the common delays 
Incident to shifting tools, to breakdowns, and the like, it may lead 
to a serious underestimate of the cost of work. On the other hand, 
when the so-called short time observation is made long enough 
to include the time spent in necessary rests, in moving machines. 
In repairs to plant, and the like, exceedingly valuable results may 
be obtained. When it is desired to find whether men are lazy, 
whether a foreman knows his business, whether the method of doing 
the work can be bettered, or whether the tool or machine is sus- 
ceptible of improvement, there is no method to be compared with 
the method of timing work with the minute hand of a watch. More- 
over, where it is desired to discover the effect on cost of varying 
the length of haul, of varying the kind of rock drilled, and the like, 
timing with the minute hand is the only satisfactory way of arriv- 
ing at definite conclusions. 

If a stop-watch is not available, an ordinary watch with a 
second hand will serve, and in many classes of work even the 
second hand can be dispensed with. An example will now be given 
to illustrate the method and value of a short time observation. 

Before beginning the record, set the minute hand so that it points 
an even minute when the second hand points at 60. Suppose it is 
desired to time the drilling of a hole in a seamy mica-schist, using 
a steam drill mounted on a tripod. At 9 :37 a. m. the driller is 
set up and ready to begin drilling a hole and exactly 30 seconds 
later he turns on the steam ; then we begin our record : 

9 :37 :30 Start. 

9 :49 :20 Down. 

9 :51 :20 Start. 
10:00:40 Down. 
10:03:40 Start. 
10:09:40 Down. 
10:13:00 Start. 
10:14:40 Bit sticks. 

10:24:40 After hammering the drill repeatedly, the driller is di- 
rected to break up some cast iron and throw it into the 
drill hole. 
10:32:30 Drilling begins again. 
10:45:00 Hole finished. 
11:15:10 New hole started. 



COST KEEPING. 117 

It will be seen that drilling started at 9 :37 :30, and that at 
9 :49 :20 the full length of the feed screw was out, and that to drill 
farther a new bit had to be inserted. At 9 :51 :20 the new bit was 
in and drilling began again, after a delay of 2 mins. in changing 
bits. At 10:00:40 the second bit was down. Each successive bit, it 
should be stated, is usually 2 ft. longer than its predecessor. At 
10:14:40 the bit sticks in the hole due to having run into a pocket 
of rotten rock. The observer might readily have predicted this 
sticking by noting the increased rapidity of penetration ; for it took 
nearly 12 mins. to drill the first 2 ft. of the hole, and only 6 mins. 
to drill the 2 ft. just prior to the sticking. After wasting 10 mins. 
abusing the drill the driller finally removed the bit (at the direc- 
tion of the observer), broke up a piece of cast-iron pipe into hazel 
nut sizes, and threw two handfuls of the iron into the bottom of the 
hole. Drilling was resumed at 10 :32 :30, and the last 2 ft. were 
completed at 10:45:00. At 11:15:10 the driller started another 
hole, having spent more than 30 mins. shifting the tripod and drill. 

What do we learn from this observation? First that the driller 
was slow in changing bits ; second, that he was very slow in shift- 
ing his tripod ; third, that the driller was ignorant ; fourth, that the 
foreman was equally so ; fifth, that fragments of cast iron com- 
pletely overcome sticking of bits in this rock. 

"We know that the driller was slow, because other similar obser- 
vations have proved it possible to change short bits in much less 
time than 3 mins., and, since the driller has an easy time of it 
while turning the crank, he can work rapidly without exhausting 
himself when it comes to changing bits or shifting the machine. 
We know that both driller and foreman were ignorant, for broken 
Iron should have been provided ready to use in case of sticking of 
the bit. We conclude that it will pay to assign a man to measure 
up the footage of hole drilled by each driller every day, and to offer 
each driller a bonus for every foot of hole drilled in excess of a 
stipulated minimum. 

The foregoing is a record of fact and not of theory. On a large 
contract job I secured an increase of 45% in the daily footage of 
each drill by taking just such observations as the above. 

I have found it of great advantage to time in detail the work of 
cableways, derricks, steam shovels, concrete mixers, dinkey locomo- 
tives, pile drivers and other machines used on contract work. Even 
the output of men working with hand tools can be profitably studied 
in the same way. The number of shovelfuls of earth may be timed 
under different conditions, with a view to ascertaining the effect of 
changed conditions, and the effect of using larger shovels. How- 
ever, the greatest gains from minute-hand timing occur when it Is 
applied to machines operated by power rather than to hand work. 

It is desirable in nearly all cases not to let the workmen know 
that they are being timed. When men are working in the open air, 
an observer can often use the telescope of a transit or a pair of 
field glasses to good advantage, xi shop work, or underground, 
where the observer mp.^st- be near ine men, a convenient way of 
timing any detail of wovk is by counting. One can soon learn to 



118 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

count with regularity, and thus dispense with a second or minute 
hand. Other methods of ascertaining the time of doing worlc with- 
out being observed will occur to anyone who gives thought to the 
matter. 



SECTION II. 
EARTH EXCAVATION. 

Magnitude of the Subject. — Probably no kind of engineering work 
involves as many varying factors as earth excavation. Not only is 
there a wide range of classes of earths but the tools for excavation 
are almost as varied as the conditions encountered. Taken as a 
whole, accurate estimating of the cost of earthwork is probably 
more difficult than estimating the cost of any other item of con- 
struction discussed in this book. Having already written one book 
on earthwork, and having another and much larger treatise in 
preparation, I shall give in this section only the very briefest sum- 
mary of some of the commoner methods of earth excavation and 
cost. 

In other sections of this book will be found supplementary data, 
on earthwork, for which consult the index under "Excavation, 
Earth." 

Earth Measurement. — Earthwork is paid for by the cubic yard, 
and is usually measured "in place," that is, in the natural bank, 
or pit before it has been loosened. The price paid usually includes 
the excavating, hauling and placing the earth in the embankment, 
and no extra price is paid for making the embankment — in other 
words, the earth is paid for but once. Occasionally, in dike work, 
in building reservoir embankments, and wherever it is very difficult 
to measure the earth in place, it is specified that the earth shall be 
measured in the consolidated embankment. However, unless other- 
wise stated, all costs given in this book refer to measurements of 
earth in place. 

Many specifications for railroad work contain an "overhaul 
clause," which provides that for all earth hauled more than a cer- 
tain specified limit, the contractor shall be paid a certain amount 
per cubic yard, usually 1 ct. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. overhaul. The 
specified limit of "free haul" is sometimes 1,000 ft, sometimes 500 
ft. Even in case of an overhaul, no additional payment is made 
for building the embankment, but only for the overhaul. 

Earth Shrinkage. — Earth when first loosened and shoveled into a 
wagon swells, that is, it occupies more space than it did "in place" ; 
but, when placed in an embankment and rolled or pounded down, 
it shrinks, and this shrinkage is often so great that the earth occu- 
pies less space in the embankment than it did "in place." The fol- 
lowing is a summary, based upon data of actual tests given in my 
book on earthwork : 

1. Taking extreme cases, earth swells when first loosened with 

119 



120 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a shovel, so that after loosening it occupies 1 1/7 to 1% times as 
much space as it did before loosening; in other words, loose earth 
is 14% to 50% more bulky than natural bank earth. 

2. As an average, we may say that clean sand and gravel swell 
1/7, or 14% to 15%; loam, loamy sand or gravel swell 1/5, or 20%; 
dense clay, and dense mixtures of gravel and clay, % to %, or 33% 
to 50%, ordinarily about 35% ; while unusually dense gravel and 
clay banks swell 50%. 

3. Loose earth is compacted by several means ; (a) the puddling 
action of water, (b) the pounding of hoofs and wheels, (c) the 
jarring and compressive action of rolling artificially. 

4. If the puddling action of rains is the only factor, a loose 
mass of earth will shrink slowly back to its original volume, but 
an embankment of loose earth will at the end of a year be still 
about 1/12, or 8%, greater than the cut it came from. 

5. If the embankment is made with small one-horse carts, or 
wheel scrapers, at the end of the work it will occupy 5 to 10% 
less space than the cut from which the earth was taken, and in sub- 
sequent years will shrink about 2% more, often less than 2%. 

6. If the embankment is made with wagons or dump cars, and 
made rapidly in dry weather without water, it will shrink about 
3Vo to 10% in the year following the completion of the work, and 
very little in subsequent years. 

7. The height of the embankment appears to have little effect 
on Its subsequent shrinkage. 

8. By the proper mixing of clay or loam and gravel, followed 
by sprinkling and rolling in thin layers, a bank can be made weigh- 
ing 1% times as much as loose earth, or 133 lbs. per cu. ft. 

9. The bottoms of certain rivers, banks of cemented gravel, and 
hardpan, are more than ordinarily dense, and will occupy more 
space in the fill than in the cut unless rolled. 

Kinds of Earth. — Earth may be divided into three classes as re- 
gards difficulty of excavation : ( 1 ) Easy earth ; ( 2 ) average earth ; 
and (3) tough earth. To the first class belong loam, sand, and 
ordinary gravel, which require little or no picking to loosen ready 
for shoveling. To the second class belong sands and gravels im- 
pregnated with an amount of clay or loam that binds the particles 
together, making it necessary to use a pick or a plow drawn by two 
horses to loosen the earth before shoveling. To the third class be- 
long the compact clays, the hardened crusts of old roads, and all 
earths so hard that one team of horses can pull a plow through 
the earth only with greatest difficulty, but that two teams of horses 
on one plow can loosen with comparative ease. 

This third class of earth passes by insensible degrees into what 
Is called "hardpan." Hardpan commonly means a very compact 
clay, or mixture of gravel or boulders with clay. Soft shales that 
can be plowed with a rooter plow are sometimes called hardpan. 
There are also certain gravels cemented with an iron oxide (iron 
rust) which are called hardpan. 

There are many local names applied to different kinds of earth. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 121 

"Adobe" is a name much used in Texas, Arizona, California and 
and neighboring states to denote any clay of which mud bricks, 
or adobes, might be made. "Gumbo" is a word used in the M's- 
sissippi Valley to denote a black loam containing so much clay as to 
be exceedingly sticky when wet. "Marl" is, strictly speaking, a mix- 
ture of clay and pulverized limestone, but the term is often applied 
to clay soils containing only 1% to 2% of limestone dust, as, for ex- 
ample, the greensand marls of New Jersey. There are many local 
deposits of disintegrated minerals, which, when soapy in texture, 
are often called marl. In some cases these deposits are so greasy 
that, when saturated with water, slides and cave-ins occur when an 
attempt is made to excavate them. 

Quicksand is a term applied to any sand, or sandy material, 
which flows like molasses when the sand is saturated with water. 

In this book the rules for estimating costs, unless otherwise 
stated, relate to "average earth," as above defined. 

Definitions of Haul and Lead. — "Lead" is a term used to denote 
the horizontal distance in a straight line from the center of mass 
of the pit to the center of mass of the dump. The pit, in this case, 
refers to the volume of earth to be excavated, and the dump refers 
to the embankment. The "lead" does not include the distance actu- 
ally traveled, including turnouts, etc., from pit to dump ; this actual 
distance traveled by the cars or wagons is called the "haul." The 
"haul" is then half the distance traveled by a car or wagon in 
making a round trip. 

Work of Teams. — A "team," as used in this book, means a pair 
of horses and their driver. Even where the word driver is omitted 
in speaking of the cost of team work, the wages of the driver are 
always included under the word "team." 

A good average team is capable of traveling 20 miles in 10 hrs., 
going 10 miles loaded and returning 10 miles empty, over fairly 
hard earth roads. If the team is traveling constantly over soft 
ground, 15 miles is a good day's work. On the other hand, if the 
team is traveling over good gravel or macadam roads, or paved 
streets, it is possible to average 25 miles per 10-hr. day. These 
rates include the occasional stops made for rests, etc., and include 
the climbing of an occasional hill. 

When traveling at the rate of 2% miles an hour, which is the or- 
dinary walking gait of horses, the distance covered in 1 min. is 220 
ft. Over good hard roads a team may trot with an empty wagon 
at the rate of 5 miles per hr., and thus make up for delays in load- 
ing and unloading, so as to cover the full 20 miles of daily work; 
but over soft ground a team should not trot. 

The loads that a team can haul (in addition to the weight of 
the wagon) over different kinds of roads are as follows : 

Earth, 
Short tons. cu. yds. 

Very poor earth road 1.0 0.8 

Poor earth road 1.25 1.0 

Good hard earth road 2.0 1.6 

Good clean macadam road 3.0 2.4 

It is not possible to haul much greater loads over an asphalt or 



122 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

brick pavement than over a first-class, clean macadam. On all 
the kinds of roads to which the above averages apply, there may be 
occasional steep grades to ascend, and occasional bad spots to pass 
over. 

The pulling power of a horse averages about one-tenth of his 
weight when exerted steadily for 10 hrs. ; that is, a 1,200-lb. horse 
will exert an average pull of 120 lbs. on the traces. But for a short 
space of time the horse can exert a pull (if he has a good foot- 
hold) equal to about four-tenths his weight, that is, four times 
his average all-day pull. This I have tested with teams, not only 
in ascending steep grades but in lifting the hammer of a horse- 
operated pile driver. 

Where teams are traveling long distances, it is customary to have 
two wagons keep together, so that one team can help the other up 
a steep hill by acting as a "snatch team." A "snatch team," or 
helping team, may often be kept busy to advantage in pulling heav- 
ily loaded teams out of a pit, or onto a soft embankment, or up a 
steep grade. Three-horse snatch teams are frequently used. A 
small hoisting engine may replace a snatch team to advantage in 
many places. By laying channel irons for rails up a steep hill, 
and having a hoisting engine at the top, very heavy loads can be 
assisted over bad roads. In this case, a boy mounted on a pony can 
drag the hoisting rope back to the foot of the hill ready for the next 
team. Plank roads can often be built to advantage for short dis- 
tances up steep grades, or over bad spots. 

In the far West it is customary for three or more teams to be 
hitched to a train of two or more wagons ; and, wlien a steep hill 
is to be ascended, to haul one wagon up at a time. This saves 
wages of drivers. 

In the last section of this book. Miscellaneous Costs, will be found 
further suggestions on hauling with teams, also costs of feeding 
'and maintaining teams. Consult the index under Hauling, Teams. 

Cost of Plowing. — ^A team on a plow will loosen 500 cu. yds. of 
loam, or 350 cu. yds. of loamy gravel, or 250 cu. yds. of fairly 
tough clay, per 10-hr. day. For "average earth," therefore assume 
350 cu. yds. per day loosened by a team and driver and one man 
holding plow. With wages at $3.50 for team and driver, and 
$1.50 for laborer, the cost of plowing average earth is 1% cts. per 
cu. yd. 

In plowing very tough material with a pick-pointed plow, four 
horses and three men, estimate 180 cu. yds. plowed per' day at a 
cost of 5 cts. per cu. yd. 

For tough material there has recently been developed a "gang 
plow" of remarkable efficiency. It consists of a framework mount- 
ed on four small wheels, and equipped with five rooters or plows. 
These plows can be quickly set, by means of levers, to plow or cut 
to any desired depth. From 6 to 12 horses, or a traction engine, 
pull the gang plow, and it cuts five furrows at once. This gang 
plow is made by the Petrolithic Pavement Co., Los Angeles, Calif. 

Cost of Picking and Shoveling. — When wages are $1.50 per lO-hr. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 123 

day, the cost of loosening earth with a piclc (instead of a plow) 
ranges from 1 ct. pei- cu. yd. for very easy earth, to 11 cts. per cu. 
yd. for very stiff clay or cemented gravel ; for "average earth" the 
cost of picking is about 4 cts. per cu. yd. 

The cost of loosening with a pick and shoveling into wagons is 
as follows, wages being 15 cts. per hr. : 

Per cu. yd. 

Easy earth, light sand or loam 12 cts. 

Average earth 15 cts. 

Tough clay 20 cts. 

Hardpan 40 cts. 

The amount of earth that a man can load with a shovel varies 
with the character of the earth, the way it has been loosened, the ' 
size and shape of the shovel, etc. If a man is shoveling earth from 
the face of a cut that has been undermined and broken down with 
picks, he can readily load 18 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day, after the earth 
has been loosened. If he is shoveling plowed earth, where he must 
use more force in driving the shovel into the soil, he will easily load 
14 cu. yds. of average earth in 10 hrs. If he is shoveling loose 
earth off boards upon which it has been dumped, he can load 25 
cu. yds. in 10 hrs., but it is not wise to count on more than 20 
cu. yds. even under good foremanship. 

For data on the cost of trenching, the reader is referred to the 
sections on Sewers and on Water-works. Consult the index under 
"Excavating, Trenches." 

Cost of Trimming, Rolling, Etc. — After earth has been dumped 
from carts or wagons, a man will spread in 6-in. layers by hand 75 
cu. yds. in 10 lirs., at a cost of 2 cts. per cu. yd. A leveling scraper, 
or road machine, will spread large quantities of earth for % ct. to 
% ct. per cu. yd. With a leveling scraper operated by a team and 
driver and a helper, I have had 500 cu. yds. spread per day. A 
road machine, operated by 6 horses and 2 men, will spread 900 cu. 
yd.s. In 10 hrs. in 6-in. layers, earth having been dumped from 
patent dump-wagons. 

A man can thoroughly tamp 25 cu. yds., in 6-in. layers, per 10- 
hr. day at 6 cts. per cu. yd. Embankments can be consolidated with 
horse-drawn rollers for % to 1 ct. per cu. yd., wages of a team 
being $^.50 a day. I have one record of 4 cts. per cu. yd. (at the 
above wages), for rolling a reservoir embankment, but the work 
was not well handled. 

The cost of sprinkling embankments, if specified, is difficult to 
estimate because of the vagueness of specifications. However, more 
than 8 cu. ft. of water per cu. yd. of earth, is seldom required. 

On a large embankment three sprinkling carts, each drawn by 
three teams, with one driver, sprinkled 1,000 cu. yds. of earth per 
day of 10 hrs., with short haul. Such carts each held J. 50 cu. ft. 
of water weigliing 4% tons, which is an exceedingly large capacity. 
A sprinkler of this size can be loaded from a tank in 15 mins., and 
emptied in the same length of time. Knowing the length of haul 
anu speed of team the cost of sprinkling is readily determined. In 



124 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the case just given the cost was 2% cts. per cu. yd. of earth for 
sprinkling and about 5 cu. ft. of water per cu. yd. were used. 

From several careful observations the writer has found that a 
gang of men under a good foreman will each trim the sod and 
humps off the hard surface of a cut to the depth of 1 or 1% ins. 
at the rate of 200 sq. ft. or 22 sq. yds. per hour, at a cost of 2/5 ct. 
per sq. yd. ; and where there was no sod to remove, the soil being 
sandy loam, the cost was one-half as much or % ct. per sq. yd. 
Massachusetts contractors bid almost uniformly 2% cts. a sq. yd. 
for "surfacing" (wages 17 cts. per hour), which includes rolling 
the finished surface with steam roller. 

A roadway, including ditches, 36 ft. wide and a mile long, haa 
21,000 sq. yds. of surface, which at % ct. is $140, actual cost o^ 
trimming. If the total excavation in a mile is 3,500 cu. yds- 
(which is about the average in N. Y. State), the cost of trimming, 
distributed over tliis 3,500 cu. yds., is 4 cts. per cu. yd. of excava- 
tion, a cost much greater than a mere guess would lead one to sup- 
pose. 

I have directed the scraping of a light growth of weeds and grass 
off the 4-ft. shoulder of a road by going once over it with a leveling 
scraper, at a rate of 200 sq. yds. per hour, or ten times faster than 
a man with a mattock would have done it ; making the actual cost 
about Vi ct. per sq. yd. where the team, driver and helpers' wages 
were 50 cts. per hour. 

Cost of Wheelbarrow Work. — A man wheeling a barrow over run- 
plank can not be counted on to travel more than 15 miles per 10- 
hr. day. If the runway is level a load of 300 lbs. or more may 
be wheeled in a barrow, but it is not safe to count upon more 
than 250 lbs., or 1/10 cu. yd. of earth. This is for good level run- 
ways, but, as most wheelbarrow work involves ascending steep 
grades, estimate 1/14 to 1/15 cu. yd. per barrow load. With wages 
at 15 cts. per hr., the cost of wheeling earth in barrows is, there- 
fore, 5 cts. per cu. yd., per 100 ft. of haul, the haul being the dis- 
tance from pit to dump. If the runways were level, and the men 
worked hard, the cost might be reduced to 3 cts. per cu. yd. per 100 
ft. of haul. 

The cost of picking and loading has already been given, and 
may be assumed to be 15 cts. per cu. yd. A wheelbarrow is 
dumped in about % min., which is equivalent to a loss of nearly 4 
mins. per cu. yd., where 15 barrow loads make a yard; and this 
is equivalent to 1 ct. per cu. yd. for dumping the barrows. The 
time lost in changing barrows, etc., may easily add another 1 ct. 
per cu. yd. The rule for estimating the cost of loosening, loading 
and hauling average earth in barrows is as follows when wages 
are 15 cts. per hr. : 

Rule I. — To a fixed cost of 17 cts. per cu. yd., add 5 cts. per cu. yd. 
per 100 ft. haul, when steep ascents must be made, or sy^ cts. 
per 100 ft. when level. 

Cost by One- Horse Carts. — Small two-wheeled carts drawn by 
one horse are often used on railway work. If the haul is level or 
slightly down hill and over a well compacted embankment, a horse 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 125 

will pull 0.6 cu. yd. per load; but over poor earth roads it is not 
safe to count upon more than 0.4 cu. yd. per load, if there are any 
steep grades to ascend. On short hauls of 300 ft. or less, one 
driver can tend to two carts by leading one to the dump while the 
other is being loaded. A gang of 4 or 5 men should load a cart with 
0.4 cu. yd. in 3 mins., and it takes about 1 min. to dump a cart, so 
that 4 mins. of cart time are "lost" every round trip. If the wages 
of a horse are $1 per 10-hr. day, and the wages of a driver are 
$1.50 a day, the wages of a cart and half a driver are $1.75 a day. 
The 4 mins. "lost time" is therefore equivalent to 3 cts. per cu. yd. 
The cost of picking and loading average earth is about 15 cts. per 
cu. yd., as previously given. A dumpman can easily dump a cart 
load a minute, where he has no spreading to do ; but the material 
is seldom delivered fast enough. If we assume 150 cu. yds. deliv- 
ered to him in carts in 10 hrs., the cost is 1 ct. per cu. yd. for dump- 
man's wages. Hence the total fixed cost may be assumed as 15 + 
3-1-1 ct, or 19 cts. per cu. yd. If the cart load is 0.4 cu. yd., and 
wages are as above given, we have the following rule : 

Rule II. — To a fixed cost of 19 cts. per cu. yd. add % ct. per cu. 
yd. per 100 ft. of haul. 

If the material is plowed, and is shoveled easily, the fixed cost 
may become 14 cts. per cu. yd. instead of 19 cts. 

If the haul is long, one driver may still attend to two carts by 
taking them both together to the dump. There are occasions, how- 
ever, when one driver attends to only one cart ; in such cases the 
cost of hauling is 1 ct. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. 

In cities, where the carts travel over hard earth or gravel roads, 
a cart carrying % cu. yd. may be used. The cost of hauling is, then, 
% ct. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. haul, wages of cart and driver being 
25 cts. per hour. 

Cost by Wagons. — There are three types of four-wheeled wagons 
commonly used by contractors: (1) The slat-bottom wagon; (2) 
the bottom-dump wagon ; . and ( 3 ) the end-dump wagon. Any 
farmer's wagon can be made into a slat-bottom wagon by remov- 
ing the wagon box and replacing it with "slats" of 3 x 6-in. sticks 
for a bottom, and 2 x 12-in., or 2 x 16-in., planks for sides and ends. 
The bottom-dump, or "patent dump-wagon," has a bottom consist- 
ing of two doors that swing downward in dumping. 

The end-dump wagon dumps backward like a two-wheeled cart. 
The best makes of this type of wagon are provided with a geared 
device by which the dump-man slides the wagon box bodily back- 
ward over the axle of the rear wheels until it tips and dumps its 
load. 

The loads that are commonly hauled in a wagon by one team are 
givfen on page 121. 

To reduce the lost time in loading wagons a common expedient 
is to provide extra wagons which are loaded while the teams are on 
the road to and from the dump. A team can be changed from an 
empty wagon to a loaded wagon in 1 to 1% mins. 

Three horses should be used on each wagon far oftener than they 



126 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

are used on contract work, as nearly 50% more material can be 
hauled per load than with two horses. In the far West, one often 
sees two teams (four horses) hitched to a wagon, even on short 
haul work. 

One man aided by the driver can dump a slat-bottom wagon hold- 
ing 0.8 cu. yd. in 1% mins., at a cost of 0.4 ct. per cu. yd. for 
the dumpman's time and 1 ct. per cu. yd. for lost time of team, 
wages being 15 cts. per hr. for dumpman, and 35 cts. per hr. for 
the team. It takes 3 mins. for these men to dump a large slat- 
bottom wagon holding 1% cu. yds., where the driver removes the 
■eat before dumping and replaces it afterward. So that in either 
case we see that the cost of dumping is about 1% cts. per cu. yd. 
If a binder chain is wound around the wagon box to hold the slats 
close together so that no earth will spill through onto a street 
pavement, it takes 5 mins. to dump the wagon. 

The time required to dump a drop-bottom wagon is practically 
nominal, and the driver dumps his own wagon. 

It takes about 1 min. for the dumpman and driver to dump an 
end-dump wagon. 

In loading wagons there are usually enough men provided in the 
pit to load 1 cu. yd. into a wagon in 4 or 5 mins. or less. This is 
equivalent to 2% to 3 cts. per cu. yd. for lost team time in the pit, 
which, added to the lost team time at the dump, gives us about 4 
cts. per cu. yd. where slat-bottom wagons are used. The cost of 
the dumpman's time will never be much less than % ct. per cu. yd. ; 
and, if the material is not delivered rapidly, it may be much more. 
The cost of excavating and loading has been given in previous 
pages. We assume this cost to average 13 cts. per cu. yd., where 
the earth is plowed, and add 5 cts. for lost team time and dump- 
ing, we have a fixed cost of 18 cts. per cu. yd. Then the cost of 
hauling will depend upon the size of the load, and, assuming wages 
of team at 35 cts. per hr., and speed of travel 2% miles an hour 
While actually walking, we have the following rule: 

Rule III. — To a fixed cost of 18 cts. per cu. yd., add % ct. per cu. 
yd. per 100 ft. haul when the wagon load is 1 cu. yd. 
For other wagon loads use the following: 

Per cu. yd. per 100 ft. 

Load being 0.8 cu. yd., add 0.66 ct. 

Load being 1.0 cu. yd., add 0.53 ct. 

Load being 1.6 cu. yd., add 0.33 ct. 

Load being 2.0 cu. yds., add 0.26 ct. 

Load being 2.4 cu. yds., add 0.22 ct. 

In round numbers, therefore, for a load of 1 cu. yd. we must add 
% ct. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. haul, or 28 cts. per cu. yd. per mile 
haul, wages of team being 35 cts. per hr. 

Cost by Drag Scrapers. — ^A drag scraper, or slip scraper, is a 
steel scoop, not mounted on wheels, for scooping up and transport- 
ing earth short distances, and is drawn by a team. The ordinary 
No 2 drag scraper weighs 100 lbs., and is listed in catalogues as 
holding 5 cu. ft. of earth. The actual average load, however, is 
about 1-9 to 1-7 cu. yd. place measure. 

In working drag scrapers on short leads there are usually three 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 127 

teams traveling in a circle or ellipse of 150 ft. circumference. One 
man loads the scrapers in the pit as they go by, and each driver 
dumps his own scraper. When the gang is working properly, the 
actual speed of the teams is 2% miles an hour, or 220 ft. per min., 
while actually walking ; and the "lost time" in loading and dump- 
ing is % to % min. per trip, or, say, 31/2 mins. per cu. yd., which 
is equivalent to 2 cts. per cu. yd. for lost team time when team 
wages are 35 cts. per hr. The man loading can readily load 1,500 
scrapers per day, or, say, 180 cu. yds., so that the cost of load- 
ing is about % ct. per cu. yd. The cost of plowing (see page 122) 
will average 1% cts. per cu. yd. As above stated, the teams travel 
in a circle, and, no matter how short the "lead," room must be 
allowed for turning and manoeuvering the teams ; this room is 
approximately 50 ft. at each end of the haul, so that we have 100 
ft. of extra travel, or nearly % min. of time for each trip, in 
addition to the "lead." This % min. adds another 2 cts. per cu. 
yd. Summing up, we have the following fixed cost, exclusive of 
foreman's wages : 

Per cu. yd. 

Lost team time loading and dunaping 2 cts. 

Wages of man loading % cts. 

Plowing 1 % cts. 

Extra travel of team in turning, etc 2 cts. 



Total fixed cost 6 % cts. 

If the average load is 1-7 cu. yd., hauled at a speed of 220 ft. 
per min., the cost of hauling is 4% cts. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. of 
"lead." Note that this "lead" is measured on a straight line from 
center of pit to center of dump. The rule, then, is as follows for 
"average earth" when team wages are 35 cts. per hr. : 

Rule IV. — To a fixed cost 0/6% cts. per cu. yd. add 4% cts. 
per cu. yd. per 100 ft. of "lead." 

This is approximately equivalent to 1 ct. added for each 25 ft. 
of "lead." Thus, if the "lead" is 25 ft., the cost of drag scraper 
work is 6% -1- 1, or 7% cts. per cu. yd. 

The cost of foreman's wages is ordinarily about % ct. per cu. 
yd., and wear on scrapers, etc., will add another % ct. per cu. yd. 

The cost of excavating and hauling fairly stiff clay may easily 
be 30% more than the above costs for "average earth." 

Cost by Wheel Scrapers. — The wheel scraper is a development 
of the drag scraper, being a steel scoop low hung between two 
Wheela The following are common sizes of wheelers : 

-Capacity.- 



Weight, Listed, Actual Struck 

lbs. cu. ft. Measure, cu. ft. 

No. 1 340—450 9—10 714—9 

No. 2 475 — 500 12 — 13 8% 

No. 21/2 '. 575 14 12 

No. 3 625—800 16—17 ISVa 

The "listed" capacity is the capacity given in catalogs. The 
"actual struck measure" capacity is the exact contents of the bowl 
when level full of loose earth, and it should be remembered that 



128 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

about one-fifth of 20% should be deducted from this to get the 
"actual struck capacity of earth measured "in place" before loosen- 
ing. 

Large wheelers, even in light soils, and small wheelers in tough 
soils, seldom leave the pit full of earth, but at the back end of the 
bowl there is usually a wedge-shaped unfilled space. I have found 
the average load, "place measure," carried by wheelers is as 
follows : 

No. 1 1/5 cu. yd. 

No. 2 ■ % cu. yd. 

No. 2 % 1/3 cu yd. 

No. 3 4/10 cu. yd. 

A snatch team, to assist in loading, is generally used with a No. 
2 wheeler, and always with a No.. 3 wheeler. 

On long hauls it is advisable to have men with shovels to heap 
the bowi full of earth, using a front gate on the wheeler to prevent 
loss of material in transit. 

The lightest No. 1 wheelers made are to be recommended where 
leads are very short and rises steep, that is, wherever drag scrapers 
are ordinarily used, for they move earth more economically than 
drags. "Where soil is very stony, or full of roots, drag scrapers 
are to be preferred, since they are more easily and quickly loaded 
under such conditions. "With wheelers, as with drag scrapers, add 
50 ft. to the actual "lead" for turning and maneuvering the teams, 
equivalent to half minute of team time each trip. Another half 
minute is lost in loading and dumping. 

The fixed costs for the three common sizes of wheelers are as 
follows for "average earth," when wages are 15 cts. per hr. for 
laborer and 35 cts. per hr. for team (with driver) : 

— Cents per cu. yd. — 
No. 1. No. 2. No. 3. 

Lost team time loading and dumping. ... 1.5 1.2 0.8 

"Wages of man loading 0.8 0.8 1.5 

Plowing 1.5 1.5 1.5 

Extra travel of team in turning, etc 1.5 1.2 0.7 

Snatch team ; 1.5 1.5 

Wages of man dumping ... 0.8 

Total, cts. per cu. yd 5.3 6.2 6.8 

Size of load hauled, cu. yds • • • • 1/5 % 4/10 

A snatch team is usually used with No. 2 wheelers, and in short- 
haul work there is usually a dump man also. 

In easy soils, I have had one snatch team assist in loading 300 
cu. yds. per day, so that this item may be less than above 
estimated ; and under the same conditions another % ct. per cu. 
yd. or more may be saved in wages of men loading and dumping. 
There are usually two men required to load a No. 3 wheeler, which 
accounts for the higher cost of this item in the No. 3 column. 

The cost of wheeler work, based upon the foregoing data, is 
as follows : 

Rule v. — To a fixed cost of zy^ cts. per cu. yd. for No. 1 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 129 

wheelers, or 6% cts. for No. 2 wheelers, or 6% cts. for No. 3 
wheelers, add the following per cu. yd. per 100 ft. of "lead'': 
2% cts. for No. 1 wheelers; or 2 1/5 cts. for No. 2 wheelers; or 1% 
cts. for No. 3 loheelers. 

The cost of foreman's wages and repair of wheelers will add 
about 1 ct. more per cu. yd. 

If the "lead" is 50 ft. and No. 1 wheelers are used, the cost is 
5% cts. + (% X 2% cts.), or 6.7 cts. per cu. yd., exclusive of 
foreman's wages. 

Cost by Fresno Scrapers. — The ordinary four-horse fresno 
scraper has a bowl 13 ins. high, 18 ins. wide and 5 ft. long, giving 
a struck measure capacity of slightly more than 8 cu. ft. ; but in 
almost any soil, except dry, running sand, the earth will heap up 
6 or 8 ins. above the top of the bowl, and will extend quite a 
distance beyond the front of the bowl. One carefully measured 
fresno load of clayey earth contained 19 cu. ft. of loose earth, 
which compacted to 161/2 cu. ft. when rammed in 4-in. layers in a 
box. Several other large loads gave almost the same results after 
being hauled 100 ft. over a level road. 

Mr. Geo. J. Specht has stated that on a down hill haul, loads will 
average 35 cu. ft. and occasionally run as high as 44 cu. ft. How- 
ever, this could only occur with light, damp soil and on a down hill 
pull where much material could be drifted ahead of the fresno 
Bcraper. I have never measured any loads of that size. 

On level hauls, or on uphill pulls, it is not ordinarily safe to 
count on more than % cu. yd. (measured in cut) per load, 
although under favorable conditions the average load may be 25 to 
50 per cent greater, while under unfavorable conditions it may be 
25 per cent less. 

If the delays in loading and dumping are excluded, the team can 
be counted upon to travel about 200 ft. per minute. It requires 
some room in which to maneuver scrapers of any kind, no matter 
what method of hauling the teams is adopted. Hence one must not 
measure the average distance in a straight line from center of 
the cut to the center of the fill, and call that the average haul, 
for that is the average "lead," which is considerably shorter 
than the actual haul. 

When the daily wage of a driver is $1.50 and that of each of 
the four horses is ?1, a total of $5.50 per fresno, the following 
rule will give the average cost of fresno work, not including plow- 
ing, trimming or supervision. 

Rule VI. — To a fixed cost of 5 cts. per cu. yd. add 1 % cts. per 
100 ft. of "lead." 

The fixed cost of 5 cts. includes traveling the extra distance In 
loading, etc., the slower speed in loading, the shifting of the gang 
to newly plowed ground, etc., and it includes 1 ct. for plowing the 
earth. The hauling cost of 1% cts. per 100 ft. is based upon a trav- 
eling speed of 200 ft. per minute (when not delayed by loading, 
dumping, etc.) and upon the assumption that the average load is 



130 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

% cu. yd., wages of four horses and driver being $6 per 10-hr. day. 
In applying the rule never assume a "lead" shorter than 50 ft. 

"Lead" in Cu. yds. per 

feet. fresno per day. 

50 120 

100 100 

150 87 

200 75 

250 67 

300 60 

350 55 

400 50 

I have never measured any fresno loads that had been hauled as 
far as 400 ft., and I doubt very much whether fresno loads hauled 
tnat distance would average as much as % cu. yd., due to the loss 
that occurs en route. 

If the soil is not of a kind that heaps up and drifts well in front 
of the fresno, the average load will probably not exceed 9 cu. ft. 
or Vs cu. yd., particularly on long hauls. In which case the rule 
becomes : 

Rule VII. — To a fixed cost of 5 cts. per cu. yd. add 2% cts. for 
each 100 ft. of "lead." 

Then, for a 600-ft. "lead" the cost would be 5 + (6 X 2%), or 21 
cts. per cu. yd. This checks very closely with Mr. Walter N. Frick- 
stad's data for a 600-ft. haul with fresnos, as given in Engineer- 
ing-Contracting, Nov. 3, 1909. 

Based upon this last rule the cost of fresno work is as follows 
for different leads : 

"Lead" in 
feet. 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
300 
400 
500 
600 

Bear in mind that the above costs do not include cost of fore- 
man's wages, which ordinarily ranges from % to 1 ct. per cu. yd. 
Dressing roadbed and slopes will usually cost an additional % ct. 
per sq. yd. of surface trimmed. 

I have assumed a 10-hr. working day, but it is my opinion that it 
makes little difference whether the day is 8 or 10 hrs. long, for 
the horses can be "crowded" harder on the shorter day, and thus 
cover the same mileage as on the longer day. 

I have assumed that each fresno is loaded as well as dumped by 
the driver. This is one of the great advantages of a fresno over a 
drag scraper. However, in tough soils it is generally wise to 
have one man with each string of fresnos to load them. 

A four-horse fresno scraper weighs about 275 lbs. A rope should 
be tied to the end of the handle, so that the driver can jerk the rope 



Cts. per 


Cu. yds. per 


cuyd. 


fresno per day. 


SVa 


109 


7 


86 


SVa 


70 


10 


60 


111/2 


52 


13 


46 


16 


37 


19 


31 


22 


28 . 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 131 

and right the bowl when he gets back to the pit and is ready to 
load. 

The four horses are hitched abreast. The two outside horses have 
a "jockey stick," the ends of which are tied to their bits, and each 
horse's bridle is fastened to the adjoining horse's bridle by a short 
strap or rawhide string. Each of the two reins is divided into two 
lines, one line going to each horse's bridle, one of the lines from 
each rein going to one outside horse, and the other line to the sec- 
ond outside horse from it. Thus the left hand rein pulls the left 
hand outside horse and the right hand inside horse, these two 
horses guiding the other two horses by the bit straps. The right 
hand rein controls the other two horses. 

Due to the fact that fresno scrapers can ordinarily be loaded by 
the drivers, it is not necessary to work several fresnos in a string. 
In fact when building an embankment from two ditches, one on each 
side, a common method of handling the fresnos is as follows : The 
driver loads the fresno in the ditch, drives up the embankment 
diagonally, dumps the load and continues right across the embank- 
ment and down into the ditch on the opposite side, where he loads 
again after turning around, and returns. When working in this 
fashion, some foremen require all the fresnos to move in unison, 
so that a glance will show that none is loafing. When handled 
thus, however, it is not possible to plow where the fresnos are 
working, so some time is always lost in moving the fresno gang 
to newly plowed ground. This lost time has been allowed for in 
the rule for cost above given. 

Fresno work is cheaper than drag scraper work under almost 
every condition that can be named. 

It is not easy to fix the limit of economic haul with fresnos as 
compared with wheeled scrapers, principally because the size of the 
fresno load varies greatly in different soils. It is quite commonly 
believed in California that for hauls beyond 200 to 250 ft. the 
wheeled scraper is preferable, but in tough soils or in dry sand 
the fresno loads may be so small that a wheeler can compete suc- 
cessfully on shorter hauls. On the other hand, in soft, damp soils 
that heap up and drift well in front of a fresno, the economic haul 
may considerably exceed 300 ft. 

The above conclusions are based upon the assumption that the 
wage of the driver equals the wage of two horses. Where horse 
feed Is cheap and wages of men are high, it is clear that the fresno 
shows up more favorably, for It is one of the characteristics of 
fresno work that there are many horses and comparatively few men. 

In solving the problem of economic earthwork In any Individual 
case, the first step should be to measure a number of average 
loads of earth as they are delivered at the dump by fresnos and by 
wheelers. Don't measure the loads In the ditch or pit, but on the 
dump, for much may be lost in transit. Shovel the load of earth 
into a wooden box and ram It In 4 to 6-In. layers. A little time 
spent In thus measuring the loads accurately will enable a close esti- 
mate to be made of the actual yardage moved per day per scraper 
of each class, provided a boy or man Is assigned for a day to the 



132 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

task of tallying every load moved by a typical fresno gang and 
by a typical wheeler gang. 

Considering the amount of money that is usually at stake, it is 
remarkable how often guesswork prevails where a little time spent 
in measuring a few loads and a day's tally of the loads would 
settle the matter definitely. Where a gang is moving only 1,000 cu. 
yds. daily, 1 ct. saved per yard means $10 a day. Yet even the 
most skilled foreman will find it next to impossible to ascertain the 
difference of a cent a yard cost between a fresno gang and a 
wheeler gang merely by looking at them work. I am speaking now 
of work by these two types of scrapers where the length of haul 
Is such that they are almost on a parity as regards cost. Of 
course there are hauls where there can be no doubt at all, where it 
is either the fresno "hands down," or where it is the wheeler "hands 
down." 

Cost by Elevating Graders. — An elevation grader consists essen- 
tially of a four-wheeled truck provided with a plow which casts 
Its furrow upon an endless belt, which elevates the material and 
deposits it in wagons as fast as they are driven under the belt. 
For successful operation there must be few boulders or roots to stop 
the plow of the machine ; and there must be considerable room 
In which to turn the machine, and maneuver the teams going 
and coming, and the ground on which the grader is working must 
not be too hilly. The machine does not work to advantage in nar- 
row cuts, due to lack of room for wagons alongside. The machine 
is adapted to loading wagons on road work, but is especially suit- 
able for reservoir work and the like. The machine is used in 
prairie soils for digging ditches and conveying the material directly 
into the road, but the material must afterward be leveled with a 
leveling scraper or road machine ; and it would seem better prac- 
tice to use the road scraper entirely for this class of grading with- 
out resort to the elevating grader at all. Claims have been made 
that 1,000 cu. yds. in 10 hrs. are loaded by the grader. Under 
very favorable conditions this may be done, but I have never seen 
a daily average of more than 500 cu. yds. place measure loaded by 
a grader operating in easy soil. 

A grader costs about $1,000, and is hauled either by 10 or 12 
horses or by a 25-hp. traction engine, the latter being usually the 
more economical in the long run. It requires 2 men to operate the 
grader, and, where horses are used, 2 or 3 men to drive the 
horses. "Where a traction engine is used, 2 men operate the 
grader, 1 engineman operates the traction engine, and it is often 
necessary to keep a team busy part of the* time hauling water for 
the engine, if water is not supplied by gravity or by pumps. The 
traction engine burns 0.6 to 0.7 ton, or 1,200 to 1,400 lbs., per 10 
hrs. To furnish steam there will be required not over 8 lbs. "of 
water per lb. of coal, or 0.7 X 8 = 5.6 tons of water per day. The 
grader travels about 150 ft. per min. when hauled by an engine, 
and it takes 1% mlns. to turn around at each end of Its run, de- 
scribing a circle of about 50 ft. diameter In turning. It takes about 
15 seconds to load a wagon with % cu. yd. of earth measured In 



i 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 133 

place, when the grader is traveling 150 ft. per min., so that the 
grader travels 40 ft. in loading a %-yd. wagon; then it stops for 
about 15 sees, until the next wagon comes up under the belt. If 
three-horse patent dump wagons are used — and no other kind 
should be used with elevating graders — the wagon load Is 1 1/4 
cu. yds., and the grader travels about 65 ft. to load a wagon. 

I have seen 700 two-horse wagons, holding % cu. yd. each, 
loaded per 10-hr. day; and, I am informed, that with good man- 
agement and an easy soil, 700 wagons, holding more than 1 cu. yd. 
each, can be loaded per 10-hr. day. With three-horse . wagons the 
average 10-hr. day's output on the Chicago Drainage Canal was 
500 cu. yds. of top soil. 

Mr. N. Adelbert Brown, C. E., of Rochester, informs me that an 
elevating grader was used by Thomas Holihan, in grading streets 
at Canandaigua, N. Y. The streets were 60 to 75 ft. wide be- 
tween property lines, and 36 ft. between curbs. A traction engine 
was used to haul the grader, and there was no trouble in turning the 
engine and grader between the wallc lines, which was easily within 
50 ft. of space. "The efficiency of the machine was not tested fully, 
due to a lack of teams; but, when teams were available, 50 wagon 
loads, of 1% cu. yds. each, were readily loaded in an hour. The 
machine was satisfactory in stone and gravel roads and stiff clay, 
but in light sand in some cases refused to elevate." This latter is 
true, however, of all elevating graders in any dry sand that will 
not turn a furrow. 

Fred. T. Ley & Co., of Springfield, Mass., inform me that ele- 
vating graders were used by them on electric railway work in 
central New York state, both with traction engines and with horses. 
They averaged 400 to 500 cu. yds. loaded into wagons per grader 
per day. 

No matter how short the lead, a team hauling earth from a grader 
must perform a large percentage of waste labor following the 
grader, and this is equivalent to adding about 400 ft. to the "lead." 
If 3 horses and a driver are worth $4-50 a day, and the load is I14 
cu. yds., the cost of hauling is 0.6 ct. per cu. yd. per 100 ft. of haul; 
so that the waste distance traveled (400 ft. lead) adds 2% cts. per 
cu. yd. to the cost. With wages of single horses at $1, and men at 
$1.50, the fixed cost is as follows, with an output of 500 cu. yds. 
per 10 hrs. : 

Per cu. yd. 

Lost team time (400 ft. added to "lead") 2.5 cts. 

10 horses on grader and 4 men 3.5 " 

5 men on dump spreading 1.5 " 

Interest, repairs and depreciation, $5 per day. ... 1.0 " 

Total 8.5 cts. 

The rule is: 

Rule VIII. — To a fixed cost of 8% cts. add 6/10 ct. per cu. yd. per 
100 ft. of lead. 

It will take 6 three-horse wagons to handle the 500 cu. yds. per 
day where the lead is 500 ft. 

It is necessary to spread the earth on the dump to prevent stall- 



134 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Ing of the dump wagons, but by using a leveling scraper the cost 
•of this item can be reduced to 1 ct. or less, instead of the l^^ cts. 
above given for hand work. 

A traction-engine outfit will reduce the cost of operating the 
grader somewhat below the above given figures, thus : 

Per day. 
% ton coal, at $3 $ 2.00 

1 engineman 3.00 

2 grader operators 5.00 

Interest, repairs and depreciation of engine 3.50 

Total, 500 cu. yds., at 2.7 cts $13.50 

This 2.7 cts. per cu. yd., it will be seen, is 0.8 ct. less than where 
10 horses and 4 men operate the grader. 

If it is necessary to pump water by hand and haul it far for the 
traction engine, the cost may easily be increased % ct. per cu. yd., 
or more. 

In Ungineering-Contracting, April, 1906, page 102, etc., there is an 
article by Mr. Daniel J. Hauer, giving costs of elevating grader 
work on 7 railroad jobs. The limitations of the grader for narrow 
thorough cuts are well shown. The average cost was as follows 
lor an average "lead" of 800 ft., with an average daily output of 
288 cu. yds. per elevating grader: 

Per cu. yd. 

Loading $0,100 

Hauling 0.127 

Dumping and spreading 0.029 

Water boy 0.002 

I'oreman 0.010 

Total $0,268 

The wages of the grader operators were $1.50 per 10-hr. day; 
laborers, $1.50 ; two-horse team and driver, $4.60 ; three-horse team 
and driver, $6.25. The $0,268 does not include any allowance for 
interest, repairs and depreciation. This is probably as high a cost 
for elevating grader work as will be likely to occur with the same 
length of haul and the same rates of wages. 

Steam Shovel Data. — The size of a steam shovel is usually 
denoted by the capacity of the dipper in cubic yards and the weight 
of the whole machine in tons ; both should be given, for in a hard 
material a smaller dipper is used than in soft material when work- 
ing with the same steam shovel. The following are some of the 
standard sizes : 

Weight, tons 35 45 55 65 

Dipper, cu. yds I14 IV2 1% 2 

Coal in 10 hrs., tons % 11% I14 

Water in 10 hrs., gals 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 

The price of shovels is approximately $130 per ton for the larger 
sizes, and $160 per ton for the 35-ton size. 

A shovel of any size is so designed that, when digging in average 
earth, it can average at least 3 dipperfuls per minute, when the 
dipper arm swings only 90°. Shovels are built to run on standard 
gage track, and in operating a shovel it is customary to use rails 
In 5-ft. lengths, so that the shovel cuts 5 ft. into a face before it is 



75 


90 


21/2 


3 


2 


2y, 


4,000 


4,500 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 135 

shifted ahead. The time required to shift ahead may average as 
low as 3 mins., and should never average more than 5 mins., but on 
poorly managed work I have often seen 10 mins. consumed in shift- 
ing the shovel ahead. 

"Traction shovels" weighing 26 tons, or less, may be had, and 
they do not require rails to run upon, but are provided with broad- 
tired traction wheels. 

Steam shovels of small size, mounted like a locomotive crane so 
that they can swing a full circle, are especially adapted for loading 
wagons in confined places. 

Tlie width of the cut or "swath" excavated by a shovel varies 
from 18 ft. for the smallest shovels to 40 ft. for the largest. The 
height of the face of the cut is usually 15 to 30 ft. In tough 
material the face of the cut should not be higher than the dipper 
can reach, that is, 14 to 20 ft. Too high a face in treacherous, 
sliding material is to be avoided, for the shovel may be buried by a 
slide. 

The height of the face of the cut has a marked influence upon 
the output of a shovel. If the face is only 6 ft. high and 18 ft. 
wide, there are only 4 cu. yds. per lineal foot of cut, or 20 cu. yds. 
for every 5 lin. ft. of cut. A 1-yd. shovel would excavate this in, 
say, 10 mins. ; then, if 5 mins. were spent moving forward for the 
next "bite," there would be 15 mins. required to excavate 20 cu. 
yds., and one-third of the time would be spent in shifting the 
shovel. Shallow cuts are expensive not only on this account, but be- 
cause a full dipper cannot be averaged when the height of the face 
of the cut becomes much less than one and a half or two times the 
depth of the bucket. 

In addition to the lost time of shifting the shovel, there is more 
or less lost time switching cars up to the shovel. On "thorough 
cut" work this lost time of switching is greater than on "side cut" 
work. A "thorough cut" is practically a huge trench, in which the 
shovel is working at the face, so that only one or two cars can 
come up on the track alongside of the shovel, the car track being 
in the bottom of the cut. This method of attack should be avoided 
wherever possible. In "side cut" work a full train of cars can 
come alongside the shovel, one car being loaded after another until 
the train is loaded. 

There are frequently conditions that make it cheaper in the end 
to use wagons instead of cars for hauling the earth away. In 
such cases never use a large dipper, for so much earth will spill 
over the sides of the wagon as to block the road and delay the 
movement of the wagons, even when a snatch team is used. A 
1%-yd. bucket is as large as should be used for loading wagons. 

Hauling With Dinkeys. — The ordinary "contractor's locomotive," 
or "dinkey," travels on a track of 3-ft. gage. The smallest size 
of dinkey commonly used weighs 8 short tons, and is listed as 
having a tractive pull of 2,900 lbs. on a level track. Whether 
the actual tractive capacity is exactly 2,900 I do not know, but 
it must be approximately that, for any locomotive can exert a pull 
of 25% of the weight on its driving wheels even on clean rails. 



136 HANDBOOK OP COST DATA. 

The loads that a dinkey can pull, however, are much over-estimate<i 
in catalogues, due to too low rolling resistances assumed for cars. 
It is said in some of the catalogues that the resistance to traction 
is 6% lbs. per short ton. This rate applies only to the best of 
standard gage railway tracks with heavy rails, well ballasted, and 
with heavy wheel loads. On a contractor's narrow gage, light rail 
track, the resistance to traction is probably not must less than 20 
to 40 lbs. per ton, and at the point where the cars are loaded it is 
doubtless more, due to the dirt on the rails. It requires almost 
twice as great a pull to start a car as to keep it in motion. 

The resistance due to gravity is 20 lbs. per short ton per 1% of 
grade ; but, of course, the tractive power of a locomotive falls off 
20 lbs. for every ton of its own weight for each 1% of grade. 

Based upon these data, and upon the assumption that the resist- 
ance to traction is 40 lbs. per short ton, an 8-ton dinkey is capable 
of hauling the following loads, including the weight of the cars : 

Total tons. 

Level track 70 

1% grade 46 

2% grade 33 

3% grade 26 

4% grade 21 

5% grade 17 

6% grade 14 

8% grade 10 

Note. — On a poor track not even as great loads as the above can 
be hauled. 

Due to the accidents that frequently occur from the breaking 
in two of trains on steep grades, and from the running away of 
engines, it is advisable to avoid using grades of more than 6%. 

When heavily loaded, a dinkey travels 5 miles per hr. on a 
straight track ; but when lightly loaded, or on a down grade, it 
may run 9 miles an hour. 

The following are the average struck measure capacities of the 
dump cars made by one firm (variations of weight of several hun- 
dred pounds occur, according to the make) : 

^"e^irht.^'ibs" .^.''.":::::: .-1,700 2.000'^^ 2,300' 2,800^^ 3.500' 

A car seldom averages its struck capacity of earth measured 
"in place," even when the car is heaped full with a shovel ; for not 
only are there vacant places in the corners of the car, but the loose 
earth is 20% to 30% more bulky than earth ''in place." 

The number of dinkeys required to keep a shovel busy can be 
estimated from the data given. On short hauls (1,000 ft. or less) 
one very often sees only one dinkey serving a 1%-yd. shovel. In 
such cases the dinkey is not heavily loaded, so that it can run fast, 
and by having enough men to dump a train of 6 cars in 2 or 3 mins. 
a fairly good daily output of the shovel can be secured. 

In dumping the cars, estimate on the basis of one 3-yd. car 
dumped by each man in 1% to 2 mins. The men work in groups 
of 2 or 3 in dumping the cars, and enough men are usually provided 
on the dump to dump a train in 3 mins. 

When two or more dinkeys are serving one shovel, and long 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 137 

trains (12 cars) are being used, it would seenn that very little lost 
shovel time would occur due to switching in an empty train ; but, 
even under favorable conditions, I find that 1% to 2 mins. per train 
are lost in switching. This is another reason why a shovel served 
by only one dinkey makes so good a showing on short-haul work. 
Still another reason is that at the time the shovel is shifting for- 
ward, the dinkey can often make its round trip ; and on shallow 
face work this shifting of tne shovel occurs frequently. 

The method of using a hoisting engine and cable to move the 
cars is quite common in railroad work, where the hauls are short, 
say 1,000 ft. or less. The track is laid on a rather steep grade, at 
least 3% from the pit to the dump, and the cars coast down 
by gravity usually in trains of 4 cars holding about 2 cu. yds. each. 
The hoisting engines pull the cars back with a wire rope. A team 
of horses will have all it can do to pull a train of 4 such cars 
even on a slight down grade to the dump. As a matter of fact, 
a team that is working steadily cannot be counted on to pull more 
than two cars holding 3 cu. yds. each, on a level track of the 
kind ordinarily used in contract work. 

The 3-ft. gage track commonly used is laid with rails weighing 
16 to 40 lbs. per yard of single rail. A 30 or 35-lb. rail makes a 
track that is not easily kinked under the loads, even when ties are 
spaced 4 ft. centers. A 6 X 6-in. tie, 5 ft. long, is the best size. I 
have tried 4 X 4-in. ties, but they are easily split by the spikes, and 
are not of much value after being used once ; whereas the 6 X 6-in. 
ties can be laid 4 to 6 times. After the rails and ties are delivered, 
and the roadway graded, such a track can be laid for $100 per mile, 
or ?2 per 100 ft., when wages are 15 cts. per hr. And the track 
can be torn up and loaded on wagons for ?1 per 100 ft. ; there being 
1 ton of SO-lb. rails and 375 ft. B. M. of 6 X 6-in X 5-ft. ties per 
100 ft. of track. 

In railroad work it is usually necessary to build a trestle through 
which the cars are dumped in making the embankment. The trestles 
usually consist of two posts per bent, the posts being of round 
timber, capped with a squared stick, and sway braced with round 
timber saplings. In the section on Timberwork the reader will find 
data on the cost of trestlework. 

Summary of the Cost of Steam Shovel Work. — ^As above stated, 
shovels are so designed that about 3 dipperfuls can be averaged per 
minute when actually loading cars ; but I find that even with well 
arranged tracks, and a good high face, the necessary delays of shift- 
ing the shovel ahead, switching the trains, moving the shovel back 
to start a new swath, etc., keep the shovel idle about half the time. 
Occasionally, under exceptionally favorable conditions, a shovel may 
average 6 or 6% hrs. of actual shoveling per 10-hr. day. 

The size of the dippers, as listed in catalogues, often refers to 
dippers heaped full of loose earth. I find that the actual "place 
measure" averages about 30% less than the listed capacity of a 
dipper, for not every dipper goes out full, and even if it does the 
earth is not as compact in the dipper as in place. 



138 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

On the basis of 3 dippers loaded per minute of actual work, we 
have the following for dippers of different sizes: 

Dipper. — Output in Cu. Yds. — 

Nominal. Actual (average). Steady Shoveling. 

Yds. Yds. 10 hrs. 5 hrs. 

1 0.7 1,260 630 
1% 1.0 1,800 900 

2 1.4 2,520 1,260 
21/2 1.7 3,060 1,530 

We see that where the shovel is actually shoveling 5 hrs. out of 
the 10 (and this is a good average), a 1-yd. dipper will load 630 
cu. yds.; a 1%-yd. dipper, 900 cu. yds.; a 2%-yd. dipper, 1,530 cu. 
yds. These are not merely theoretical outputs, for I have monthly 
output records that show these averages for each 10-hr. shift. 
However, the track arrangement must be such that cars are 
promptly supplied to the shovel, if any such average as 900 cu. yds. 
per day per 1%-yd. dipper is to be maintained. 

Taking the 1%-yd. dipper as the common size, we may say that 
in "average earth," with cars promptly supplied, 900 cu. yds. are a 
fair 10-hr. day's work ; but if only one dinkey is used, the lost time 
may easily be increased to such an extent that 650 cu. yds. become 
a good day's work in "average earth." In hardpan, or exceedingly 
tough clay, the output of a shovel may fall to about half the out- 
put in "average earth" ; that is, 450 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day with a 
1 % -yd. shovel. 

The size of shovel to select for any given work depends upon the 
yardage of earth in each cut — not upon the total yardage in the 
contract. On very light cuts, such as street and road work, cellars, 
etc., a small shovel with a % to %-yd. dipper is usually most 
economic. Use a small 26-ton traction shovel, with 1-yd. dipper for 
small railway cuts, where moves from one cut to another will be 
frequent. Use a 55 to 65-ton shovel with 1% to 2 %-yd. dipper 
where cuts are heavy, and moves not very frequent. Use a 75 to 
90-ton shovel, with 2% to 3 1/2 -yd. dipper, on heavy cuts, where 
moves are infrequent. Of course a heavy shovel with a small dipper 
is necessary in hardpan and very tough material. 

The cost of operating a 5 5 -ton shovel is ordinarily as follows, 
assuming 22 days worked during the month, and 6 months worked 
during the year, or 132 days actually worked per year : 

Per Day 

Shovel Crp.w ; "Worked. 

1 engineman on shovel, at $125 per mo .....$ 5.70 

1 craneman on shovel, at $90 per mo 4.10 

1 fireman on shovel, at $65 per mo 3.00 

6 pitmen, at $1.75 per 10-hr. day 10.50 

1 night watchman, at $50 per mo 2.30 

Total shovel crew $ 25.60 

Coal for shovel, 1% tons, at $4, delivered $ 5.00 

Water 3.00 

Oil and waste :aa-; oor 

Interest on $7,200 shovel at 6% per year -=- 132 days 3.25 

Repairs on $7,200, 3% per mo. -^ 22 days 10.00 

Depreciation on $7,200, 6% per year -f- 132 days 3.25 

Total steam shovel crew, fuel, repairs, etc $ 50.60 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 139 

Moving and housing shovel once during year, say, $500 -i- 

132 days 4.00 



Total charges on shovel $ 54.60 

Train Crew: 

2 enginemen (on 2 dinkeys), at $3 $ 6.00 

2 trainmen, at ?2 4.00 

6 dumpmen, at ?1.75 10.50 



Total train crew $ 20.50 

Coal for 2 dinlieys, 0.6 ton, at $4 $ 2.40 

Water 1.50 

Oil and waste 0.50 

Interest on $8,000 (2 dinkeys and 24 cars), at 6% per year 

-^ 132 days 3.65 

Repairs on $8,000, at 11/2% per mo. -^ 22 days 5.45 

Depreciation on $8,000, at 8% per year -=- 132 days 4.85 



Total train crew, fuel, repairs, etc $ 38.85 

Moving and housing locomotives and cars once during year, 

same as for shovel 4.00 



Total charges of locomotives and cars $ 42.85 

Track Crew and Track: 

6 men grading and track shifting, at $1.75 $ 10.50 

Interest on $2,250 (rails (35 lbs. per yd.) and fastenings 

for 1 mile of track), at 6% h- 132 days 1.00 

Depreciation on $2,250, at 12% -^ 132 days 2.00 

Interest on $750 (ties, at 30 cts. each, 2 miles track), at 

6% -^ 132 days 0.35 

Depreciation on $750 (ties), at 10% per mo. -^ 22 days 3.50 



Total track crew and track $ 17.35 

Supervision, Etc.: 

% superintendent, at $150 per mo $ 3.50 

1 foreman, at $75 per mo 3.50 

1 timekeeper, at $65 per mo 3.00 

General management, office expenses, etc., 6% of daily pay- 
roll 4.00 



Total supervision, etc $ 14.00 

Grand total $128.80 

Summarizing we have the following daily cost and cost per cu. 
yd. when the daily output is 1,000 cu. yds. (or 22,000 cu. yds. per 
month) : 

Per cu. yd. 
Per day. cts. 

Shovel expenses $ 54.60 G.46 

Train expenses 42.85 4.29 

Track expenses 17.35 1.73 

Supervision, etc 14.00 1.40 



Total $128.80 12.88 

Tough material and unfavorable conditions frequently reduce 

the daily output to 600 cu. yds., and run the cost up to 21 cts. per 

cu. yd. 

The most variable of the four main items of daily expense is 

Track Expense. Often a large crew of men is kept busy grading 

for new tracks, although it is rare that more than 10 or 12 men 

are thus engaged for each shovel crew. 

The estimated percentages for repairs and depreciation are lib- 



140 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

eral, but it must be remembered that repairs increase as the 
machines grow older, and that a high allowance should be made 
for depreciation to cover obsolescence, i. e., the "getting out of date" 
or behind the times. 

Depreciation of ties is especially rapid in contract work, due to 
the destruction that occurs from frequent track shifting. Depre- 
ciation of rails is also rapid, due to their becoming kinked. 

Tha foregoing itemization of cost should be taken merely to repre- 
sent a Jairly typical example, but each particular case will have its 
varying conditions that must be considered. 

Where temporary trestles must be built to carry the cars out over 
proposed fills, as is common on railway work, the cost of the 
trestles must be added to the above figures. The cost of trestle- 
work can be estimated from data civen in the section on Piling and 
Timberwork, bearing in mind, however, that much lighter timbers 
can be used for dinkey locomotives and trains than for standard 
railway traclis. It should also be remembered that round poles 
can usually be secured for the legs or posts of trestle bents, and 
that each bent usually has only two legs. The squared stringers, 
ties and caps can usually be recovered, but the posts, sills and sway 
braces are buried permanently in tlie fill. 

Cost of Digging a Well or Cesspool.*— Circular wells or holes 
are often dug for water supply an I for cesspools around buildings. 

A well was dug on Long Island in a clay material with an occa- 
sional boulder. The material was stiff enough to stand up with- 
out shoring. The hole was 8 ft. in diameter and 24 ft. deep. For 
two days two men did the work, but, when a bucket had to be used, 
another man was added to the force. A three-legged derrick, with a 
crank on it, was used to hoist the bucket of earth. The excavation 
was made entirely with picks and shovels. There were 1,305 cu. ft. 
of material excavated, or about 4 8 cu. yds. A 10-hr. day was 
worked. The cost of the work was as follows : 

2 men 2 days, at $1.50 $ 6.00 

3 men 5 days, at $1.50 22.50 

Total $28.50 

Tliis gives a cost of 60 cts. per cu. yd. for excavating and 
hoisting the material and dumping it on the ground by the side of 
the hole. This cost is quite reasonable for this work. 

Cost of Trenching, Cross- References. — Data on this subject will 
be found in the following sections of this book : Waterworks, 
Sewers, and Miscellaneous Costs. Consult the index under Trenches. 

The Cost of Backfilling a Trench With a Scraper.f — Fig. 1 shows 
a Doan Ditching Scraper for back filling trenches or ditches. 

To backfill a trench, a rope or chain about 20 ft. long is fastened 
to the cable chain on the scraper, and a team is hitched on to the 
end of the rope. The team, of course, works on one side of the 
trench. The scraper weighs only 75 lbs., and can be dragged back 



*Engtnering-Contracting, Oct. 28, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, January, 1906, p. 11. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 



141 



by one man, although some contractors prefer to have two men on 
the scraper, especially when the men are small. 

In 10 hrs. a team and driver and one man on the scraper back- 
filled 400 lin. ft. of trench 2 ft. wide by 7 ft. deep. This is more 
than 200 cu. yds. backfilled at a cost of 2i^ cts. per cu. yd. With 
two men on the scraper, and working very hard, as much as 700 lin. 
ft. were backfilled in a day, which is equivalent to less than 2 cts. 
per cu. yd. In this case no tamping was required, but, even where 
tamping is called for, a scraper is much cheaper than a shovel for 
backfilling. 

While good work can be done with the ordinary drag scraper, it is 
not so good a tool for backfilling as that described above, for three 
reasons : First, because a Doan scraper is lighter ; second, be- 
cause a drag scraper is narrower ; and third, because a drag 




Fig. 1. Doan Scraper. 

scraper is not so quickly dumped. The Doan scraper is made of oak, 
shod with steel on the cutting edge. This cutting edge is 4 ft. long, 
which means a good wide swath cut at each forward pull. In addi- 
tion to its use for backfilling, the scraper is also suited for use in 
digging ditches, leveling embankments, etc. The scraper is made by 
the Sidney Steel Scraper Co., of Sidney, Ohio. 

Prices for Drainage Ditch Work.* — The following figures on ditch 
construction in Minnesota were given by Mr. George A. Ralph, 
State Drainage Engineer, in a paper before the Minnesota Sur- 



"Engineering-Contracting , July 10, 1907. 



142 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

veyors' and Engineers' Society. The figures are the average prices 
and are based on contract prices for worlc on which Mr. Ralph was 
engineer; they cover a period extending from 1886 to 1906: 

Slip scraper work : . Per cu. yd. 

Not exceeding 6 ft in depth $0.10 

Not exceeding 10 ft. in depth 0.12 

Not exceeding 12 ft. in depth 0.14 

Elevating grader work 0.08 

Shovel work, 2 to 6 ft. deep 0.15 

Shovel work, 2 to 10 ft. deep 0.20 

Hayknife work, 2 to 4 ft. deep 0.12 

Hand labor in timbered swamps 0.15 to 0.20 

Good dredge work 0.08 

Dredge work, unfavorable conditions 0.10 to 0.14 

Capstan ditch, plow work 0.40 to 0.60 

Cost of Boring Test Holes in Earth.* — For the purpose of pros- 
pecting, testing foundation sites, well drilling, etc., it is often neces- 
sary to bore through sand, gravel, clay, etc. There are four com- 
mon methods of boring in earth : ( 1 ) By means of an earth auger ; 
( 2 ) by a churn drill ; ( 3 ) by driving a pipe and washing out the 
earth inside the pipe with the aid of a force pump, called "wash 
boring" ; and (4) by post hole diggers of various forms. 

Any of these methods (except the third) may be used either with 
or without a casing pipe to preserve the sides of the hole from 
crumbling in, and any kind of power may be used. In soil that 
crumbles readily a casing pipe is always necessary where the hole 
must be sunk to any considerable depth ; but by the exercise of a 
little ingenuity it is often possible to bore even in dry sand with- 
out using a casing pipe. We are indebted to Mr. J. M. Rudiger for 
the following hint, which will be found exceedingly useful in boring 
in sand up to depths of about 30 feet: Pour one or more barrels of 
water on the sand at the site of the proposed bore hole. The water 
will pass vertically downward, spreading no great distance laterally. 
In the sand thus made damp, an earth auger may be used to bore 
without any caving in of the sides. If the hole is to be used as a 
well, lower a casing pipe into it after water has been struck. 

Cost of Hand Auger Prospecting. — Mr. Charles Catlett is author- 
ity for the following methods of prospecting for deposits of hema- 
tite in Virginia. The set of tools consists of a steel auger bit 
twisted into a spiral (4 turns) 2 ins. diam., the steel of the bit 
being % in. thick and 13 ins. long and provided with a split point. 
This biL is welded to an 18-in. length of 1-in. wrought pipe having 
a screw threaded end. Another chopping bit for use in hard ma- 
terial is made of 1%-in. octagon steel with a 2-in. cutting edge, and 
is welded to a length of 1-in. wrought pipe. As many lengths of 
1-in. wrought pipe are provided as necessary, Vvith screw couplings. 
An iron handle, 2 ft. long, is provided with a central eye and with 
a set screw so that it can be fastened to the 1-in. pipe at any place. 
A 10-ft. length of li/4-in. pipe, threaded at each end for connection 
to the 1-in. pipe, is provided for use in giving weight to the pipe 
drill rods in churning. The other tools are: A sand pump of 1 or 
2 ft. of 1-in. pipe with a leather valve, and cord for lowering it ; 

*Engineering-Contr acting, January, 1906, p. 11. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. -13 

two pairs of pipe tongs; two monkey wrenches; 25-ft. tape; flat 
file ; spring balance ; oil can ; water bucket, etc. In boring through 
soft material, the auger is rotated by two men, raised every few 
minutes, scraped clean, and the handle fastened higher up on the 
rods. In hardpan or rock the churn bit is used, and the sludrre is 
removed either with the auger or with the sand pump. The greatest 
depth penetrated with this outfit was 80 ft. Up to a depth of 
25 ft. two men suffice; from 25 to 35 ft., three men; 35 to 50 ft., 
three men, the third man standing on a rough timber frame 15 or 
20 ft. high, so that the pipe need not be unjointed when raised. 
For depths of 50 ft. more the pipe is unjointed when raised. The 
following are progress records on eight holes: 

WOT.E A . 

Through. Ft. 

Sand and clay 2 

Yellow clay • ". 6 

Hematite ore 5 

Clay and ore 3 

Total 16 

Time of 2 men. 'i hrs. 
t Cost per ft, 18.7 cts. 

HOLE B. 

Through. Ft. 

Yellow clay 12 

Black flint ! % 

Yellow clay 2 % 

White sand 1 

Sandstone 2 

Total 18 

Time. 2 men, 5 hrs. 
tCost per ft. 8.3 cts. 

HOLE c. 

Through. Ft 

Sand 1 

Shale 4 

Yellow clay and sand 9 

Sandstone : 5 

Total 19 

Time, 2 men, 8% hrs. 
t Cost per ft, 13.4 cts. 

HOLE D. 

Through. Ft. 

Yellow clay ; 17% 

Solid ore 8 V^ 

Total 26 

Time. 2 men. 6 hrs. 
. t Cost per ft, 6.9 cts. 

HOLE E. 

Through. ' Ft. 

Sand and gravel 1 

Clay 28 

Total 29 

Time, 2 men. 5 hrs. 
t Cost per ft., 5 cts. 

t Assuming wages at 15 cts. per hour. 



144 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



HOLE P. 

Through. Ft. 

Loose slide 3 

Clay 7 

Shale ore 6 

Wash ore 24 

Total 40 

Time, 2 men, 11 hrs. ; 3 men, 4 hrs. 
t Cost per ft.. 12.7 cts. 

HOLE G. 

Through Ft. 

Sand and drift* 19 

Clay 33 

Total 52 

Time, 2 men, 15 hrs. : 3 men, 4 hrs. 
tCost per ft.. 12.1 cts. 

HOLE H. 

Through. , Ft. 

Sand and drift 12 

Clay 51 

Total 63 

Time, 2 men. 5 hrs. : 3 men. 25 hrs. 
tCost per ft, 20.2 cts. 



♦Sandstone drift. tAssuming wages at 15 cts. per hour. 

Cost of Wash Borings on a Canal Survey.J — Mr. A. W. Saunders 
is author of the following: 

These data were obtained on a survey of 95 miles, covering the 
operations of a year. The line ran over a little rough country, two 
rivers and a lake. The land was not "rocky," though there were 
some stony plots of course. 

The equipment was complete in all its details, thus enabling an 
economic and thorough prosecution of the work, 1. e., making test 
borings to locate the "rock line" or elevation of the rock in the 
earth, on a survey of a ship canal. 

Two parallel lines were run 500 to 1,500 ft. to the right and left 
of the main line. This necessitated a systematic and constant hustle 
to prevent a stalling of the work, for one machine often was on one 
side of a river and others scattered over a mile of ground. 

Fig. 2 is the Carpenter wash drill. The pump is to the left and 
rear of the hammer. This machine, equipped for 120 ft. of work 
with pump, 500 ft. of 1%-in. water pipe and all necessary acces- 
sories, will now cost $200. This machine is readily transported by 
hand through swamps, marshes or even rivers ; and, with its tool 
box, makes but a small one-horse load. The illustration shows a 
machine rigged to put down deep holes (100 ft). Fig. 3 shows 
method of pulling the pipe. 

Two 2-oz. sample bottles are shown (just below the fore- 
man's knee). The notes are recorded in his note book suitably 
ruled ; samples of the borings are obtained, the bottles labeled and 
all sent into the office where the whole is plotted ; the notes and 
samples are filed. 

XEngineering-Contracting, Dec. 9, 1908. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 



145 




Fig. 2. Wash Drill. 




Fig. 3. Pulling Pipe. 



146 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Fig. 4 is the Sullivan earth drill. Water is forced through the 
drill rods down to the foot or "shoe" of the casing and then up 
in the casing bringing with it the material drilled through, a 
Bample of which is thus obtained and its "condition" noted. This 




Fig. 4. Earth Drill. 

machine is not as easily moved as the other and trails along be- 
hind a wagon. It will cost $300 completely equipped for 100 ft. of 
work with 500 ft. of 1%-in. water pipe, pump, etc. A portable 
blacksmith or repair shop, 12 x 12 x 8 ft., equipped with pipe work- 
ing tools, forge, etc., is figured in with the cost given below. 

The total amount of work in one year's continuous .work of 4 
crews (increased to 8 crews for 5 months), was 750 holes aggregate 
ing 33,711 ft. exclusive of water. The cost of the entire outfit (8 
machines complete, repair shop and tools) was considered sunk in 
the enterprise. The total cost was $21,862.12, or $230 per mile of 
survey, or 64.9 cts. per ft. of boring, divided as follows: 

Salaries and subsistence $18,593.46 

Traveling expenses 189.48 

Plant, tools, repairs 2,242.41 

Explosives 508.32 

Freight and express charges 129.17 

Office expenses 199.28 

$21,862.12 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 147 

This includes its share of the expense of the chief engineer, assist- 
ant engineer and other engineering work, as well as the plotting, etc. 
The actual cost of all borings, exclusive of the cost of the plant, re- 
pairs, superintending, freight, express, traveling and incidentals, 
was 48.7 cts. per ft. of boring, much of it through hard compact 
material. 

The scale of wages was: Assistant engineer, $150 per month; 
superintendent, $100 ; assistant superintendent, $60 ; foreman, $45 ; 
laborers, $30 ; all a monthly rate, with subsistence furnished. A 
teamster with a team received $90 per month and "found" himself 
and team. A regular crew consisted of a working foreman and 
4 men. 

I used a Carpenter machine on the Wachusett Aqueduct, Ma.ssa- 
chusetts, and often obtained a sample of earth at a depth of 240 ft. 
in one-half day. 

On another job in New York state, a Carpenter, with some of 
my Massachusetts men, was 17 days on one hole, including lost time 
by reason of bad weather, breakages and 2 Sundays ; 55 half- 
pound sticks of dynamite were used blasting and blowing boulders 
out of the way. This was an unusual condition, yet I quote It, 
as I had to meet it and overcome it. It figures in with the cost. 

On water the machines are set up on rafts 17.5 x 24.5 ft. composed 
of timbers, planks and oil barrels and constructed so as to allow 
the raft to be moved away from the pipe should occasion require. 

There need be but little time lost during the winter. Greater care 
is necessary, however, to prevent the pumps and pipes from freezing 
at night. 

Comparing the working of the two types of machines, during one- 
quarter of the year (3 months), the Carpenter machine drove 21 
holes to a total depth of 1,501.6 ft. at a total labor cost of $760.35, 
explosives and freight $22.69, which is equivalent to 52.1 ct. per ft. 

The Sullivan machine drove 22 holes in the same time to a total 
depth of 1,384.6 ft. at a labor cost of $687.04, explosives and freight 
$32.48, which is equivalent to 51.9 ct. per ft. 

Comparing these two same machines on a single hole each, we 
have: 

Carpenter. Sullivan. 

Loose material 0.0 to 42.6 0.0 to 53.3 

Hard packed 42.6 to 72.0 52.3 to 74.5 

Rock 72.0 to 73.8 74.5 to 75.8 

Time boring (including 1 rainy day).... 3.85 days 4.25 days 

Cost per foot 43.7 cts 45.8 cts 

Dynamite (40%) 3.5 lbs. 5 lbs. 

Electric exploders 7 5 

Time removing drill rod 9 mins. 13 mins. 

Time removing casing 39 mins. 30 mins. 

Other comparisons might show advantage to the other machine. 

As our business was to locate the rock, I caused the men to drill 
into and blast upon it, thus making sure of it. The rock drills come 
along later, but are not subjects of this article. 

Neither of these machines is adapted to drilling in rock. They 
can drive the casing to the rock and no further. 



148 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Wash Drill Borings on a Canal Survey.* — ^In surveying 
in 1897-1900 the several possible routes for the proposed ship 
canal or deep waterway connecting the Great Lakes with Atlantic 
tide waters the character of the excavation was sought by making 
25 diamond drill borings and some hundreds of wash 
drill borings along the various routes. In the following 
paragraphs we summarize from the scattered data in the report of 
the Board of Engineers such facts as are given regarding the 
methods and costs of making the wash borings. These figures are 
not so complete in detail as might be wished, but, with the omis- 
sions kept in mind, should prove a reasonably good guide for engi- 
neers about to undertake similar work. In presenting the records 
we shall take up the several routes separately. First, however, 
some of the features common to the work as a whole will be men- 
tioned. 

Organization. — The organization of the boring parties on the 
several routes varied somewhat. Usually, however, they comprised 
for eacn route a superintendent having charge of all the boring 
gangs and one or more boring gangs composed of a foreman, three 
or four laborers, and a teamster with team and wagon. The 
wages paid are not given in the report, but for similarly organized 
gangs for diamond drill work they were as follows : Superintendent, 
¥125 per month; foreman, $100 per month; laborers, $55 per 
month; teamster with team and wagon, $75 to $90 per month. 
It is fair to assume, since the time and location of the borings were 
the same and the work was done for the same employer, that about 
the same wages were paid to the wash boring gangs. 

Method of Borings. — The boring process was the usual one of the 
method, but the outfits used varied considerably. Whatever the out- 
fit the process consisted in alternately "driving casing" and "drill- 
ing" until "bottom" was reached. Where obstructions were en- 
countered that could not be passed by drilling, they were removed 
by pulling the drill rod and lifting the casing 3 or 4 ft. and then 
firing a stick or two of dynamite at the bottom of the hole. 

Routes. — In making the surveys, two routes were considered for 
getting from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario. One was from Tonawanda 
via Lockport to Olcott and the other was from Lasalle below 
Tonawanda to Lewiston, both on the Niagara River. Two routes 
were also considered for getting from Lake Ontario to the Hudson 
River. One route was from Oswego via the Oswego River, Oneida 
Lake and the Mohawk Valley to Norman's Kill on the Hudson, and 
the other was along the St. Lawrence River to Lake St. Francis, 
then up Lake Champlain and across country to the Hudson River. 

Tonawanda-Olcott and Lasalle-Lewiston Routes. — The borings for 
these routes were taken on sections 1,500 ft. apart and were carried 
to rock or to a depth below tne bottom of the proposed 30-ft. chan- 
nel. On the Tonawanda-Olcott route the materials penetrated were 
sand and gravel and sand, clay and sand, hard clay and hardpan. 



*Engineering-Contracting, March 27, 1907. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 149 

and on the Lasalle-Lewiston route they were sand, gravel, clay and 
hardpan. The force maKing the borings consisted of one superin- 
tendent and three boring parties, each composed of a foreman, 
three laborers and a teamster with a team to haul water and move 
the machines from hole to hole. In all 404 holes were bored to an 
aggregate depth of 9,624 ft. The cost of the work was as follows: 
Item. Total. Per foot. 

Salaries $5,552.11 $0.5769 

Traveling expenses 123.92 0.0128 

Plant 649.05 0.0673 

Explosives 223.87 0.0232 

Freight and express 0.70 

Office expenses 33.00 0.0034 

$6,582.65 $0.6863 
These figures do not include the cost of surveys locating the 
bore holes, but they do include the total cost of the plants which 
was considered sunk when the work was completed. 

Oswego-Mohawk Route, Western Division. — ^The borings on the 
Western Division of the Oswego-Mohawk route extended from Os- 
wego to Rome and comprised the work in Peter Scott's swamp, 
Oneida Lake and Oswego River and Oswego Harbor. For the 
Oswego river and harbor work the machines were mounted on small 
flatboats with open wells at the center. The work on Oneida Lake 
was done through the ice. In all 750 holes were bored to an aggre- 
gate depth of 33,711 ft. and including the depth in water. The 
cost of the work was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per foot 

Salaries $19,645.96 $0.5827 

Traveling expenses 219.75 0.0065 

Plant 3,035.00 0.0900 

Explosives 508.32 0.0091 

Freight and express 203.77 0.0065 

Office expenses 199.28 0.0059 

Total $23,812.08 $0.7007 

Oswego-Mohawk Route, Eastern Division. — The work on this 
route comprised 290 soundings by hand with a steel rod and 1,562 
actual borings, amounting together to 55,521 ft. aggregate depth. 
As indicating the character of the boring the following table is 
given; 

Earth 7,611 

Sand 20,706 

Clay , 9,880 

Blue clay 177 

Gravel 2,815 

Shale 161 

Hardpan 100 

Quicksand 1,529 

Sand and gravel 2,728 

Sand and clay 3,176 

Clay and gravel 760 

Sand and shale 262 

Clay and shale 902 

Gravel and stone 105 

Gravel and boulder 177 

Hardpan and boulder 87 

Hardpan and stone 36 

Sand and cobble 63 



150 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Gravel and shale 292 

Sand, gravel and stone 77 

Sand, loam and mud 900 

Sand, clay and gravel 1,843 

Gravel and cobble 91 

Mud 417 

Rock 626 

Total penetration, ft 55,521 

Four types of machines were used on the work, two being manu- 
facturers machines, one a Pierce well boring machine and one a 
Sullivan wash drill, and two being home-made affairs. The first 
of these latter consisted of a simple tripod, with a pulley at the 
apex and a rope passing over the pulley and attached alternately 
to a wooden maul for driving casing and to the drill rod. The sec- 
ond of these home-made devices was more elaborate. II consisted of 
a frame like a small pile driver, that is, two leads with back braces 
mounted on base timbers. The leads were 15 ft. high and the dis- 
tance between the bottoms of the leads and back braces was 4 ft. 
The base extended 2 ft. in front of the leads. A pulley between the 
leads at the top and one set in brackets in front of it provided for 
handling the hammer and the drill rods. The hammer was of iron, 
with a hollow in the bottom for a wooden cushion. In operation 
the machine was guyed by two wire ropes. It could be loaded onto 
a two-horse wagon in 15 minutes and unloaded and set up in the 
same length of time. 

The boring gangs each consisted of a foreman, three or four 
laborers and a teamster and double team. A superintendent of 
borings had charge of all the gangs. The borings varied from a 
few feet to 190 ft. in depth. The cost of the work was as 
follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Salaries $26,470.80 $0.4769 

Traveling expenses 687.62 0.0124 

Plant, repairs and tools 2,287.03 0.0412 

Explosives 182.20 0.0033 

Freight and express 131.56 0.0027 

Office expenses 298.08 0.0054 

Total $30,057.29 $0.5419 

Champion Route, Ogdensburg to Lake St. Francis. — The borings 
along this route were made partly on land and partly in water, 
using a Sullivan machine. The division was as follows : 

Item. No. holes. Ft. depth. 

Sand borings 148 7,052 

"Water borings 151 2,123 

Total -. 299 9,175 

The cost of the work was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Salaries $6,103.12 $0.6552 

Traveling expenses 438.37 0.0477 

Plant, repairs, tools 830.92 0.0905 

Explosives 319.38 0.0347 

Freight and express 72.54 0.0078 

Office expenses 54.54 0.0059 

Total $7,818.87 $0.8418 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 151 

Champlain Route, Hudson River Division. — This line of borings 
began in Lake Champlain at Port Henry and ran to Whitehall, 
thence across country to Fort Edward on the Hudson River and 
thence down the river to the State Dam at Troy. From Troy to 
Fort Edward one party consisting of a foreman, three laborers and 
a teamster and 2 horses made the borings on land, and one party 
consisting of a foreman and three laborers made the borings in the 
river. At Fort Edward the river party was transferred to land, 
giving two land parties to Whitehall. For the river work a 
catamaran was used since it could be taken apart and carried 
around dams. On Lake Champlain the borings were made through 
the ice. As most of the work was done in cold weather it was 
necessary to house the machine to keep the pumps and water 
swivel from freezing. A small shanty was built on runners and 
hauled from hole to hole. It had trap doors in the floor and roof 
and contained a stove. With this arrangement boring was carried 
on successfully at — 30° F. The materials penetrated on Lake 
Champlain were silt and sand and boring was very easy as is indi- 
cated by the fact that 20,169 lin. ft. of borings were made for 
?2,268, or 11.24 cts. per lin. ft. The itemized cost of the borings 
as a whole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Salaries $6,288.23 $0.1083 

Traveling expenses 156.49 0.0027 

Plant, repairs, tools 561.27 0.0097 

Explosives 40.74 0.0007 

Freight and express 50.40 0.0008 

Office expenses 74.12 0.0013 

Total $7,171.25 $0.1235 

The total aggregate depth of hole was 57.991 lin. ft. 

Hudson River Survey, Hudson to Troy, N. Y. — The borings along 
this line were made with an outfit mounted on a catamaran and 
on scows ; silt, clay, coarse and fine sand, gravel and boulders 
were the materials penetrated. A 2% -in. casing and "B drill rods," 
with X-bits were used. The drilling gang consisted of one foreman 
and three laborers. For removing obstructions 40% Atlas powder 
was used, from one-half stick to two sticks for a charge. To get 
some of the holes below the depth required for a 30-ft. channel 
or to rock required from 10 to 30 shots. In all 1,385 borings were 
made to an aggregate depth of 28,965 ft. The cost of the work 
was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Salaries $5,652.57 $0.1951 

Traveling expenses 299.89 0.0104 

Plant, repairs, tools 1,105.62 0.0381 

Explosives 105.98 0.0037 

Freight and express 68.63 0.0023 

Offlce expenses 39.71 0.0011 

Total $7,272.40 $0.2507 



152 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Boring Test Holes.* — In making test borings most ma- 
chines use water to wash up the material or to make the drilling 
easier, hence these borings are called "wash borings." The water 
changes some earths materially, softening some and washing away 
fine sands. For this reason wash borings are not always satisfac- 
tory, where samples of the earth are desired. A machine that will do 
this work without water, and, at the same time, takes a core, is of 
great value to engineers and contractors. 

Fig. 5 shows a light, inexpensive and portable machine that will 
do this work quite cheaply. Its operation is simple, and the general 
principle is as follows : 

The drilling is done with one of several tools — adapted to the 
particular kind of material being drilled — attached to the drilling 
rod. The tool and rod are operated inside the casing by the men 
on the platform, who raise and drop them like a "churn" drill. 
The men on the ground rotate the casing, which has a sharp cut- 
ting shoe on the lower end. The casing, with its burden of plat- 
form and men, thus keeps cutting and sinking into the ground 
several inches ahead of the tool. A horse may be substituted for 
the men who rotate the casing. 

The material which enters the casing is drilled and forced into a 
sand pump at the same time. The pump is occasionally lifted out 
of the casing, emptied and the contents noted. Any material can 
be penetrated until the solid bed rock is reached. An accurate core 
is obtained, and the exact nature of the ground drilled is readily 
shown. 

Four-inch pipe is generally used, with a special coupling that 
makes a perfectly flush Joint ; that is, all 'of the couplings have the 
same outside diameter as the pipe, which makes it very easy either 
to sink or remove this casing. Instead of the 4-in. pipe or casing, 
3-in. or even 2% -in. casing can be used if desired, and it will make 
more rapid work, but of course would give a smaller core. 

After the hole is finished, the pipe is easily withdrawn because 
the casing, having been constantly rotated, is always loose, both 
while sinking and removing. 

In estimating the cost of operating this drill there is little else 
to be calculated besides the labor, as the repairs constitute a small 
part of the operating expense. Of the laborers employed, one must 
be a foreman or driller, another an ordinary pipeman, and the bal- 
ance of the crew common laborers. When the casing or piping with 
its platform is rotated by a horse, instead of the men oh the ground, 
it effects quite a saving in the cost by dispensing with three or 
four men. If the ground does not contain heavy boulders, and the 
holes are not over 35 of 40 ft. deep, six men will be sufficient, or 
three or four men and a horse; the cost of this crew will gener- 
ally be not more than $15.00 per day. 

With the 4-in. size hole 50 ft. of hole per day have been drilled 
at a cost of 30 cts. per foot. Twenty-five to thirty feet of hole per 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 29, 1908. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 



153 




Fig. 5. Hand Drill. 



154 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

day will be averaged through hard cemented gravel containing 
boulders. 

Mr. Thos. G. Ryan used one of these drills on Long Island put- 
ting down a number of holes through sand and gravel, with occa- 
sional strata of clay, and in some cases encountering large boulders. 
About 40 test borings were made, each hole averaging 59% ft., the 
total lineal feet drilled being 2,454. The time consumed in this 
work was 73 days, working 9 hrs. per day. The cost given below 
Includes the drilling, drawing the casing, and moving and setting 
up drill, thus covering a number of removals over a considerable 
period of time. 

The total cost of the work was : 

1 foreman 73 days, at $4.00 $292.00 

1 pipeman 78 days, at $3.00 219.00 

3 laborers 73 days, at $1.50 each 328.50 

1 horse 73 days, at $1.00 73.00 

Depreciation, interest, renewals and incidentals.. 81.76 

Total cost $994.26 

The average work done each day was 33.6 ft., which gives the 
following unit cost: 

Per lin. ft. 

Foreman $0,119 

Pipeman . .• ., 0.089 

Laborer 0.134 

Horse 0.030 

Interest, repairs, deprec, etc 0.033 

Total $0,405 

The machine is the Empire Hand Drill, made by the New Ttyrk 
Engineering Co., 2 Rector St., New York City. 

In this article* we give the work of a hand drill used for 
prospecting in Colombia, South America. The drill was an Empire 
Hand Drill, manufactured by the New York Engineering Co. of 
New York. The work was done under the direction of Mr. Clar- 
ence R. Snow, during the autumn of 1908. 

The work was done with native peons or Indians, who had never 
seen machinery of any kind before. The country in which the holes 
were being sunk was covered with forest, the bush and under- 
growth in many places being very heavy. To move the drill 
from hole to hole a narrow path was cut through the undergrowth 
6 or 7 ft. high. A small flat bottom boat was used to carry the 
drill across the river, there being consumed about. half an hour to 
do this. As there are no roads in Colombia it would be almost 
impossible to work a steam drill, owing to the difficulty of moving 
it from place to place. 

Four men were used to turn the casing, and four men did the 
drilling, an additional man being used for cutting trails. The en- 
tire crew was used to draw the casing and move the drill from 
hole to hole. The following is a record of seven days' work. 

First Day. — Carried outfit across river in boat and began hole 
No. 1. Made 14 ft. in top soil and 11 ft. in gravel by 5 p. m. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 6, 1909. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 155 

Second Day. — Finished hole No. 1, 2% ft. more to bed rock, total 
271/2 ft. Pulled casing and began hole No. 2, 100 ft. distant before 
noon, and sunk the hole 17 ft. deep to bed rock before 4 p. m. 
Pulled casing and moved to hole No. 3, drilling 9 ft. in overburden. 

Third Day. — Finished hole No. 3, 24 ft. deep. Pulled casing and 
started hole No. 3 by 2 p. m. Passed through 12 ft. of over- 
burden and 10 ft. of sand and gravel by 5 p. m. 

Fourth Day. — Finished hole No. 4, which was 28 ft. deep to bed 
rock. Pulled casing, cut trail and moved to hole No. 5, 300 ft. 
northeast of hole No. 4, and started new hole by noon. After drill- 
ing 17 ft. through overburden an old buried tree was struck, but the 
drill went through it easily. By 5 p. m. 22 ft. were made in this 
hole. 

Fifth Day. — Finished hole No. 5, 28 ft., and after pulling casing 
began hole No. 6. Got down 14 ft. in overburden and 9 ft. in gravel 
by 5 p. m. 

Sixth Day. — Finished hole No. 6, going down 9 ft. more to bed 
rock. Moved outfit across the river and about a mile up the 
river, and at 2 :45 started hole No. 7. Made 6 ft. in overburden and 
9 ft. in gravel by 5 p. m. 

Seventh Day. — Finished hole No. 7, 29 ft., to bed rock, and moved 
50 ft. north and sunK hole No. 8, 22 ft., to rock. Started hole 
No. 9, 50 ft. north, and made 6 ft. in top soil by 5 p. m. 

Thus in seven days of drilling 213% ft. were drilled, an average 
of 30% ft. per day. It will be noticed that as the men became ac- 
customed to the work, they improved a little each day. 

With the Empire drill an auger drill spoon is used that will cut 
through hard soils, roots and sunken logs and easily penetrates 
gravel. It picks up any material and brings it as a core to the 
surface with a minimum amount of disturbance of the material as 
it actually lies in the ground. Water, as a rule, is not used to assist 
in drilling, so the auger will pick up the finest particles of gold. 
If it is desired to use water in drilling it can be done. The casing 
is pulled by levers with a very simple device. 

With wages at ?1 per day for the men the expenses were about 
$10 per day, allowing $1 for incidentals, the cost per foot was about 
33 cts. With standard wages the cost per lin. ft. would have 
been about 47 cts. 

Cost of Testing for Bridge Foundations.*— Mr. F. H. Bainbridge 
is author of the following: 

This article is confined to bridge foundations, although much of 
what follows is also applicable to foundations for buildings and 
hydraulic structures and preliminary examination for tunnel con- 
struction. 

Two methods of testing only are effective, an open pit or well for 
shallow foundations and the core drill for deep foundations. Sound- 



*Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 25, 1908, reprint from "Mine and 
Quarry." 



156 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ing with gas pipe or rods in shallow foundations and the com- 
mon well drill in deep foundations are not satisfactory. Pig. 6 
shows two cross-sections of a stream at the same point, the dotted 
line being the line of supposed ledge rock as determined by a well 
drill operating a chopping bit ; and the full line, the correct loca- 
tion of the ledge rock, determined with a Sullivan "HN" diamond 
core drill. 

In general two sets of borings should be made for an important 
bridge crossing ; the first set, a number of borings on the center 
line of the proposed location, to determine whetlier the site is a 
favorable one, and, if favorable, to determine by approximate esti- 
mate the most economical location of the piers and tlie length of the 
spans. In a general way it may be assumed that the economical 
relation is reached when the cost of the substructure equals the 
cost of the superstructure ; but inasmuch as the cost of the super- 
structure can be determined with considerable accuracy, wliile the 
cost of the substructure is involved in great uncertainty, the length 
of the spans selected should exceed that of the apparent econom- 
ical relation. The length of spans chosen may also be influenced by 
other than economical considerations, such as government require- 
ments, or the liability of ice to gorge against the bridge. 

Having made a tentative location of the piers, borings should be 
made at each i ler, and in the case of pneumatic or open dredged 
caisson foundations, one boring s.iould be put down at each of the 
four corners of the caisson. 

The preliminary borings may often be dispensed with when there 
are well records on both sides of the river in the vicinity. These 
well records can almost always be found in the various state geo- 
logical reports, which can be had at any public library in the state. 
In case of the borings at Pierre, South Dakota, to be described later, 
the well records were so good that borings to determine the length 
of the spans were not necessary. 

In cases where pile foundations are feasible and the river bottom 
is firm enough to lay concrete on, no borings are necessary, the re- 
quired length of piling being best determined by driving experi- 
mental piles ; but where the river bottom is soft, as it is in most 
streams with a sluggish or reversing current, borings should be 
made, the softer material being taken out dry with a sawtooth bit. 
This is feasible in the hardest clay or the softer shales and gives a 
perfect knowledge of the material encountered. Unless dry cores 
are taken when feasible, a hard clay in every way suitable for a 
foundation may be overlooked and provision made for carrying the 
foundation farther down than necessary. 

In pneumatic work an accurate set of borings with a core drill 
Is of incalculable value. These advantages are : 

1st. The final location of the caisson can be accurately deter- 
mined and cut stone and timber ordered without any waste or delay 
waiting for material for which no provision had been made. 

2d. The contractor in bidding on the work knows exactly what 
material is to be encountered, and will make a lower bid when there 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 



157 




bo 
C 

'u 
o 

m 



bB 



158 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

is no uncertainty. The difference in cost between handling in a 
caisson material which can be taken out through the blow pipe and 
material which must be locked out in buckets is very great. 

3d. The piers can be located in the most economical pbsition. 
Often a change of a few feet ih locating a pier may make a differ- 
ence in cost of tens of thousands of dollars. 

4th. Much can be learned as to the character of the foundation 
that cannot be learned from the interior of the caisson. In lime- 
stone formations subterranean caverns are common, and in both 
lime and sandstone formations overhanging subterranean cliffs are 
found. The existence of these can be determined with the drill, 
but cannot be learned from the interior of the caisson. 

Nearly the whole North American continent north of the Ohio 
River and east of the Missouri River has at various periods been 
covered with glacial drift ; in fact, the Ohio and Missouri Rivers 
were formed by glacial action. Below the recent alluvial deposits 
in a riverbed in this district will be found glacial deposits of sand, 
gravel, clay, till, or boulders, sometimes all together in a hetero- 
geneous mass. The extreme determined movement of the greatest 
glacial sheet was 1,500 miles. Boulders of granite from Canada 
and Minnesota were carried as far as Kansas and Missouri. One 
of the boulders in the river bed is therefore liable to be mistaken 
for ledge rock. Usually the character of the ledge rock can be 
learned from state surveys and samples secured from the outcrops, 
which are located in these surveys. When a core is obtained which 
can be identified as the same as ledge rock it may or may not be the 
actual ledge. If the core is granite or some older formation than 
the ledge rock, it is certain that a boulder has been reached. 
More recent rocks sometimes exist as pockets in earlier forma- 
tions, so that a mere difference in the character of the rock from 
the bed rock is not conclusive evidence that bed rock has not been 
reached. When such a condition is liable to be found in any 
locality it will usually be mentioned in the state geological surveys. 
Boulders of granite and other hard rocks must be removed by 
placing sticks of dynamite at the bottom of the stand-pipe, with- 
drawing the pipe, and exploding with an electric battery. Boulders 
of softer rock can be cut up with the chopping bits and the casing 
driven through them. As boulders are usually separated by a 
matrix of sand or clay, the drop of the rods and the wash will 
show them as boulders and not bedrock in most cases, though this is 
not always conclusive, as pockets sometimes filled with sand are 
common in limestone ledges. 

No definite rules can be given to cover all cases, and it is best, 
especially where there is any uncertainty, to put down a hole at 
each of the four corners of a pier. Where the drill strikes first 
rotten or sap rock, gradually increasing in hardness until known 
ledge rock is reached, this is conclusive evidence of bed rock. It 
is best to take out very soft, rotten rock with a saw tooth bit 
working dry. 

Drill tests for foundations of the Chicago and Northwestern Rail- 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 159 

way bridge across the Missouri River at Pierre, South Dakota, 
were begun in December, 1905. The drill used was a Sullivan Ma- 
chinery Company's "HN" diamond drill, operating 2-in. core bits ; 
4% -in. stand-pipe and 3-in. casing, both with flusli joints, were 
used. Borings at tlie sites of the river piers were made from the 
ice. In general four lioles were put down at the site of each 
pier. On diagonally opposite corners holes- were put down to 
about 90 ft. below low water, and on the other two corners to 
<50 ft. below low water. Thirty-three holes in all were put down, 
aggregating a length below the river bed or ground level of 2,379 
ft, of which 1,456 ft. was in sand, gravel, and boulders, and 823 
ft. in sliale, with occasional small lenticular pieces of limestone. 
On the east or left banlc lieavy beds of glacial drifts were encoun- 
tered and there was some difficulty in putting down stand-pipe and 
casing. The boulders were brolien up with dynamite. In shale, 
saw tooth bits were used entirely, the bortz bit being used only in 
the limestone poclcets. 

The worlc of setting up the drill was started December 5, 1905, 
and the first boring started December 8, 1905, with one shift worlt- 
ing 10 hours. On January 17, 1906, a second shift worlting 10 
hours was put on. 

Sliale was found practically level over the entire cross-section 
bX 42 ft. below water. There was apprehension upon encountering 
an underground flow of water in .the upper strata of the shale, 
but in no case was this more than a few feet below the top of 
the sliale. 

Caissons for the permanent piers penetrated the shale from 4 
to 6 ft. and tlie material encountered was accurately described 
in the record of tlie borings. The cost of the drilling, including 10 
per cent for depreciation of plant and tools, was about $2,400, 
or about $1 per ft. 

In 1908 tlie Northwestern Railway began tests to locate suitable 
foundations for a new bridge over the Mississippi River at Clinton, 
Iowa. The same apparatus, tools, piping, etc., were used at Pierre, 
but the manner of worliing and the materials encountered were 
essentially different. These borings were started in April, and 
it became necessary to mount the drill on a scow. Tlie scow was 
15 ft. wide, 32 ft. long on the bottom and 37 ft. long on top, with 
a draft of 16 ins. when loaded. Experience in rough water showed 
that a scow 10 ft. longer on top with somewhat more ralce to 
the ends would have been more serviceable. The tripod consisted 
of three pieces of Douglas fir, 5x8 ins. and 32 ft. long. An 8-in. 
wrought iron pipe near tlie center of the scow, bolted with a pipe 
flange to the bottom of tlie scow, made a well for passing the 
stand-pipe, 4% ins. in diameter, and the casing, 3 ins. in diameter. 

The materials encountered were in order as follows : Recent 
alluvial sands, glacial drift of gravel, sand and boulders, a shale 
consisting of sand with a clay matrix, and finally limestone bed 
roclc. The upper stratum of bed rock was identified by fossils and 
general appearance as belonging to the Gower stage of the Niagara 



160 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

series of Silurian rocks. This overlaid conformably rock of the 
Delaware stage of the same series. In the middle of the river the 
Gower rock and nearly 50 ft. of the Delaware rock had been en- 
tirely eroded. Great care was taken to ascertain the possible 
existence of subterranean pockets or overhanging cliffs in the rock. 
Only two of these pockets were found, however, both in the same 
boring, and these were only 1 and 6 ins. in depth. Both were 
filled with sand, consisting of about equal parts of quartz and 
dolomite sand. Some of the borings were carried down 30 to 40 
ft. into the bed rock to determine the possible existence of these 
subterranean pockets. 

All the boulders encountered were such as could easily be broken 
with the chopping bit and no dynamite was found necessary. To 
determine the consistency of the shale, cores were taken out with 
saw tooth bits working dry, showing perfectly the consistency of 
the material. The saw tooth bit or the chopping bit working with 
the pump gave no idea of what this material was, and without the 
expediency of the dry core an excellent foundation would have 
been overlooked, and a foundation sought 30 ft. lower. It is in- 
tended to use pneumatic caissons in all the piers except the shore 
piers. 

Borings in the limestone were made with a bortz bit when the 
water was still, and with the chopping bit taking occasional cores 
with the saw tooth bits. Fully 95 per cent of the boring in the 
limestone was made with the 'bortz bit. The work of mounting 
the drill was started April 2 and the first hole begun April 7. The 
work was finished June 6, working one shift of 10 hrs. per day. 

The aggregate length of casing put down was 692 ft. The 
aggregate length of casing driven through hard material was 406.5 
ft. The aggregate length of borings in shale was 86 ft., and in 
limestone 226 ft. The cost was as follows: 

Labor $ 456.16 

Coal 124.41 

Depreciation of bortz, estimated 200.00 

Scow 287.24 

Depreciation on tools, pipe, etc 200.00 

$1,267.81 
The scow still has a value which is somewhat uncertain. Omit- 
ting this credit, the cost amounted to $1.83 per ft. 

Costs of Making Test Borings, III., Etc.* — Despite the wide use 
of test borings few engineers or contractors seem to have taken 
the trouble to amass data on the cost of making them, at least 
few such data can be found in print. The records which we give 
here are from scattered sources and are less complete than could 
be wished, but in default of better, they are of interest. 

The several prices of work of which costs are given were done 
with a No. 80 Pierce tubular well and test boring rig. This machine 
consists of a base on which sets four uprights serving as guides for 
the driving hammers and the pipe. In operation the base is set up 



^Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 26. 1906. 



EARTH EXCAVATION. IGI 

level and the hammer is set on it. The four guides are then fas- 
tened in position. The whole machine is then laid over sidewise on 
the ground, the head casting is placed and the hoisting cable is con- 
nected up. The assembled machine is then lifted to a vertical posi- 
tion and is ready for work. The first section of pipe with the steel 
cutting shoe attached is then put in position by raising the ham- 
mer and attaching the pipe guide clamps. The pipe is then driven 
by raising and dropping the hammer exactly as in driving a pile. 
The pipe being driven, the upper part of the machine is slid rear- 
ward on the base so as to clear the pipe and a 2-in. discharge tee 
Is screwed to the tap of the pipe. The drill with water discharge 
holes near the bottom and the hollow drill rod are inserted in the 
pipe and the top of the drill rod is connected by hose to a hand 
pump. One man then pumps water down the hollow drill rod while 
another churns the drill up and down to chip and loosen the mate- 
rial which is carried upward through the annular space between 
pipe and rod and discharged into a pail so that samples can be 
taken. A second joint of pipe is then screwed on and driven and 
the drilling and working out process is repeated. In this way by 
alternate drilling and driving the boring is carried to the required 
depth. The next step is to take out the pipe so that it can be used 
for a second hole ; this is accomplished by means of a screw jack 
apparatus. With the No. 80 machine a 2-in. pipe in 5 ft. sections 
Is used. The limit of drilling of this rig is considered to be about 
125 ft., for deeper holes a heavier rig is employed. 

Illinois and Desplaines Rivers Sxirvey. — In making surveys, plans 
and estimates for a 14-ft. waterway from Lockport, 111., by the 
Desplaines, Illinois and Mississippi rivers to St. Louis, Mo., test 
borings were made along the route. From the official report of this 
work submitted to the U. S. Government and from additional data 
sent us by Mr. J. W. Woerman, of Peoria, 111., who was Assistant 
Engineer in charge of the work from Lockport, 111., to the mouth 
of the Illinois River, we have prepared the following description of 
the test boring work. 

On one of the quarter boats a well was cut through the rake at 
one end through which to operate the boring machine. A lOx 10-in. 
X 32 ft. spud was provided at each corner of the boat to hold it 
fast while drilling. An office and living quarters for the crew and 
a blacksmith shop were installed on the boat. The machine used to 
make the borings was a "Pierce test boring rig No. 80." It con- 
sisted essentially of a 2-in. outer pipe, or casing, and %-in. inner 
pipe or drill, with arrangements for forcing them into the ground. 
Water was forced down the smaller pipe, and came up again be- 
tween the. two pipes, carrying with it, in suspension, the material 
from the bottom of the river. The casing was made of extra strong 
wrought iron pipe, screwed together in 5-ft. lengths as it was 
driven down by a 200-lb. hammer. The hammer had a maximum 
fall of 8 ft., and was kept in line over the casing by four iron 
guides. It was raised with a small hand winch. The drill was 
made of light wrought iron pipe, to the top of which was attached 
a 1%-in. hose connected with a steam deck pump on the towboat. 



162 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A hand pump, furnished with the boring machine, was used only 
when it was necessary to send the towboat away from the boring 
boat. The drill was churned up and down by hand, when the 
outer casing was not being driven, and the material which came up 
between the two pipes escaped through a tee connection at the top 
of the large pipe. Samples were taken frequently by catching por- 
tions of this mixture in pails and allowing it to settle. In order to 
make the casing drive easily the drill was kept from 3 to 5 ft. in 
advance of the casing, and any change in material was noted as the 
drill entered it. 

The borings were made in or near the channel, to a depth of 
about 30 ft. below low water. This was done because, when the 
boring boat was anchored and the machine was in operation, it cost 
but very little more to go 30 ft. than to stop at the proposed depth 
of 14 ft., and the additional information may prove valuable at 
some future time. As a rule the borings were spaced about half 
a mile apart, but if rock was encountered, or if there was any 
other decided change in the character of the bottom, the holes were 
placed close enough together to define the limits of the material. 
The work of making borings in the river bed was completed on July 
2, 1904, and the party disbanded. 

The materials penetrated were mud, sand, gravel, clay, shells, 
soapstone, coal and various mixtures of the above materials. When 
the boring reached bed rock it was necessary to stop. Bed rock 
was not struck very often, however, and when it was, additional bor- 
ings were made in the vicinity to be sure that the drill was not in 
a boulder instead. 

The boring party consisted of ten men who were furnished with 
quarters and subsistence which cost about $15 per month per man. 
The wages paid the members of the party were as follows : 

Rate 
per month. 

1 civil engineer in charge $125.00 

1 pilot 75.00 

1 steam engineer 75.00 

1 fireman 50.00 

1 cook 50.00 

1 blacksmith 45.00 

1 night watchman 35.00 

3 laborers, at $35.00 105.00 

10 men $560.00 

In addition to the above wages there were also charged against 
the work various other expenses as indicated in the following para- 
graph from the official report : 

"The cost of subsistence, while the men were on the quarter 
boats, has been charged to the various parties, according to the 
number of men in each party. When parties boarded away from 
the quarter boats, the amounts of their board bills were charged 
directly to that branch of the work upon which they were then 
engaged. The cost of the construction and equipment of the quarter 
boats, the cost of instruments, tools, office furniture, etc., was also 
charged pro rata to the various branches of the work. This was 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 163 

done in order to make the total cost agree with tlie actual amount 
expended on the survey, but as this is not done usually, it should 
be taken into account in making comparisons with the cost of 
any other surveys. These items amounted to about $18,000, or 
more than one-tenth of the total amount expended. These articles 
are all in good condition and will give good service for many years 
to come. The cost figures given also include a portion of the ex- 
penses of the Chicago office, as well as all expenses connected with 
the Peoria office." 

With all the above charges included the cost of making test bor- 
ings on this survey was : 

Total cost $7,797.00 

Cost, per hole 13.70 

Cost, per lin. ft. of hole 0.62 

Erie R. B. — A record of four weeks' work, Nov. 7 to Nov. 2 8, 
Inclusive, on the Brie R. R., gives the following figures: 

Superintendent, 18 half days, at $5 $ 45.00 

Foreman, 19 days, at $2.50 47.50 

Laborers, 41 days, at $2.00 82.00 

Total $174.50 

The total depth of hole bored was 699.1 ft. The labor cost of 
making the borings was, therefore, 24.9 cts. per lineal foot of hole. 
The holes were bored through sandy red clay. 

New York Central &■ Hudson River R. R. — Two test borings were 
made 90 ft. deep in one day in February, 1905, for some work 
being done by the New York Central & Hudson River R. R. The 
borings were made in one case through 3 ft. of frozen ground and 
in the other case through 3 ft. of ice, moving the machine 600 ft. 
from one hole to the other. Both borings were made in one day 
at a total labor cost of $5 or 2% cts. per lineal foot of hole. 

Cost of Test Borings with Wood Augers.* — Mr. A. C. D. 

Blanchard is author of the following: 

The borings enumerated below were made in the city of Toronto 
during the last year in order to find the character of the soil to 
a depth of from 30 to 70 ft. These borings were made in connec- 
tion with several works which were about to be built, and were 
taken in different parts of the city. The ground met with con- 
sisted chiefly of blue clay, although seven borings were made in 
wet, sandy clay, and four were made in filled ground. The aver- 
age length of holes is shown for each locality. The borings were 
all made with a 1%-in. carpenter's machine auger, welded to the 
end of a ^-in. pipe. The %-in. pipe was cut in sections 6 ft. long, 
and each length was added as it became necessary. 

In the process of boring the auger was turned by two or three 
men with Stillson wrenches, at the surface. The heavier clay re- 
quired three men to turn the auger. After the auger had bored 
from 8 to 12 ins. It had to be removed from the hole and cleaned 



*A paper in Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 11, 1909, reprinted 
from "The Canadian Engineer." 



164 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and then replaced in the hole, and continued for another auger 
length. Considerable time was thus lost in having to remove the 
auger and getting it back to its position again, especially after the 
hole became quite deep. Samples were taken from each boring 
and bottled. 

The force consisted of one recorder and three laborers each at 
?2 a day. The work was done at all seasons of the year, and no 
time was lost by any of the men. The cost of blacksmith work 
and teaming amounted to about 5 per cent of the total cost, and 
the cost of material, such as augers, wrenches and iron pipe, 
amounted to about 10 per cent. The following is a statement of 
the itemized cost of the work : 

( 1 ) HEAVY BLUE CLAT : 1 INS. OF RED CLAT ON TOP. 

Number of holes 28 

Total depth, ft 709 

Average depth of hole, ft 25.3 

Cost. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $199 $0,281 

Materials and blacksmith 34 0.048 

Total $233 $0,329 

(2) MADE GROUND. 

Number of holes 4 

Total depth, ft 90 

Average depth of hole, ft 22.5 

Cost. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $44 $0,488 

Materials -and blacksmith 5 0.066 

Total $49 $0,554 

(3) FINE, RUNNING, CLATET SAND. 

Number of holes 36 

Total depth, ft 1,163 

Average depth of hole, ft 32.3 

Cost. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $293 $0,252 

Materials and blacksmith 43 0.037 

Total $336 $0,289 

(4) HEAVY CLAT. 

Number of holes 7 

Total depth, ft 152 

Average depth of hole, ft 21.7 

Cost. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $48 $0,315 

Materials and blacksmith 9 0.059 

Total $ 57 $0,347 

(5) HEAYT BLUE CLAT. 

Number of holes 5 

Total depth, ft 160 

Average depth of holes 32 

Cost. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $40 $0,250 

Materials and blacksmith 6 0.038 

Total $46 $0,288 



EARTH EXCAVATION. Itio 

Cost of Drilllnfl Test Holes with a Well Driller.*— This drilling 
was done with a Star drilling machine (well drilling type) to test 
the site of a double track, steel trestle for concrete pedestal foun- 
dations. Seven holes were put down for a total depth of 190 ft. 
through clay and gravel to solid rock. The average depth of soil 
was 23 ft. and the average penetration into rock was 4 ft. The 
actual time consumed in drilling and moving from one hole to 
another was 11% days and the total distance over which the drill 
was moved was 730 ft. The average time per foot of hole drilled, 
Including moving, was 30 mins. The contractor furnished the drill 
and labor at cost plus 10 per cent on labor, and his bill was as 
follows : 

Rate. Total. Ft. 

Driller, 11% days $3.50 ?40.25 $0,212 

Helper, llVa days 1.75 20.13 .106 

Teaming, 2.1 days 4.00 8.10 .044 

Labor, 10 days 1.75 17.50 .092 

Use of drill, 11 1/2 days 2.00 23.00 .121 

Coal, 45 bushels 08 3.60 .018 

4%-in. casing, 54% ft 35 19.13 .100 

Teaming 1 day for other parties 4.00 .021 

10% for supt. and use of tools as above 8.63 .046 

Total $144.64 $0,760 

The above cost does not include any charge for inspection, as the 
regular inspector for the railroad company had to be on the ground 
to watch other work and could easily keep track of the drilling. 
For the above information we are indebted to H. M. Chapin, 
Resident Engineer, F. & C. R. R. 

Cost of Diamond Drilling, Cross- References.— The foregoing data 
relate to costs of test borings through earth. For similar test bor- 
ings in rock, see the section on Rock Excavation, under Diamond 
Drilling. 

Cost of Sinking a Well.t — Mr. Daniel J. Hauer is author of the 
following : 

The well was driven in a rolling country, where rock does not 
occur. The materials through which it was sunk were stiff red 
clay and sand. A tidewater marsh adjoining the site of the well 
furnished a poor quality of water to start the sinking of the drill, 
the hydraulic method being used. All remarks made by the writer 
will be regarding driven wells. The distinction being made from 
open wells, large enough for a man to enter. 

These machines are generally mounted on wheels, with a mast 
on one end. This mast is jointed about 6 ft. from the base, so 
as to admit of it being lowered on to the bed of the machine, when 
It is necessary to move from one job to another. When the ma- 
chine Is in use the mast is upright and is guyed and held in place 
by two brace rods or timbers bolted to it near the top. The bit 
used on such a machine is solid and "the string of tools" consisted 
of rods, one end being a socket and the other a bolt end, all 



* Engineering-Contracting^ Mar. 4. 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting , May 23, 1906. 



166 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

threaded. The top piece has a "rope socket" on the upper end, used 
to attach it to the machine. With such a well boring apparatus, the 
hole must be cleaned when a depth of from 2 ft. to 5 ft. has been 
obtained. This necessitates removing the boring tools and pumping 
out the debris or "sludge" with a sand pump, all of which con- 
sumes a large amount of time, especially if the well is driven to 
a depth greater than 100 ft. The hydraulic method of driving 
wells obviates the use of the sand pump, and in wells of any depth, 
through soft material, is preferable to the other method. 

Driven wells are usually from 6 ins. to 16 Ins. In diameter. A 
hole less than 6 ins. cannot be driven to any great depth as the 
tools would have to be so light as to run grave chances of break- 
ing them. Fifteen and sixteen-inch holes are the maximum at 
present, owing to the fact that these seem to be the sizes of the 
pipes for casing, that are made economically and are easily placed 
in the well. Many manufacturing plants are using twelve and 
fourteen-inch wells. 

When the hydraulic method is used a square pyramidal derrick 
from 40 ft. to 70 ft. in height is erected. Timber is used for these 
structures by well drilling contractors, but the writer sees no 
reason why a tower, modeled after those used by prospectors In 
taking ore drillings, and made of steel, could not be used and 
taken down after each job and moved to a new site. Of course, 
the timber can be used more than once, but each time some of it 
Is used up and all of it has to be renewed after several jobs. The 
life of a steel derrick, if kept painted, would be many years, and 
only the bolts would have to be renewed from time to time. The 
tools differ somewhat from those previously described. The bit 
Is hollow, with a hole just above the cutting point on either side 
to allow the jet of water to enter the well. Instead of rods, pipes 
are used, and the rope socket has an attachment to which is 
fastened the hose, run from the pump to the drilling column. 

The well in this case was 8 ins. in diameter. The derrick was 
50 ft. high. The iirst deck was 20 ft., while the three upper decks 
were each 10 ft. The head blocks carried a sheave. On one side 
of the derrick was a ladder. On the other side was fastened the 
windlass and gearing. The corner posts of the derrick were 4x6 
in. timbers, while the braces were 2x8 in. and 1x12 in. planks; 
the head blocks were 4x6. Twenty-five hundred feet board meas- 
ure of timber was used for the derrick and about 500 ft for a tool 
house and other needs. The outfit consisted of the following: An 
upright boiler and engine on separate bases, a steam duplex pump, 
two hand pumps, windlass and gearing, two hammers for driving 
well casing, ropes and blocks, drill points, hard rubber hose, 
wrenches of various kinds, pipe cutters and dies, and various small 
tools. Several tents for the v/orkmen to live in while driving the 
well, and bedding and cooking utensils were also included in the 
outfit. The approximate value of this outfit, when new, was $2,000. 
Allowing 25 per cent per year for interest and depreciation, and 
considering 100 work days as covering a season's work for an out- 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 167 

fit, we have a daily plant charge of $5.00. This is small consid- 
ering the hard usage the plant undergoes. The boiler has all kinds 
of water used in it, which quickly injures the tubes. The pumps 
also fare roughly from the pumping of water saturated with the 
debris from the well, the water being used over and over again. 
The continual handling of the pipe soon wears out the threads, 
necessitating cutting and making new threads, and so it is with 
otlier details of the outfit, all of which quickly takes money for 
renewals and repairs. As a large percentage of wells are driven 
In inaccessible parts of the country, a well driving contractor must 
carry with him every tool that any emergency may demand. 

In the work which the writer is describing five days were con- 
sumed by two men in erecting the derrick and setting up the plant. 
Then a length of 12-in. pipe was sunk to protect the mouth of 
the well, after which the well driving commenced. As stated above, 
water to start the work was used from an adjoining swamp. The 
first day's driving resulted in a depth of over 50 ft. and gave 
enough water to continue the work. The average depth obta,ined 
each day of actual driving was 20 ft., but the average for the 
total time consumed in working on the well was a fraction over 
11 ft. The well was sunk to a depth of 339% ft, when sufficient 
water was obtained to fulfil the terms of the contract. At 260 ft. 
a stratum of sand was struck and the well was cased up and tested, 
but as the vein of sand was not over 3 ft., it did not give sufficient 
water and the driving was continued. At a depth of 318 ft. sand 
was again encountered, and again the well was cased up and the 
strainer put in place and the well tested, the strainer being lo- 
cated at the depth given above. No effort was made to obtain the 
depth of this stratum of water bearing sand. 

Seventeen days were consumed in driving the well, and five days 
in casing up, placing the strainer and testing. One day sufficed to 
dismantle the plant and haul it away. As the outfit was on the 
road two days, two additional daj's are included in the plant 
charge. Three and one-half tons of coal were used, there being 
a daily consumption of 320 lbs. The cost of this, including haul- 
ing, was $5.25. 

The crew consisted of one experienced drill driver, who acted as 
foreman when the contractor was absent, and two laborers, both 
of whom had had some experience in driving artesian wells. The 
derrick was built and the machinery placed by the foreman and 
one laborer, the second laborer coming on the work only after 
the well driving began. At all critical stages of the work a member 
of the contracting firm took charge of the forces and worked with 
the rest of the crew, doing whatever came to hand. In all he 
worked in this manner seven days. In the record of cost given 
an allowance of $3.50 is made for each of these days' work. The 
rates of wages or their equivalent for the other men were as 
follows : 

Well driver $2.75 

Laborers 2.00 

The wages were paid weekly and included board ; but the figures 



168 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

given show the daily cost for ten hours' work to the contractor, 
made up from a season's employment. All of the men were paid 
full time, and frequently were called to make over-time without 
additional pay. Well driving can be done during wet weather 
without serious inconvenience to the men, as they seldom stop 
except in steady downpours of rain. This is made possible by only 
a few men being employed ; with a large number, a few become 
dissatisfied and the whole force is stopped. 

The itemized cost of the well, for both labor and materials, except 
the strainer, was as follows : 

Labor: 

Erecting derrick and machinery $ 23.75 

Driving well and casing 170.75 

Pumping and testing well 12.25 

Tearing down derrick, etc 6.75 

Total labor $213.50 

Materials: 

3% tons of coal, at $5.25 .$18.37 

Pipe casing, 340 ft, at $0.86 292.40 

Outer casing (second hand) 10.00 

Derrick timber, 3.000 ft. B. M., at $25.00 75.00 

Total materials $395.77 

Miscellaneous: 

Transportation charges $100.00 

Plant rental, 30 days, at $5.00 150.00 

Superintendence and general expenses 50.00 

Total miscellaneous $300.00 

Grand total $909.27 

The transportation charge is for both freight by train and haul- 
ing by wagons to and from the job, and is a little higher than usual. 
The figures giving a cost per lineal foot of well are as follows: 

Labor $0.63 

Materials 1.16 

Miscellaneous 0.88 

Total $2.67 

It is of interest to note that the cost of fuel, which is high per 
ton, amounts to a fraction over 5 cts. per foot of driven well, which 
is a comparatively small cost. The full charge is made against 
this job for the derrick timber, although some of it had been used 
previously and all of it was hauled away to be used on another job. 
The boiler was fired by the man attending to the pumps or els© 
the man running the windlass. The consumption of coal might have 
been reduced somewhat by the boiler having a cheap house over 
it and the steam pipes being covered. On a single job like this 
but little saving would be shown, but in a year or two the addi- 
tional cost would be more than saved. With a small boiler a house 
could be constructed readily in sections and moved from job to job. 
The steam pipes could also be lagged and handled in the same 
manner. The writer feels confident that these are details well 



EARTH EXCAVATION. 1G9 

worth considering not only in well driving, but also on much other 
construction work. 

The contractor doing this work owns three such outfits, and In 
spite of the fact that three or four men can operate each plant, 
he states that it is exceedingly difficult to obtain men to put in 
charge of a plant ; men who can be relied upon to face any crisis 
in the work and handle it without a money loss. For these reasons 
he seldom runs but two machines, as he can give these his per- 
sonal attention and only keeps the third plant for an emergency. 
That is, to take a job from an old customer, that may go to a com- 
petitor, or land new work that is exceedingly desirable. Margins 
are so close that a single mistake of judgment may use up the 
entire profit of a job. 

After pumping this well, the sinking of which has just been de- 
scribed, for 24 hours the flow was tested and found to be 66 gallons 
per minute. The water level had only been reduced 20 ft. by 
this pumping. The strainer was placed 340 ft. below the level of 
the ground, the elevation of the latter being 5 ft. above mean low 
tide. The strainer used was made from a piece of pipe plugged 
at one end and punched with holes, the dimensions of which were 
% in. X % in. 

The placing of the strainer and the variety of strainer used is 
a matter of vast importance and every detail regarding it should be 
specifically stated in a contract for a driven well. All too fre- 
quently this is not done, and the entire matter is left in the hands 
of the contractor, who only sees that the well comes up to the 
required tests and that a strainer is properly placed in the well. 
The kind he will use will be the style he is accustomed to, which 
may not be suitable for the well in question. 

Strainers, of which there are a number of styles patented and 
used, may be classed as either fine or coarse. The majority of the 
older patents are for fine strainers, that is, the openings are made 
so small as to admit of water entering the pipe and yet stop the 
finest sand. The slots are cut larger on the inside than on the 
outside of the pipe, so as to allow any grains of sand that may 
enter the opening to go into the strainer and not clog the hole. 
The openings in fine strainers are less than 1/50 in. in size. It is 
evident that with little corrosion or rust these holes will become 
closed and the entire well rendered useless. In the coarse strainers 
this will neither happen as often or as soon, hence they are pref- 
erable. The main objection to this class of strainers is that they 
will gradually fill with sand and thus stop the flow. This can be 
obviated. If the grains of sand were of equal size in water bear- 
ing sand, we would only need to have openings of such a size as 
to not admit the grains and the difficulty would be solved, but as 
a rule the grains of water bearing sand not only vary greatly in 
size, but also contain some gravel. 

When gravel is not carried by the sand some should be placed 
around the strainer by artificial means. Then the well should be 
pumped at a rapid rate for such a length of time as may be neces- 



170 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

sary to draw in all the fine sand that may ultimately be disturbed 
by the velocity of the water. When this is done and the sand 
cleaned out of the well, and the coarse strainer properly placed, no 
trouble should occur from this source. At times it may be found 
necessary to use air pressure to agitate the fine sand, as the pump- 
ing is going on, so as to facilitate the drawing in of the fine par- 
ticles. Trouble will only occur when the inflow of water is of such 
velocity as to carry the fine fluid with it. 

These operations are rather costly and it cannot be expected that 
the contractor will do them, unless they have been previously speci- 
fied, so that his price is made to cover them. The engineer should 
see to this. Many wells that have to be reworked only needed these 
things done when they were driven. The costs that have been given 
do not include any work of this nature. 

(For further data on well driving, see the index under Wells.) 
References and Cross- References on Earthwork. — For cost data 
on dredging, hydraulicking earth, and costs by many other methods 
of excavation, the reader is referred to my book on earthwork. 
In various sections of this book will be found other data on earth- 
work costs, for which consult the index under "Excavation, Earth." 



SECTION III. 
ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING AND CRUSHING. 

Weight and Voids. — Civil engineers commonly measure rock ex- 
cavation by the cubic yard in place before loosening, whereas min- 
ing engineers generally use the ton of 2,000 pounds as the unit of 
rock and ore measurement. In view of this fact it would be well 
were the specific gravity of the rock given by every engineer who 
publishes data on any particular kind of rock excavation or mining. 
Then, too, it often happens that broken rock is purchased by the 
ton even for civil engineering work, or by the cord of loosely piled 
rubble for architectural work, thus emphasizing the importance 
of stating not only the specific gravity but the percentage of voids. 

The specific gravity of any material is the quotient found by 
dividing its weight by the weight of an equal bulk of water. Water, 
therefore, has a specific gravity of 1 ; a cubic foot of any sub- 
stance like granite, having a specific gravity of 2.65, weighs 2.65 
times as much as a cubic foot of water. A cubic foot of water 
weighs 62.355 lbs., or practically 62.4 lbs. ; hence a cubic foot of 
solid granite weighs, 62.4X2.65 = 165.3 lbs. 

M^'hen any rock is crushed or broken into fragments of tolerably 
uniform size it increases in bulk, and is found to have 35% to 55% 
voids or inter-spaces, depending upon the uniformity of the frag- 
ments and their angularity. Rounded fragments, like pebbles, pack 
more closely together than sharp-edged or angular fragments. A 
tumbler full of bird shot has about 36% voids, and it is possible 
to hand-pack marbles of uniform size so that the voids are only 
26%. Obviously, If small fragments of stone are mixed with large 
fragments, the voids are reduced. Pit sand ordinarily has 35% to 
40% voids. Hard broken stone from a rock crusher has about 
35% voids if all sizes are mixed and sliglitly shaken down In a 
box ; whereas. If it is screened into several sizes, each size has about 
45% to 48% voids. 

A soft and friable rock like shale breaks into fragments having 
a great range In size, from large chunks down to dust ; and, as a 
consequence, such soft broken rocks have a much lower percentage 
of voids than the tougher rocks. 

The following table shows the swelling of rock upon breaking: 

Voids. 30% 35% 40%, 45% 50%, 55%; 

Cu. yds. broken rock ^from 

1 cu. yd. solid rock 1.43 1.54 1.67 1.82 2.00 2.22 

171 



172 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Hard rock when blasted out in large chunks and thrown into 
cars or skips may ordinarily be assumed to have from 40% to 45% 
voids, hence 1 cu. yd. of hard solid rock ordinarily makes 1.67 
to 1.82 cu. yds. of broken or crushed rock. 

Voids in Broken Stone and Gravel. — The percentage of voids in 
loose, broken stone depends upon the character of the stone, upon 
whether it is broken by hand or in a crusher (probably also on 
the kind of crusher), and upon whether it is screened into different 
sizes, or the run of the crusher is taken. 

Pure quartz weighs 165 lbs. per cu. ft., hence broken quartz hav- 
ing 40% voids weighs 165 X 60%, or 99 lbs. per cu. ft. Few gravels 
are entirely quartz, and many contain stone having a greater spe- 
cific gravity like some traps, or a less specific gravity like some 
shales and sandstones. 

Table I. — Specific Gravity of Stone. 

(Condensed from Merrill's "Stones for Building.") 

Trap, Boston, Mass 2.78 

" Duluth, Minn 2.80 to 3.00 

" Jersey City, N. J 3.03 

" Staten Island, N. Y 2.86 

Gneiss, Madison Ave., N. Y 2.92 

Granite, New London, Conn 2.66 

*' Greenwich, Conn 2.84 

Vinalhaven, Me 2.66 

Quincy, Mass 2.66 

Barre, Vt 2.65 

Limestone, Joliet, 111 2.56 

Quincy, 111 2.51 to 2.57 

(Oolitic) Bedford, Ind 2.25 to 2.45 

" Marquette, Mich 2.34 

Glens Falls, N. Y 2.70 

" Lake Champlain, N. Y 2.75 

Sandstone, Portland, Conn 2.64 

" Haverstraw, N. Y 2.13 

Medina, N. Y 2.41 

Potsdam, N. Y 2.60 

(grit) Berea, 2.12 

The weight of a cubic foot of loose gravel or stone is therefore 
no accurate index of the percentage of voids unless the specific 
gravity is known. 

Tables I and II show specific gravities of different minerals and 
rocks, and weights of broken stone corresponding to different per- 
centages of voids. 

It is rare that a gravel has less than 30 % or more than 45% 
voids. If the pebbles vary considerably in size, so that the small 
fit in between the large, the voids may be as low as 30%) ; but If the 
pebbles are. tolerably uniform the voids will approach 45%. 

Broken stone, being angular, does not compact so readily as 
gravel, and shows a higher percentage of voids when the frag- 
ments are uniform in size and shoveled loosely into a box ; but the 
Voids, even then, seldom exceed 52%. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 173 



Table II. — Specific Gravity of Common Minerals 
AND Rocks. 

Apatite 2.92 — 3.25 

Basalt 3.01 

Calcite, CaCOs 2.5 —2.73 

Cassiterite, SnO^ 6.4 — 7.1 

Cerrusite, PbCoa 6.46 — 6.48 

Chalcopyrite, CuFeSo 4.1 — 4.3 

Coal, anthracite 1.3 ^1.84 

Coal, bituminous 1.2 — 1.5 

Diabase 2.6 — 3.03 

Diorite 2.92 

Dolomite, CaMg (COs)- 2.8 — 2.9 

Feldspar 2.44 — 2.78 

Felsite 2.65 

Galena, PbS 7.25 — 7.77 

Garnet 3.15 — 4.31 

Gneiss 2.62 — 2.92 

Granite 2.55 — 2.86 

Gypsum 2.3 — 3.28 

Halite (salt), NaCl 2.1 — 2.56 

Hematite, FesOg 4.5 — 5.3 

Hornblende 3.05 — 3.47 

Limonite, FegO^ (OH)a 3.6 — 4.0 

Limestone 2.35 — 2.97 

Magnetite, FesOi 4.9 — 5.2 

Marble 2.08 — 2.85 

Mica 2.75 — 3.1 

Mica Schist 2.5 — 2.9 

Olivine 3.33—3.5 

Porphyry 2.5 — 2.6 

Pyrite, FeSa 4.83—5.2 

Quartz, SiOa 2.5 — 2.8 

Quartzite 2.6 — 2.7 

Sandstone 2.0 — 2.78 

Medina 2.4 

Ohio 2.2 

Slaty 1.82 

Shale 2.4—2.8 

Slate 2.5 —2.8 

Sphalerite, ZnS 3.9 — 4.2 

Stibnite, SbzSj 4.5 — 4.6 

Syenite 2.27—2.65 

Talc 2.56—2.8 

Trap 2.6 —3.0 



174 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Table III. 

Weight in Weight in Weight in Lbs. per cu. yd. when 

Specific Lbs. per Lbs. per Voids are 

Gravity cu.ft. cu. ya. 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 

10 62.355 1.684 1,178 1,094 1,010 926 842 

20 124.7 3,367 2,357 2,187 2,020 1,852 1,684 

21 130.9 3.536 2.475 2,298 2,121 1,945 1,768 
2"2 137.2 3.704 2.593 2.408 2,222 2.037 1,852 
2'^ 143 4 3,872 2,711 2,517 2,323 2,130 1,936 
24 149.7 4,041 2,828 2,626 2,424 2,222 2,020 
2^ 155.9 4,209 2,946 2,736 2,525 2,315 2,105 
26 162 1 4,377 3,064 2,845 2,626 2,408 2,189 
<>'^ 168 4 4,546 3,182 2,955 2,727 2,500 2,273 
2'8 174 6 4,714 3,300 3,064 2,828 2,593 2,357 
2'9 180.9 4,882 3,418 3,174 2,929 2,685 2,441 
3"0 187.1 5,051 3,536 3,283 3,030 2,778 2,526 

31 193.3 5,219 3,653 3,392 3,131 2,871 2,609 

32 199.5 5,388 3,771 3,502 3,232 2,963 2,694 
3"3 205.8 5,556 3,889 3,611 3,333 3,056 2,778 
3'4 212.0 5,724 4,007 3,721 3,434 3,148 2,862 
3.5 218.3 5,893 4,125 3,830 3,535 3,241 2,947 

Table IV. — ^Voids in Loose Broken Stoke. 
Per cent 
Authority. Voids. Remarks, 

gg^^jju 49.0 Limestone, crusher run after screen- 
ing out %-in. and under, 
ga^^jn 44.0 Limestone (1 part screenings mixed 

with 6 parts broken stone). 
Wm M Black 46.5 Screened and washed, 2 ins. and 

under. 
J J R Croes 47.5 Gneiss, after screening out %-in. 

and under. 

S B Newberry 47.0 Chiefly about egg size. 

H P Boardman 39 to 42 Chicago limestone, crusher run. 

H P Boardman.... 48 to 52 Chicago limestone, screened into 

sizes. 
Wm M Hall 48.0 Green River limestone, 21/2 ins. and 

smaller, dust screened out. 
Wm M Hall 50.0 Hudson River trap, 2^ ins. and 

smaller, dust screened out. 
Wm B Fuller 47.6 New Jersey trap, crusher run, 1/6 

to 2.1 in. 

Geo A Kimball 49.5 Roxbury conglomerate, % to 2^^ 

■ ■ ins. 

Myron S. Falk 4 8.0 Limestone, % to 3 ins. 

■^ jj Henby 43.0 Limestone, 2-in. size. 

W H Henby 46.0 Limestone, 1%-in. size. 

-peret 53.4 Stone, 1.6 to 2.4 ins. 

TTeret 51.7 Stone, 0.8 to 1.6 in. 

j^eret ".'.'. 52.1 Stone, 0.4 to 0.8 in. 

A W. bow 45.3 Bluestone, 89% being 1% to 2^^ 

ins. 
A W. Dow 45.3 Bluestone, 90% being 1/6 to 1% 

in. 
Taylor and Thompson 54.5 Trap, hard, 1 to 2% ins. 
Taylor and Thompson 54.5 Trap, hard, % to 1 in. 
Taylor and Thompson 45.0 Trap, hard, to 21/2 ins. 
Taylor and Thompson 51.2 Trap, soft, % to 2 ins. 

G W. Chandler 40.0 Canton, 111. 

Emile Low 39.0 Buffalo limestone, crusher run, 

dust in. 
C M Saville 46.0 Crushed cobblestone, screened into 

sizes. 

I O Baker 43 to 47 Crushed limestone in sizes. 

A N Johnson 41 to 51 Crushed limestone in sizes. 

W e'. McClintock 47.0 Crushed trap. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 175 



The following records of actual tests will indicate the range of 
void percentages : 

Prof. S. B. Newberry gives the voids in Sandusky Bay gravel, 
^4 to %-in. size, as being 42.4% voids; 14 to 1/20-in. size, 35.9% 
voids. 

Mr. William M. Hall, M. Am. Soc. C. E., gives the following tests 
on mixtures of Green River, Ky., blue limestone and Ohio River 
washed gravel : 

Gravel. Voids in Mixture. 

With 0% 48% 

20 44 

30 41 

40 38% 



Stone. 
100% 

80 

70 

60 

50 




50 
100 



36 
35 



The stone passed a 2% -in. screen and the dust was removed by a 
fine screen. The gravel passed a 1%-in. screen. 

The voids in mixtures of Hudson River trap rock and clean 
gravel, of the sizes just given for the Kentucky materials, were as 
follows : 

Trap. Gravel. Voids in Mixture. 

100 7o with 0% 507o 



60 

50 





40 

50 

100 



36 
35 



Mr. H. von Schon gives tests on a gravel having 34.1% voids as 
follows : 



Retained on 1-in. 
Retained on %-in. 



Retained on No. 
Retained on No. 
Retained on No. 
Retained on No. 
Retained on No. 
Passed No. 40 sieve 
Passed l^^-in. ring 



Per cent. 

ring 10.70 

ring 23.65 



4 sieve 


10 


sieve 


20 


sieve 


30 


sieve 


40 


sieve 



8.70 

17.14 

21.76 

6.49 

5.96 

5.59 

100.00 



Feret gives the following results of tests on mixtures of different 
sizes of pebbles, and mixtures of different sizes of stone (the stone 
and pebbles were not mixed together) : 



Passing a ring 

Held by a ring 

Part.s .... 



of. 



2.4" 


1.6" 


0.8" 


Voids 

Round 


in 

Broken 


1.6" 


0.8" 


0.4" 


Pebbles. 


Stone. 


1 








40.0% 


53.4% 





1 





38.8 


51.7 








1 


41.7 


52.1 


1 


1 





35.8 


50.5 


1 







35.6 


47.1 





1 




37.9 


49.5 


1 


1 




35.5 


47.8 


4 


1 




34.5 


49.2 


1 


4 




36.6 


49.4 


1 


1 




38.1 


48.6 


8 





2 


34.1 





176 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Mr. A. W. Dow gives the following tests on mixtures of broken 
stone and gravel at Washington, D. C. : 



-Parts of Broken Bluestone — — Parts of Gravel- 



Granolithic 
(92% 
being 

1/10 to 1/3 



) 



Coarse 

(89% 

being 

Va to2y2") 

1 



Average 

(90% 

being 

1/6 toiya") 



Average 

(90% 

being 

Vs to 2") 
. . .^ 

1 

""'i 
2 



Taylor and Thompson give the following: 



Small 

(90% 

being 

Vs to %") 



Ref. 
No. 



Stone. 



Hard trap 
Hard trap 
Hard trap 
Soft trap 
Soft trap 
Gravel 



Size. 



21/2" to!" 
l"to Vi" 
21/2" too 
2" to %" 
%"to%" 
2y2"to Va' 



c a 

— ' o 



03 

2 
o 

> 

54.5 
54.5 
45.0 
51.2 
51.2 
36.5 



■"to 
.S ti 

O tfl g d 
m a; ^< to 



14.3 
14.5 
11.9 
14.3 
12.5 



I 

HtnS 

O 
> 



46.9 
35.7 

44.6 
43.1 
27.4 



(3 c g 
01 o 5 

e^ 

19.2 
20.5 
20.8 
17.8 
23.9 
11.5 



Voids. 
Per cent. 
45.3 
45.3 
39.5 
29.3 
35.5 
36.7 



tm 

fits S 
0) oi a 

Pho>. 

.a 
43.7 

42.8 
30.6 
40.6 
35.9 
28.2 



The stone was thrown into a measuring box and measured, then 
rammed in 6-in. layers. The variation in the last column for Nos. 
4 and 5 was due to the breaking of the trap under the rammer. 
No. 3 was "crusher run" containing 44.4% of No. 1, 33.3% of No. 2, 
and 22% of screenings from y2-in. down to dust. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 
were crushed in a gyratory crusher ; Nos. 4 and 5, in a jaw crusher. 

Mr. George W. Rafter gives the voids in clean limestone, broken 
(by hand?) to pass a 2y2-in. ring, as 43% after being "slightly 
shaken," and 37y2% after being rammed. 

Mr. Desmond FitzGerald states that broken stone dropped 12 ft. 
into a car measured 7% less in volume after the fall. 

As originally pointed out in my "Rock Excavation," I have found 
that a wagon load of broken stone measures 10% less in volume 
after it has traveled a short distance, due to the shaking down. In 
buying broken stone by the cubic yard it is well to bear this fact 
in mind. 

Percentages of voids in sand are given in the section on Con- 
crete. Consult the index under "Sand, Voids." 

Sizes and Weight of Crushed Trap. — Mr. William E, McClintock 
gives the following data relative to Massachusetts trap rock: The 
rock weighs 180.7 lbs. per cu. ft. solid, or 4,879 lbs. per cu. yd. 
solid, being very heavy. The crushed trap of the Mass. Broken 
Stone Co., at Salem, weighs 2,586 lbs. per cu. yd., and has 47% 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. Ill 

voidis. A rotary screen is used 10 ft. long, 40 ins. diameter, with 
three sections 3l^ tt., 3 ft. and 3 ft. long respectively, having cir- 
cular holes %-in., li/^ ins. and 3 ins. diameter. A bin holding 29 
cu. yds. was used to measure the %-in. screenings which were after- 
ward weighed and found to average 2,605 lbs. per cu. yd. A box 
holding 1 cu. yd. was packed full with wet screenings which 
weighed only 2.480 lbs. The same box nacked full of the same 
kind of screenings dry was found to hold 2,690 lbs. A bin holding 
90 cu. yds. of the 1%-in. stone averaged 2,423 lbs. per cu. yd. ; and 
a bin of the same size full of 3-in. stone, averaged 2,522 lbs. per 
cu. yd. This 3-in. stone was again measured in cars, and found 
to average 2,531 lbs. per cu. yd. 

To determine the percentages of the different sizes, 19 cu. yds. 
of broken stone were measured and found to run as follows : 

Per cent. 

1/2-in. trap 13.24 

iy2-in. trap 23.89 

3-in. trap 62.87 

Total 100.00 

The tailings over 3 ins. in size were re-crushed. 

Weight and Voids of Crushed Limestone.*— In 1906 the State 
Highway Commission of Illinois had a series of tests made at the 
state stone crushing plants at Menard and Joliet to determine what 
should be called a cubic yard of crushed stone. The results of 
these tests are given by Mr. A. N. Johnson, State Engineer. In 
making the tests both cars and wagons were loaded in different 
ways and hauled different distances. The contents of each car or 
wagon were carefully measured and weighed, and on arrival at 
destination again measured, so that the variation in the density 
of the load due to method of loading, to size of material and to 
settlement, was determined. From the results of these tests it will 
be seen that the average weight of the wagon loads of limestone, 
including all sizes, was, at the start, very nearly 2,400 lbs. per 
cubic yard, varying somewhat according to the method of loading, 
and that the weignt of a cubic yard in a wagon after it had been 
hauled a distance of one-half mile was a little over 2,600 lbs. 
Also, that the weight of a cubic yard of stone, as loaded in the 
cars, is but a few pounds over 2,400 and after settlement 2,600 lbs. 
As the weight of a cubic yard depends very considerably on the 
method of loading the car or wagon, and also as to the amount 
of settlement due to the length and character of the haul, the de- 
termination of what shall be the weight of a cubic yard is some- 
what arbitrary." In view of the results of these testa, the State 
Highway Commission has adopted 2,500 lbs. as the weight of a 
cubic yard of crushed limestone at both the Menard and Joliet 
crushers. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 3 and 10, 1907. 



178 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In the following tabulation is shown the weight per cubic yard 
of crushed limestone in carload lots and per cent of settlement in 
transportation, the haul in each instance being about 150 miles: 

Weight in 
Size Method pounds per cubic Per cent 

in inches. of loading. yard wlien shipped, of settlement. 

Screenings, 15 ft. drop 2,500 9.5 

2,509 12.5 

2,530 9.8 

3 Wheelbarrows 2,476 3.4 

2,320 8.2 

15 ft. drop 2,528 9.5 

Screenings, 8 ft. drop 2,520 0.0 

2,520 

2,730 8.3 

2,610 12.5 

2,680 8.3 

IVa " 2,570 1.4 

2,210 13.9 

2,360 8.7 

2,300 13.6 

2,180 7.4 

2,200 9.7 

2,250 7.7 

3 " 2,520 3.8 

2,440 3.4 

2,500 5.0 

2,380 12.9 

2,300 3.7 

2,400 0.0 

2,290 9.0 

2,270 7.4 

2,275 9.2 

2,240 11.1 

2,260 10.5 

2,470 

To determine the effect of manner of loading,, other experi- 
ments were made. In some experiments a box measuring 2.8 cu. ft. 
was used. No difference in the results, however, due to the size of 
the box could be detected. In every instance the voids were de- 
termined by weighing the amount of water added to fill the box. 
The tabulation is as follows: 

Method of Per cent 

Size. Loading. of Voids. 

3 in. 20-ft. drop 41.8 

3 in. 15-ft drop 46.8 

3 in. 15-ft. drop 47.2 

3 in. shovels 48.7 

11/2 in. 20-ft. drop 42.5 

iy2 in. 15-ft. drop 46.8 

iy2 in. 15-ft. drop 46.8 

1% in. shovels 50.5 

% in. 20-ft. drop 39.4 

% in. 15-ft. drop 42.7 

% in. 15-ft. drop 41.5 

% in. 15-ft. drop 41.8 

% in. shovels 45.2 

% in. shovels 44.6 

% in. shovels 41.0 

% in. shovels 40.6 

% in. shovels 41.0 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 



179 



Settlement of Crushed Stone in Wagons.*— The tests, the results 
of which are shown below, were made by the Illinois Highway Com- 
mission to determine the settlement of crushed stone in wagon loads 
for different hauls. The road over which the tests were made 
is a macadam road, not particularly smooth, but might be consid- 
ered as an average road surface. The wagon used was one with 
a dump bottom supported by chains, which were drawn as tight as 
possible, so as to reduce the sag to a minimum. It will be noticed 
that about 50 per cent of the settlement occurs within the first 100 
ft., and 75 per cent of the settlement in the first 200 ft. Almost all 
of the settlement occurs during the first half mile, as the tests 
showed practically no additional settlement for distances beyond. 

Some of the wagons were loaded from the ground with shovels, 
others were loaded from bins, the stone having a 15-ft. drop, which 
compacted the stone a little more than where loaded with shovels 
so that there was somewhat less settlement. But at the end of a 
half mile the density was practically the same, whatever the 
method of loading. The density at the beginning and at the end 
of the haul can be compared by the weight of a given volume of 
crushed stone. For convenience, the weight of a cubic yard of the 
material at the beginning of the haul and at the end was computed 
from the known contents of a wagon. 

Table V shows the per cent of settlement of crushed limestone 
in wagon loads at the end of different lengths of hauls: 

Weight of Crushed Stone in Wagons and Cars. — In Engineering- 
Contracting, Aug. 5, 1908, are given in detail the results of some 
very careful tests made by Prof. Ira O. Baker on the voids in 
broken limestone of various sizes and after various drops and 
lengths of haul in wagons and cars. The following is a very brief 
summary of the results. 

The following were the weights of broken stone per cubic yard 
in wagons and in cars, both at the crusher and after hauling a given 
distance : 

Wagon Loads. Car Loads. 

After a 

haul of 1/2 After 

mile a haul of 

Location of Size Wt. at or Wt. at 75 miles 

quarry. of stone. crusher, more, crusher, or more. 

Joliet Va in. Scr. 2303 2533 2659 2905 

Joliet %inScr. 2652 2882 

Joliet 2in.-y3in. 2315 2480 2386 2592 

Joliet 2in.-%in. 2296 2516 

Joliet... 3 in.-2 in. 2361 2553 

Chester % in. Scr. 2442 2797 2546 2850 

Chester 2 in.- % in. 2344 2582 

Chester 3 in. -2 in. 2367 2569 2348 2545 

Kankakee % in. Scr. 2430 2697 

Kankakee 1 % in.-% in. 2325 2546 

Kankakee. .. .2^ in.- % in. 2260 2390 

The limestone came from Chester, Joliet and Kankakee, 111., the 
specific gravity being 2.57, 2.71 and 2.61 respectively. There was 



* Engineering-Contracting, April 24, 1907. 



180 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



^ o S 



O CO o o 



OinOiOfM OOiniinrHO 





^ 


00 


00 


00 


O 


C<J 


o 


■^ 


•^ 


CO 


O 


CTl 


o 


rH 


00 


oo 


t- 


c- 


CO 


CO 


CO 


•^ 


CO 


CO 


in 


m 


CO 


in 




c-a 


M 


N 


N 


CO 


C<l 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


(M 


+j 


oo 


00 


O 


in 


in 


o 


o 


O 


m 


CO 


O 


o 


o 


in 


Sh 


rH 


rH 


la 


M 


o 


00 


in 


h- 


o 


r- 


CO 


1^ 


r— 


CO 


d 


lO 


irs 


^ 


"^ 


CO 


CO 


■* 


CM 


CO 


co 


CO 


^ 


Cl 


CO 
































m 


C^ 


M 


IM 


IM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


cq 


CM 


CM 


CM 






in CO CM ■* 



in (M "<*^ CM CO 
rH oj in t-^ CM 



O 05 CO rH 
CO T}* CM t- 



CO ■* in 
00 in CO 



OCO 
0) 

o 
Co 



O CO !>. 

00 m in 



03 CO CO 

t-^ in in 



3 
do 

W2 



CM CM 

CTS O' 



• t- OO CO 

I t-^ in in 



Eh 



^o 
c 



«2 



CO CO 
00 OS 



o S 


ft ft 
o o 
u u 
-a -a 




-t-j -t-j 
in in 

rH rH 



ft o. 

g ° 



U2 K m 01 

m im be bss 

S B S « 

C C C C 

(U (B 0) 

a> oj (B HI 

(h t< t< S-. 

o o o a 

to m m JB 



rH OJ 00 

t>I T)< T)! 



ft ft ft 

o o o 

;-> ;-! ^ K 0! 

"O -a -a -J -J 

-(J ^ +J E> ^ 

«tH S-l **H O O 

in in in r^ ^ 

rH rH rH CC 73 



in 00 

-* CM 



CO CO ■»*< . 


• ■* CM 


. m 


^ 
fl 














® 


CO CO in : 


: in in 


: o 


s 


m cvi CO • 


• CO o 


• in 








O 



ft ft ft 
o o o 



m 01 



tH "H •« 



0) a) 
> > 
o o 



^ fl ^ ^^ ^ 
o o o o o 

c c c fi fl 



v« ^ vj) ^ ^ 
S- >• ?N rf^ ri^ 



^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 
O O O O t) 

C G C C G 



CO CO CO CO CO 



"" 0) a) +5 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 181 

no very marked variation in the voids for different sizes of stone, 
the range being from 43% for the 1^4 to 2^-in. size of stone to 
47% for screenings % in. and less. 

When brolcen stone was shoveled or dropped into a wagon, and 
hauled, it settled about 4% during the first 100 ft. of haul, and 
about 4% more during the next half mile, a total of 8%, beyond 
which there was no settlement. Screenings settled more, about 6% 
in the first 100 ft, and a total of 12% at the end of a half-mile 
haul. A 75-mile haul in railway cars caused no more settlement 
than a half-mile haul in wagons. 

The Per Cent of Voids in Railway Embankment.* — One of the 
editors of this paper, some years ago, built a section of a railroad 
in the South where many of the embankments were made from 
borrow pits, the material being solid rock. These pits were not 
cross-sectioned, and the specifications stated that when excava- 
tion was measured in embankment, that it should be considered that 
one yard of solid rock in place would make 1.75 cu. yds. in em- 
bankment. The editor protested against this, believing he was 
being deprived of from 15 to 20% of his yardage, but as he could 
show no authentic records to disprove the engineer's claim, he was 
paid on the basis given in specification. 

We are able to give an example when it was possible to obtain 
the exact yardage taken from the cut, and the amount it made in 
the fill. At Boulder, Colo., in 1882, a cut of 3,600 cu. yds. made an 
embankment of 5,340 cu. yds., which is a ratio of 1 to 1.51. 

In blasting rock for excavation on railroads, the mass comes 
out in pieces of all sizes, and as they are placed in the embank- 
ment voids of considerable size are made between the pieces. If the 
excavated rock has a layer of overlying earth that has not been 
stripped off before the rock is blasted, much of this earth, and the 
rock that is ground up fine, go to fill up these voids, making the 
embankment more compact than where there is no dirt excavated 
in connection with the rock. The result is that rock by itself 
"swells" more than it does when excavated in connection with 
earth and loose rock. 

The writer's experience is that with solid rock first stripped and 
then excavated, the example given at Boulder is a fair average ; 
but, with rock excavated where the solid rock is excavated in con- 
nection with loose rock and earth, this ratio of expansion is too 
high. For the last named excavation 1 to 1.4 is about the proper 
ratio. 

Voids in Rock Blasted Under Water.f— Mr. E. C. Bowen is author 
of the following: 

In Dredge Section 2 of the Ashtabula Dock Extension, Lake 
Shore & Michigan Southern Ry., which has just been finished by the 
Lake Erie Dredging Co. of Buffalo, the rock dredged was paid 
for by place measurement, there being 62,869 cu. yds. of rock so 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 25, 1907. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 6, 1907: 



182 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

measured in this section. This was determined by careful soundings 
taken 6 ft. apart on ranges which were parallel lines spaced 6 ft. 
apart, both before and after dredging. The material dredged was 
shale rock which had been drilled and blasted, and which, after 
being dumped into scows, averaged about 25 lbs. per piece, in size. 

Payments were made monthly and it was found impracticable to 
make place measurements each month on account of the large 
amount of floating plant engaged on the dock extension, which was 
in the way, and the often rough condition of Lake Brie. It was, 
therefore, decided to measure the material in scows and take a 
certain per cent of this as place measure until the final estimate 
when the total amount of material in this section would be deter- 
mined by soundings taken before and after dredging. The sum of 
all partial payments previously made would then be subtracted 
from the above total, giving the amount of the final estimate. 

The total amount dredged as measured in scows was 103,537 
cu. yds. The amount of voids in the rock was, therefore, 39.3 
per cent. Excavation was paid for 6 ins. below the required grade 
and no excavation was found by the soundings to have been car- 
ried below this level, which was 21.5 ft. below lake level. 

A large amount of this material was used below water for filling 
the cribs forming the substructure of the docks and it was found 
to pack down very solidly. "When exposed to air, however, it disin- 
tegrates rapidly. 

Measurement of Rock. — Rock excavation is commonly measured 
in place before loosening, and paid for by the cubic yard of actual 
excavation ; but, in sewer work and in tunnel work, if the con- 
tractor excavates beyond certain "neat lines" shown in the blue- 
prints, no payment is made, unless the specifications explicitly 
provide for payment for excavation beyond these "neat lines." In 
trench work, for example, a contractor often has to excavate from 
6 to 18 ins. below the grade shown in the blue-print, because it 
costs less to do so than to work too close to the grade and after- 
ward break off projecting knobs with a bull-point or otherwise. The 
same is true of shallow excavation, or skimming work, in road 
construction and the like. 

The amount of rock taken out beyond the "neat lines" is called 
the "overbreak." For percentages of "overbreak" in tunnel work 
consult the index under Tunnels. 

In examining specifications care should also be taken to note 
whether mention is made of rock slips or falls ; for it often hap- 
pens that after blasting to the neat lines a huge slide of rock occurs, 
possibly filling the entire excavation. Who is to stand the cost of 
removing this slide? If it is prescribed that the contractor shall, 
then he should study the dip of the rock and its character with this 
question of sliding in mind. 

A perch of masonry is commonly taken as being 25 cu. ft. (or 
nearly 1 cu. yd.), but the original perch was a wall 12 ins. high, 
18 ins. wide, and a rod (16% ft.) long, making 24% cu. ft. In 
certain localities the "perch" is taken as being only 22 cu. ft., but in. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. l^S 

most places in this country a perch is only 1&V> cu. ft. These facts- 
the contractor should know, for he must often deal witli quarrymen 
who will not sell rock by the cubic yard. 

In some localities stone for building is sold by the cord. Sedi- 
mentary rock quarried in slabs tliat are corded up carefully by hand 
may have 30% or less voids, which makes it evident that a con- 
tractor in buying rock by the cord should be careful to prescribe 
that it be packed closely and not dumped in piles helter skelter 
before measurement. In buying rock by the "cord" there is another 
precaution to be taken, and that is to specify how many cubic feet 
constitute a cord. A cord of wood is 4X4X8=128 cu. ft., but a. 
"cord" of stone is often 1X4X8 = 32 cu. ft. Rock is often pur- 
chased by the ton of 2,000 lbs. ; but to avoid lawsuits it is wise 
to define the word "ton" in any written or verbal contract, for a ton 
means 2,240 lbs. in some localities. 

If crushed stone for macadam or ballast is purchased by th& 
cubic yard measured loose, the precaution of stating where the 
measurement is to be made should always be taken. I have made 
measurements of wagon loads of broken stone after loading from, 
chutes at the bins, and again after traveling for half a mile or 
more. A surprising shaking down, or settlement, always takes 
place, ordinarily making a reduction in volume of 10%. I an- 
nounced these results in 1901, and recent experimenters have con- 
firmed this percentage very closely. 

There is another caution to be taken in examining specifications 
and in buying stone for concrete. Note whether or not the specifi- 
cation requires that the largest permissible stone shall passt in- 
every direction through a ring of, say, 2 ^ ins. diameter. I have 
italicized the words "in every direction" because few engineers- 
realize and few contractors stop to think that this virtually ineans- 
the use of a much smaller opening in the screen than the one 
specified, in this case smaller than 2% ins. In screening stone in 
a rotary screen, long narrow fragments will drop through a 2i^-in. 
hole, yet many of these fragments will not pass "in every direc- 
tion" through a 2% -in. hole. On this account, small though the 
matter seems, I once had more than 1,000 cu. yds. of stone re- 
jected by an inspector who found that he could not pass through. 
a ring some of the long fragments when laid crosswise. 

There are two ways of designating the sizes of stone after 
screening. One is to designate the stone according to the diameter 
of the screen hole through which it has passed ; in this case stone- 
that has passed a 2% -in. hole is called "two and a half inch stone." 
Another, and very common way, is to take the diameter of the 
screen hole through which the stone did not pass, add it to the 
diameter of the screen hole through which the stone did pass, divide 
this sum by two, and call this average diameter the size of the 
stone. Suppose, for example, that a stone crusher were provided 
with a rotary screen having three sections of perforated metal, 
the holes in the first section being %-in. diameter, the holes in the 
second section 1%-in. and in the third section 2 %-in. Then the 



184 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

average size of the stone that passes the %-in. holes is %-in. stone 
(assuming it to run from dust to %-in.). The average size of the 
stone that passes the 1%-in. holes but does not pass tha %-in. holes, 
is (11/4 -|- %) -i- 2, or IVs-in., and it may be called 11,6 -in. stone. In 
like manner the stone between li/2-in. and 2 %-in. may be called 
2-in. stone. This rule is not followed strictly by the manufac- 
turers of crushed stone, so it is always necessary to inquire exactly 
what they mean when they speak of stone of a certain size. Thus 
the Rockland Lake Trap Co. have the following schedule of com- 
mercial sizes : 

Diameter of holes in screen, inches.. 414, 314 2^4 11/16 % 
Commercial sizes of stone, inches .... 3 1/2 2 ^ 1 14 % % 

Therefore, when "2V4-in. stone" is ordered from this company, 
they ship a product that ranges from 2i^ ins. to 3^4 ins. in size — 
indeed, some of the stone fragments are even larger than 3% ins. 
in certain directions, for, as above stated, a long, narrow stone may 
pass through a screen. 

Kinds of Hand Drills. — Drilling holes in rock by hand may be 
effected in three ways : ( 1 ) By a rotary drill or auger ; ( 2 ) by a 
churn-drill; (3) by a hammer-drill, or "jumper" drill, struck with 
a hammer. A rock auger operated by hand is used only in very 
soft rock or coal. 

A churn-drill, as its name implies, is raised and allowed to 
drop, or is hurled against the rock. For shallow holes of small 
diameter it is necessary to give a churn-drill additional weight, 
which is done by welding a ball of wrought iron to the center of 
the drill shank, making a ball-drill. A ball-drill is usually pro- 
vided with a cutting bit at each end, and is operated by one man. 
For deep drilling, that is, for holes more than about 2% or 3 ft. 
deep, an ordinary churn-drill is used, operated by one man for 
shallow work, two men for deeper work, and three or even four 
men for very deep holes where the weight of metal becomes con- 
siderable. 

The churn-drill in the hands of a skilled driller is the most 
effective type of hand drill for vertical holes ; and a little theory 
is not without its practical value in seeking the reason for the 
effectiveness of the churn-drill. Much of the energy of the blow 
of a hammer is lost in the form of heat at the head of the drill. 
This loss does not occur with the churn-drill. It takes some skill to 
start a hole with a ball-drill and to keep it plumb ; but the time 
spent in acquiring this skill is repaid many times over if quarry 
operations with hand drills are to be moderately extensive. 

The effect of the size of the hole upon the speed of drilling ap- 
pears never to have been carefully determined. One authority 
says that to double the diameter of the hole decreases the speed 
of drilling by one-half. Another authority thinks that doubling the 
diameter divides the speed by four. According to the first authority, 
if a man could drill 12 ft. of 1-in. hole in a shift, he could drill only 
6 ft. of 2-in. hole in a shift. According to the second authority, only 
3 ft. of 2-in. hole could be drilled per shift. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 185 

Cost of Hammer Drilling. — The diameter of the hole, the angle at 
which the hole is driven and the presence or absence of water in the 
hole, all affect the cost of drilling by hand. The method of drilling 
with hammer-drills or with churn-drills is also an important factor 
in the cost. Obviously the character of the rock is the most im- 
portant factor ; but unfortunately very few reliable records of cost 
of drilling in different kinds of rock are to be found. From some 
observations on hammer drilling with a 1%-in. starting bit I have 
found that where one man is holding the drill vertically and two 
men are striking, the rate of drilling a 6-ft. hole is as follows : 

Ft. in Cost per ft., 

10 hrs. cts. 

Granite 7 75 

Trap (basalt) 11 48 

Limestone 16 33 

The cost is based upon a wage rate of $1.75 per 9-hr. day per 
man ; and does not include the cost of sharpening drills, which may 
be taken at 5 to 8 cts. per ft. more. 

I have found that a man drilling plug and feather holes in gran- 
ite, each hole being %-in. diam. by 2% ins. deep, will average one 
hole in 5 mins., including the time of cleaning out holes, the driller 
striking about 200 blows in drilling the hole. No water is used 
in drilling these shallow holes, for the dust is readily and quickly 
cleaned out with a little wooden spoon. In 8 hrs. of steady work 
about 100 holes can be drilled, which is about 21 ft. of %-in. hole. 
But in plug and feather work part of the time is spent in select- 
ing rock, driving the plugs, etc., so that 50 or 60 holes drilled and 
plugged and feathered are generally counted a fair day's work. 

I am indebted to Mr. John B. Hobson for the following data of 
hammer drilling in a British Columbia mine : Rock was augite 
diorite and firm red porphyry ; starting bit, 1 % ins. ; finishing bit, 
1 % ins. ; % -in. steel ; holes, 6 ft. deep ; 8-lb. hammer. Two miners 
(one holding drill and one striking) averaged 14.8 ft. per 10-hr. 
shift. With wages at ?2 a day the cost was nearly 28 cts. per ft. 
of hole. 

Mr. Frank Nicholson states that in mining chalcopyrite in mag- 
nesian limestone at St. Genevieve, Mo., a day's work for a striker 
and a holder was 12 ft. of hole drilled. The drills had l^-in. 
starting bits, %-in. octagon steel being used. 

In excavating hard porphyry for the rock-fill dam at Otay, Cal., 
Mr. "W. S. Russell states that a good day's work for three men 
drilling (one holding and two striking) was 6 to 8 ft. of hole, cost- 
ing about 80 cts. per ft. of hole drilled. The holes were drilled 20 ft. 
deep vertically and sprung. This was an unusual depth of hole for 
hammer drilling, and accounts for the high cost per foot. It shows 
also how uneconomic is hammer drilling in deep vertical holes com- 
pared with churn drilling. 

In driving a small (3x4%-ft.) tunnel through tough sandstone 
one driller averaged 4 to 5 holes, each 1% ft. deep, per 8-hr. shift, 
using % -in. bit for the starter ; and, upon cleaning up, the advance 



186 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was 1 ft. per shift for one man. Each hole was charged with half 
a stick of 75% dynamite. 

Cost of Hand Drilling in Granite.* — Mr. George C. McFarlane is 
authority for the following data on work done by him for Grand 
Trunk Pacific R. A., in Canada : 

Steam drills were used in all the large cuts, while in the smaller 
cuts hand drills were used. With hand drills, holes as deep as 30 ft. 
were put down. Steel 1 in. in diameter was used to make the drills, 
which were gaged to 1% in. This size drill was used for the 
entire depth of the hole. The hand drillers worked 3 men in a 
gang. In starting the hole, and until it reached a depth of about 
6 ft., 2 men did the striking and one man held the drill. In 
drilling holes to a greater depth all three men used striking hammer, 
the rebound and jumping of the drill turning it enough to keep the 
hole fairly round. The rocks encountered on this work are hard 
granite, traps and diabase of the Laurentian and Huronian system. 

Hand drillers, when working by the day, were paid $2.25 for 
10 hrs., but, when paid per foot drilled, received 45 cts. This pi-ice 
per foot does not include sharpening or carrying steel to the shop. 
In drilling block holes, every hole less than 1 ft. in depth was 
counted as being a foot. 

The following are some records of hand drilling: 

One gang of three men, in drilling 10 to 14-ft. holes in dark horn- 
blende, averaged 29 ft. per day. 

In drilling red granite, 20 ft. is about the average per day. 

In trap and diabase rock, 18 to 19 ft. is an average day's work. 

In drilling block holes, a less number of feet is drilled per day. 
A record for six days for one gang on block-hole work was: Mon- 
day, 1 hole 36 ins. deep ; 1 hole 45 ins. deep ; 8 holes from 5 to 
12 ins. deep ; total driven, 11 ft. 7 in. Tuesday, i hole 22 ins. ; 
1 hole 18 ins. ; 4 holes 6 to 9 ins. ; total, 5 ft. 11 ins. Wednesday, 
1 hole 36 ins. ; 1 hole 22 ins. ; 1 hole 17 ins. ; 5 holes 6 to 12 ins. ; 
total, 9 ft. 9 ins. On Thursday the drilling done was for holes to 
square up bottom of cut, there being 5 in all; 1 hole was 68 ins. ; 
1 hole 50 ins. ; 1 hole 24 ins. ; 1 hole 40 ins. ; 1 hole 28 ins. ; total, 
17 ft. 6 ins. On Friday 11 holes from 6 to 16 ins. were driven. 
Saturday, 1 hole 44 ins. ; 1 hole 30 ins. ; and 7 holes from 6 to 9 
ins. ; total, 10 ft. 3 ins. This gives a total of 62 ft. 8 ins. in 49 
holes, or an average depth of about 15 ins. 

For sharpening the steel a blacksmith and a helper were em- 
ployed, and a "nipper" to carry the steel back and forth from the 
cut and shop. For sharpening the steel for 5 gangs of drillers, who 
put down 2,142 ft. in a month, we have the following cost: 

Blacksmith, 25 days at ?3.50 % 87.50 

Helper, 24 days at $2.00 48.00 

Nipper, 24 days at $2.00 '. 48.00 

12 sacks coal 12.00 

$195.50 



*Ungineering-Contracting, Nov. 27, 1907. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 187 

This means an average cost of sharpening per lin. ft. of hole 
drilled of about 9 cts. 

This gives us a total cost of drilling and sharpening drills for 
the examples given as follows : 

Dark hornblende (deep holes) 29 ft. drilled per day — 

Drilling, per ft $0.23 

Sharpening, per ft 0.09 

Total, per ft ?0.32 

Red granite (deep holes), 20 ft. drilled per day — 

Drilling, per ft $0.34 

Sharpening, per ft 0.09 

Total, per ft $0.42 

Red granite (shallow block holes), 10 ft. 3 in. drilled per day — 

Drilling, per ft $0.65 

Sharpening, per ft 0.09 

Total, per ft ?0.74 

Trap and diasbase (deep holes). IS to 19 ft. drilled per day — 

Drilling, per ft $0.35 

Sharpening, per ft 0.09 

Total, per ft $0.44 

Average of 5 gangs, 18 ft. drilled each day — 

Drilling, per ft $0.37 

Sharpening, per ft 0.09 

Total §0.46 

This gives an average of 19 ft. at a cost of 47 cts. per lin. ft. 
for drilling and sharpening steel. This includes both deep and 
shallow holes. 

Cost of Churn Drilling. — I am indebted to Mr. W. M. Douglass, of 
the firm of Douglass Bros., contractors, for the following data on 
drilling with churn-drills, for railroad work in western Ohio. Three 
drillers were used for putting down the first 18 ft. of hole in blue 
sandstone the first day (10 hrs. ), and four men were used for 
putting down the last 12 ft. of hole, so that it required 70 hrs. of 
labor at 15 cts. per hr., or $10.50, for a 30-ft. hole, making the 
cost 35 cts. per ft. In brown sandstone it required 70 to 80 hrs. 
labor to put down 30 ft. The drill holes were 2% ins. at top and 
1 1/2 ins. at bottom. Drilling with steam drills in this same stone, 
holes 20 ft. deep, cost 12 cts. per ft., including everything except 
interest, depreciation and drill sharpening. The cost of hand drilling 
agrees very closely with my own records of similar work in 
Pennsylvania. 

Trautwine gives the following rates of drilling 3-ft. vertical holes, 
starting with a 1%-in. bit, one man drilling with a churn-drill, shift 
10 hrs. long: 

Solid quartz 4 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Tough hornblende 6 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Granite or gneiss 7.5 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Limestone 8.5 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Sandstone 9.5 ft. in 10 hrs. 

It should be observed that the holes in this case are shallow 
(3 ft.), and the diameter (1% ins.) is large for such shallow holes. 



188 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

indicating that Trautwine's data applied to rock excavation where 
black powder was used. 

Sizes of Air Drills. — The size of an air drill is denoted by the 
inner diameter of its air or steam cylinder; thus a 3% -in. air drill 
is one having a cylinder 3% ins. diam. 

The smallest sizes, 2% -in. drill, is called a "baby drill," or a 
one-man drill — the latter name being given to the drill because it 
can readily be moved about and set up by one man. For narrow 
work in mines the baby drill is adapted. It is also used for drilling 
plug and feather holes, and might often be used profitably for shal- 
low cuts and trenches. The most commonly used sizes for general 
contract work, tunneling and mining are the 3% -in. and the 3^ -in. 
drills. The drill is churned back and forth in the hole by com- 
pressed air or steam power, and after each stroke it is mechanically 
turned a fraction of a circle. The drill is fed forward by hand, a 
crank at the end of a feed-screw being used for this purpose. A 
longer drill is inserted every 2 ft. in depth of hole, for 2 ft. is the 
limit of feed of the ordinary feed-screw used. 

Data as to Rock Drills. — Table VI gives approximately the princi- 
pal data regarding air drills. 

Test of Air Consumption at the Rose Deep Mine. — ^A 6-houf run 
at the Rose Deep Mine, South Africa, showed the following results 
for 31 drills: The compressed air averaged 70 lbs. per sq. in. and 
each 3%-in. drill consumed 81 cu. ft. of free air per minute, includ- 
ing all leakage of pipes (there was less leakage than is common in 
mines). Each drill required 43 lbs. of coal per hour, to supply this 
compressed air ; and each 3.4 lbs. of coal developed 1 hp. per hr., 
by the indicator on the steam engine, evaporating 6.74 lbs. of water 
from 212° P. The average horsepower of the compressor engine 
was 12.7 I. H. P. per drill ; but all the drillers were trying to make 
a record, and accomplished in 6 hrs. an amount of drilling that ordi- 
narily took 8 hrs. The power plant was a vertical King-Reidler 
Compound Steam and Double Stage Compressor, with two boilers 
of the horizontal return tubular type. 

Tables of Air Consumption in Catalogues. — Table VII is given in 
the catalogue of one of the well-known drill manufacturers, and is 
said to be based upon actual tests of single drills running continu- 
ously without stops for changing bits, etc. 

Table VII. — Cubic Feet of Free Air Per Minute Required to Run 
A One-Drill Plant. 

Diarreter of Drill Cylinder- — ■ 

Gauge 

pres- 2 2% 21/2 2% 3 31/8 3 3/16 3% 31/2 3% 4% 5 SVa 

sure. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. 

60 50 60 68 82 90 95 97 100 108 113 130 150 164 

70 56 68 77 93 102 108 110 113 124 129 147 170 181 

80 63 76 86 104 114 120 123 127 131 143 164 190 207 

90 70 84 95 115 126 133 136 141 152 159 182 210 230 

100 77 92 104 126 138 146 149 154 166 174 199 240 252 

When more than one drill is to be supplied from the same air 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 



189 






S? 






r-l 


oioin 


o 


lOlO 




CRC-t- 


M 


mu5 




eo(Mco 


M 


(M«» 






r-( 


««■ 



^;:s 



eo«o 



5^;:^ 



COrHM lO 






eoto 



;^;^ 



o q 



(14 










w 


iH 


looin 


lO 


oo 




r-iecoo 


00 


mm 






eorHcg 


00 


M W9- 






s? 



6 q 






iraoo 
to tot- 



U50 
(MU5 



o q 



ooo 


O 


oo 


05tD[- 


to 


Olfl 


tH^HCv] 


to 


N«o- 



S5 



^ 



o . 



s^. 



^ 



^ 



a 



•d 



^, C S 

<t-i m 3 -^ 

o . e 
IP "^ S 



o -i:^ 



2 :S 






CO 



o 

. 1" .^ 



■rs 






Cam ai 5 



:S :S :^ 

, (B . 0) • 
-t-) +J • 
'CO •03 ."O 

c 

cS 



CO"" 

a o 



3 ft 

ai.l-< 

o 



. Si 






■^•£'0 

a) ft . 

to ^ - 
oi C 

P.°o o 

rl CD C 

M.S2g 

o_^ 
QPQ W 



0) M 



. S (B O 

.>< >< c 

. O o O) 

: >= s 

SS'to^ 
--"s-ti CO 

X ^ i <p 

■° 3 C 

oS o O 



c 

C6 C 
<u C 

■=5 



■Sft 
(11 -^.^ 

-M D <B 

c o fe 

S.5 a 
P H 



190 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

compressor the manufacturers advise multiplying the quantities 
given in Table VII by the factors given in Table VIII. 

Table VIII. 

Number of drills 1 2 5 10 15 20 30 40 70 

Multiply value in 

Table V by 1 1.8 4.1 7.1 9.5 11.7 15.8 21.4 33.2 

Tables similar to these are given by other manufacturers. In 
answer to letters of inquiry I have been informed that such tables 
are "based upon experience in a large number of mines." 

The actual drilling time, that is, the time when the drill is actu- 
ally striking blows, is seldom over 70%, and often not more than 
40% of the length of the shift. Knowing the conditions of work, 
the reader will be able (with the aid of data given subsequently) 
to predict approximately the per cent, of actual drilling time. Then, 
if there are more than, say, 10 drills, he can multiply the air 
consumption of one drill (when actually drilling) by the per- 
centage of drilling time in the shift, and the product will be the 
average air consumption of each drill. If there are less than about 
10 drills it will not be safe to figure so closely, because the fewer 
the drills operated from one compressor, the more likely is it that 
all or nearly all of them will be using air at the same time. The 
larger the number of drills, on the other hand, the more certain 
it is that some will be changing bits while others are drilling, and 
thus draw a steady, average amount of air from the compressor. 

Steam Consumption. — When steam is piped directly from the 
boiler into a drill, practically the same number of cubic feet of 
steam are consumed as of cubic feet of compressed air. We may 
assume that a cubic foot of steam will do practically the same 
work in a drill as a cubic foot of compressed air at the same 
pressure, because neither the steam nor the air acts to any great 
extent expansively in a drill cylinder, due to the late cut off. This 
being so, 0.21 lb. of steam is equivalent to 6 cu. ft. of free air, or 
1 lb. of steam is equivalent to nearly 30 cu. ft. of free air, or 
1 cu. ft. of free air is equivalent to 0.035 lbs. steam — all at the 
same pressure of 75 lbs. per sq. in. If a drill consumes at the rate 
of 100 cu. ft. of free air per min., it will consume 6,000 cu. ft. 
of free air in an hour. If it were using steam in its 
cylinder instead of air (at 75 lbs. pressure), it would,- therefore, 
consume 6,000 X 0.035 = 240 lbs. of steam (at 75 lbs. pressure) in 
an hour. 

When coal is burned under a boiler a large percentage of its heat 
passes up the chimney in the gases and is lost ; and in addition to 
this loss the boiler itself radiates heat constantly. The greater part 
of the loss occurs in the heat that goes up the chimney. In large, 
well-designed boilers, properly protected by asbestos or similar 
covering, the coal burned will develop steam to about 80% of the 
full heat value of the fuel ; the efficiency of the boiler and furnace 
is then 80%. In locomotive boilers, where forced draft is used, 
firing not of the best and boiler exposed to moving air, the efficiency 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING. ETC. 191 

is often as low as 45%. The efficiency of a good boiler of moderate 
size (100 lit).), well housed, is ordinarily about 75%. A small 
(20 hp.) boiler exposed to the wind has an efficiency of about 60% 
when not forced. If a small boiler is used to run one drill, the 
boiler must always have up enough steam to keep the drill running 
at nearly full capacity ; but when the drill is stopped, during the 
changing of bits, moving, etc., there is a waste of steam, because 
the period of stoppage is not long enough to permit the fireman to 
make any material change in the firing and in the draft. 

"^hen a %-in. drill is operated by steam from a small boiler, 
about 600 lbs. of coal are ordinarily required per 10-hr. shift. But 
if a number of drills are supplied from a large, well lagged boiler, 
through steam pipes that are also lagged with asbestos covering, it 
is possible to cut down the coal consumption to 300 lbs. or less per 
drill per 10 hrs. 

Gasoline Air Compressors. — Where not more than three or four 
drills are to be operated, probably no power can equal compressed 
air generated by gasoline. One pint of gasoline per hour per 
brake horsepower (B. HP.) of gasoline engine may be counted upon 
as tlie average consumption. It will require about 12 hp. to com- 
press air for each drill (314-in. size) ; hence 12 pints, or ly^ gals., 
of gasoline will be required per hour per drill while actually drilling. 
Since gasoline air compressors are self-regulating, when the drill is 
not using air very little gasoline is burned by the gasoline engine 
driving the compressor. If the drill is actually drilling two-thirds 
of the working shift, we may safely count upon using about 1 gal. 
of gasoline per hour of shift per drill, or 8 gals, per shift of 8 hrs. 
long. If gasoline is worth 15 cts. per gal., delivered at the engine, 
one drill consumes only $1.20 worth of gasoline per shift of 8 hrs. 
A gasoline compressor possesses other very important economic ad- 
vantages over a small steam-driven plant. First, there is the saving 
in wages of firemen ; for, once started, a gasoline engine runs itself. 
Second, there is the saving in hauling or pumping of water and 
the hauling of fuel. Third, the cost of gasoline is often less than the 
cost of coal for operating a small plant. 

Percentage of Lost Time in Drilling.— In operating machines of 
any kind the percentage of lost time is a factor that should receive 
the most careful consideration. The most serious loss of time in 
machine drilling is the time lost in changing bits and pumping out 
the hole ; for, with a 2-ft. feed screw (which is the ordinary 
length), a new drill must be inserted for every 2 ft. of hole drilled. 
It takes from 4 to 16 minutes to drill 2 ft. of hole, counting the 
actual time that the drill is striking, and it ordinarily takes from 
2 to 5 minutes to change bits and pump out the hole. I have often 
timed the work, however, where 9 minutes were spent in drilling, 
followed by 9 minutes lost by lazy drillers in changing bits. Count- 
ing no other time losses, then, half the available time was lost in 
the operation of changing bits. When shallow holes (6 ft. or less), 
are to be drilled, the drill steel is light, and there is often little 



192 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

or no sludge pumping to be done. In such cases it is possible for 
the driller and his helper to change bits in 1 minute, or even less 
when they are rushing the work. So far as the changing of bits is 
concerned, men should be made to work with a vim. When men 
have to exercise their muscles incessantly for 8 or 10 hrs. there is 
reason in taking a slow, steady gait, but in machine work, muscu- 
lar exercise is intermittent, and should be vigorous. 

Next in importance to the time lost in changing bits is the time 
lost in shifting the machine from hole to hole. To move a tripod 
from one hole to the next and set up again ready to drill seldom 
consumes less than 7 minutes, even when the two men are working 
rapidly, when the distance to move is short, and when the rock 
floor is level and soft. When, however, the rock floor is irregular 
and hard, requiring the vigorous use of gad and pick, not only in 
making holes for the tripod leg points to rest in, but requiring, also, 
some little time in squaring up a face for the bit to strike upon, the 
two men may consume from 30 to 45 minutes, shifting the machine 
and setting up, if they work deliberately. In such cases it is ad- 
visable to have laborers working ahead of the drillers preparing the 
face of the rock, leveling the site of the hole, removing loose rock, 
etc. One can see clearly what a erreat saving in time may thereby 
be effected ; yet, this simple expedient is seldom adopted ; but the 
driller and his helper are usually left to themselves in preparing 
the ground for each new set up. Excluding the time required to 
change bits for the new hole, we may say that two men can ordi- 
narily make a new set up with a tripod in 12 to 15 minutes, if they 
work rapidly. 

Rule for Estimating Feet Drilled Per Shift. — We are now pos- 
sessed of sufficient data to enable us to formulate a rule whereby 
the number of feet drilled per shift, under given conditions, may be 
predicted. I will not go into the method that I used in deducing 
the following rule, which is strictly correct, for the method is one 
of simple arithmetic. The rule is: 

To find the number of feet of hole drilled per shift divide the total 
number of working minutes in the shift by the sum of the following 
quantities : The number of minutes of actual drilling required to 
drill one foot of hole, plus the average number of minutes required 
to change bits divided by the length of the feed screw in feet, plus 
the average number of minutes required to shift the machine from 
hole to hole divided by the depth of the hole in feet. 

Suppose, for examole, the shift is 10 hrs. long, that is, 600 mins. ; 
that it requires 5 mins. to drill 1 ft. of the rock ; that it requires 
4 mins. to change bits and clean hole ; that the feed screw is 2 ft. 
long; that the machine can be shifted from hole to hole in 16 mins. ; 
and that each hole is 8 ft. deep. Then according to the rule we 

4 16 
have: The number of feet of hole per shift is 600 -^ (5 -| 1 ), 

2 R 
Which js equivalent to 600 -r- 9, or 66% ft. drilled oer 10-hr. shift. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 193 

For those who can use simole algebraic formulas the above rule 
Is much more compactly expressed in the following formula : 

S 

N — 

m s 
r + — + — 
f D 

2V = number of feet drilled per shift. 

(S = length of working time of shift in minutes = 600 for a 10-hr. 
shift when no time is lost by blasts, breakdowns, etc. 

r = number of minutes of actual drilling required to drill 1 ft. 
of the rock. 

m = number of minutes required to crank up, change drills, pump 
out hole and crank down. 

m = 3 to 4 mins. ordinarily. 

f — length of feed screw, in feet, ranging from 1 % ft. in "baby" 
drills to 21/^ ft. in largest drills, but ordinarily 2 ft. 

s = number of minutes required to shift machine from one hole 
to the next, including the time of chipping and starting the new 
iiole, but not including the time of cranking up and cranking down, 
s ranges from 5 mins. for very rapid shifting on level rock, to 40 
mins. for very slow shifting on irregular rock. 

D = depth of hole in feet. 

Even a casual study of the foregoing formula, or rule, must im- 
pres the practical man with the importance of the lost time elements 
in machine drilling ; consequently of the value of timing the opera- 
tion of changing bits and moving machines when the men do not 
know that they are being timed. Another feature that stands out 
strikingly is the reduced output of a drill working in a shallow 
hole. Let the reader solve a few problems, assuming first an aver- 
age depth of hole of 16 ft. and Anally an average depth of only 2 ft. 
(such as occurs often in the skimming work in road building), 
and he will never make the blunder of the contractor who bid the 
same price for rock excavation on the 2-ft. deepening of the Brie 
Canal as had been bid for the 3 6 -ft. excavation on the Chicago 
Canal. 

If we assume that the shift is 10 hrs. long; that the rate of drill- 
ing is 1 ft. in 5 mins. ; that it takes 4 mins. to change bits and 
pump out the hole at each change of bits ; that the feed screw is 2 
ft. long; and that it takes 15 mins. to shift from one hole to the 
next ; by applying the rule we obtain the following results : 

Depth of hole, ft 1 2 3 5 10 15 20 

Feet drilled in 10 hrs 27 41 50 60 70 75 80 

When drillers are lazy they may readily consume 8 mins. in 
changing bits and pumping out the hole each time. With all condi- 
tions the same as before, excepting that 8 mins. are consumed in 
changing bits, we have the following results : 

Depth of hole, ft 1 2 3 5 10 15 20 

Feet drilled in 10 hrs 25 36 43 50 57 60 62 

It will be seen that in deep hole drilling 20% decreased efficiency 
results from just a little laziness in changing bits, under the condi- 



194 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

tions assumed ; and in softer rocks the percentage of decreased 
efficiency is much greater. Where the holes are shallow the time 
involved in shifting from one hole to the next becomes an important 
factor. Assuming that the conditions are the same as in the first 
instance, except that 30 mins. are consumed in shifting from one 
hole to the next, then we have the following results: 

Depth of hole, ft 1 2 3 5 10 15 20 

Feet drilled in 10 hrs 16 27 35 46 60 67 70 

Rates of Drilling in Different Rocks — Unfortunately no published 
record exists showing rates of drilling in different kinds of rock 
with given air or steanj pressures and given sizes of drill bits. Such 
scattering records as are to be found merely give the feet of hole 
drilled per shift. From data obtained by observation I have com- 
piled the following table for drilling with 3% -in. machines using 
air or steam at 70 lbs. pressure, starting bit about 2% ins. and fin- 
ishing bit about 1 % ins. : 

Time to drill 1 ft. 

Soft sandstones, limestones, etc 3 mins. 

Medium, ditto 4 mins. 

Hard granites, hard sandstones, etc 5 mins. 

Very hard traps, granites, etc 6 to 8 mins. 

Very soft shales, and other rocks that make sludge 

rapidly and when a water jet is not used 8 to 10 mins. 

That the inexperienced reader may have a good general conception 
of what constitutes a day's work under ordinary conditions the fol- 
lowing summary may be of benefit : In drilling vertical holes, with 
the drill on a tripod, the holes being from 10 to 20 ft. deep, shift 
10 hrs. long, I have found that in the hard "granite" of the Adiron- 
dack Mountains, New York, 48 ft. is a fair 10-hr. day's work. In 
the granites of Maine and Massachusetts 45 to 50 ft. is a day's 
work. In New York City, where the rock is mica. schist, deep holes 
are drilled at the rate of 60 to 70 ft. per 10-hr. shift by men willing 
to work, but 40 to 50 is nearer the average of union drillers. In the 
very hard trap rock of the Hudson River 40 ft. is considered a fair 
day's work. In the soft red sandstone of northern New Jersey 90 ft. 
are readily drilled per day wherever the rock is not so seamy as to 
cause lost time by the sticking of the bit ; in fact, I have records 
showing 110 ft. per 10-hr. shift in this rock. In the hard lime- 
stone near Rochester my records show about 70 ft. per 10-hr. shift. 
In the limestone on the Chicago Drainage Canal 70 to 80 ft. was a 
10-hr. day's work. In the hard syenite of Douglass Island, in open 
pit work, and where it is difficult to make set-ups, 36 ft. was 
the average per 10-hr. day. In the granites encountered in grading 
for the Grand Trunk Pacific R. R. in Canada, only 30 ft. were 
averaged per drill per day. In the limestone near Windmill Point, 
Ontario, 3% -in. drills average 75 ft. a day (holes 18 ft. deep) ; 
2% -in. drills, 60 ft. a day, and "baby" drills, 37 ft. a day. 

The foregoing examples all apply to comparatively deep vertical 
holes, in open excavation. In tunnel work there is no reason why a 
drill should not do about the same work per shift, were there no 
delays in timbering, mucking, waiting for gases to clear, etc. Such 
delays, however, often reduce the drill footage very much. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 195 

Cost of Sharpening Bits. — One blacksmith (with a helper) will 
sharpen about 140 bits a day, and under ordinary conditions will 
keep 5 to 7 drills supplied with sharp bits. On average rock a bit 
must be sharpened for every 2 ft. hole ; in very soft rock a bit for 
every 4 ft., and in very hard rock a bit for every 11/2 ft. of hole. 
On small jobs it is often necessary to have a blacksmith, even 
iliough there is only one drill at work. In such cases, however, the 
blacksmith should be kept busy with other work. 

Cost of Drill Repairs. — Mr. Thomas Dennis, agent of the Adven- 
ture Consolidated Copper Co., Hancock, Mich., has kindly furnished 
tlie following data of the average monthly cost of keeping a drill 
in repair : 

Supplies for repairs $ 1.31 

Machinist labor 8.45 

Blacksmith labor 1.60 

Total repair charge per month $11.36 

The number of drills in tlie shop at any one time is about 15% of 
the total number. This low cost is based upon worii wliere a large 
number of drills are used and well handled by the users. 

I am indebted to Mr. Josiah Bond, mining engineer, for the state- 
ment that the cost of repairs averages 50 cts. per drill per sliift 
in mines where a few drills are operated and renewal parts- pur- 
chased from the manufacturers. In open cut work my experience is 
that 75 cts. per drill per shift is a fair allowance for renewa.ls and 
repairs. In the gold mines of South Africa, where each drill works 
two shifts Der day. the cost of drill repairs is $300 per drill per 
year ; while the first cost of a 3%-in. drill with bar is $185, accord- 
ing to a recent report of the Government Mine Inspector. 

Mr. Josiah Bond, General Manager American Copper Mining Co., 
Somerville, N. J., wrote me as follows: 

"As to the matter of drill repairs, I can give you only a few 
figures. In using drills for years, I find I have accurate figures for 
drill repairs for only three years. These place the repairs per drill 
at $102.00, $100.50 and $93.76 per year. My opinion is that a drill 
used night and day for a year is sufficiently worn to make it good 
business to throw it away ; though if a drill is used by only one 
man, and he is made responsible for its condition, I think the life of 
a drill is at least three years (one shift). Of course, studs and 
side rods will have to be replaced occasionally, and other small re- 
pairs must be made. A well-made heavy bar or column should out- 
last four drills, and arms are probably strong enough to kill three 
drills. And the drill itself is the weak part ; as soon as the cylinder 
and piston are enough worn to make a day's work only 80 ft. 
instead of 120, or even 100 ft., it is clear that you are losing money 
by keeping it at work. I have always wanted two idle drills and 
one idle column and arm, etc., for five working drills. From my 
practice, which has been a pretty hard one, developing with low- 
priced labor, I should estimate a stoping drill to cost, including re- 
pairs and its own life, about 50 cts. per shift. 

"Where an operation is large enough to warrant the erection of a. 



196 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

machine shop, sufficiently equipped to make all parts of drills, this 
cost can probably be cut in two ; and in old mines, even without 
this, where the work is more regular, a saving can be made, be- 
cause breakages do not occur so often. My practice has been 
without the luxury of a good shop, and all repairs are purchased, 
with the exception of a few of the simple parts, like side rods, etc. 

"Much depends on the care given a drill, and the rock to be drilled 
makes a great difference also, but the above figures are, I should 
hope, outside prices ; but in my work, drills have always been a 
secondary consideration." 

The following table gives the cost of repairing 25 drills for 11 
months in 1905, at the Wabana Iron Mines, Nova Scotia:* 

Total Amt. per drill 

Month of repairs. per month. 

January ? 68.32 $2.86 

February 85.53 3.576 

March 165.10 6.007 

April 33.92 1.21 

May 46.98 1.86 

June 49.41 1.98 

July 110.89 4.49 

August 316.81 13.50 

September 140.62 5.20 

October 259.60 10.66 

November 204.75 7.80 

Total and av $1,481.93 $5.40 

In addition to this add $1.75 per day for labor or 7 cts. per drill 
per day, or $2 per month, making a total of $7.40 per drill per 
month. 

The average cost of repairs was $5.40 per month per drill (drills 
worked one shift only each day), not including the cost of labor 
of repairing. It takes all of one man's time, at $1.75 per day, keep- 
ing the drills in repair, or practically $2.00 per month per drill. 
The parts used in making repairs are all bought of the manufac- 
turers. We see that the total cost of drill repairs has been about 
$7.40 per drill per month, or 30 cts. per drill per 10-hr. day, which 
is a very moderate cost, and speaks well not only for the make of 
the drills, but for the care given to them. 

Cost of Operating Drills. — When operating a single (3i/4-in.) drill 
supplied by steam from a small portable boiler, I find the cost is 
usually as follows for a 10-hr. shift: 

1 drill runner ' $ 3.00 

1 drill helper 1-75 

1 fireman ^ 2.00 

660 lbs. of coal (0.3 ton at $3) 90 

Water, if hauled, say 75 

Hauling and sharpening 30 bits (incl. new steel) at 4 cts.. 1.20 
Repairs to drill and hose renewals 75 

Total per 10 hrs $10.35 

The foregoing is merely an example, based, however, upon sev- 
eral different jobs ; but in each case the accessibility of a black- 
smith, the nearness to water, the price of coal delivered at the 

*See Engineering-Contracting, February 1, 1906, p. 42. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 197 

boiler, etc., must be determined before an accurate estimate can be 
made. If 4 drills, for example, are to be operated from the same 
boiler, the fuel bill will be somewhat reduced even if the pipes are 
not covered with asbestos, and of course the wages of the fireman 
will be distributed over 4 drills. It will then pay to have a black- 
smith at hand. If 10 or more drills are run by steam from a central 
boiler, and if the main pipes are lagged, the fuel should not much 
exceed 300 lbs. per drill per 10-hr. shift. By the rules previously 
given a fairly close estimate can be made of the number of feet of 
hole that each drill should average. If 60 ft., for example, are to 
be a fair day's work in limestone or sandstone, we have $10.35 -h 
60 = 17 cts. per ft. as the cost, exclusive of superintendence, plant 
installation and plant rental. 

If a central compressor or steam plant supplies power for, say, 15 
drills, we may estimate the cost of operating each drill as follows : 

1 drill runner $3.00 

1 drill helper 1.75 

1-15 fireman at $2.25 15 

1-15 compressor man at $3 20 

300 lbs. coal (water nominal) at $3 ton 45 

Sharpening bits, 30 at 3 cts 90 

Repairs to drill, hose, etc 75 

Total for 60 ft. of hole at 12 cts $7.20 

If the cost of each drill and 1/15 part of the compressor plant is 
$350, and 30% of this is assumed as a fair allowance for annual 
plant rental, we have $105 to charge up against each drill for 
"rental," or about 50 cts. per shift if 200 shifts are worked each 
year, or about 1 ct. per ft. of hole drilled. 

In my book "Rock Excavation — Methods and Cost" will be found 
detailed data on the cost of drilling blast-holes with well-drillers of 
the "Cyclone" type. The holes were 3 ins. diam. X 24 ft. deep in 
sandstone and cost 12% cts. per ft. to drill. Other data on drilling 
with well drillers will be found in this handbook, page 253. 

piece Rate and Bonus System in Drilling, — The original "hole 
contract system" was a piece rate system, whereby the driller was 
paid for his work according to the number of lineal feet of hole 
drilled. I have modified the original system by paying the drillers 
a daily wage plus a bonus for each lineal foot in excess of a stipu- 
lated minimum. See Section I of this book. 

Cost of Loading by Hand. — ^Where a laborer has merely to pick 
up and cast one-man stone into a jaw crusher, I have had men 
average 34 cu. yds. of loose stone handled per man per 10-hr. shift, 
which is equivalent to about 20 cu. yds. of solid rock. This, I be- 
lieve, marks the maximum that may be done, day in and day out, by 
a good worker, where the stone has scarcely to be lifted off the floor 
to toss it into the jaws. Every stone, however, was handled and 
not shoved or slid into the crusher. 

On the Chicago Canal the average output per man per 10-hr. 
shift was about 7 cu. yds. loaded into dump cars, and this included 
some sledging. The average per man loading into the low skips 
used on the cableways, involving very little sledging, was about 



198 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

10 cu. yds. of solid rock per man per 10-hr. shift. The best day's 
record was 16.6 cu. yds. per man loading into skips. In loading 
cars about 5 men out of the force of 36 loaders were kept busy 
sledging the rock ; but with the cableways not only was it easier 
to roll large rocks into the skips (or "scale pans"), but very large 
rocks were lifted with grab hooks and chains and carried to the 
dump without sledging. 

In loading wagons with stone readily lifted by one man, the 
wagon having high sides, I have found that a man will readily 
average 10 cu. yds. solid, which is equivalent to 17 cu. yds. loose 
measure per day of 10 hrs. The same man will throw the stone out 
of the wagon twice as fast as he will load it, and this does not 
mean dumping the wagon, but handling each stone separately. In 
loading a wagon having a stone-rack, and no sides, two men, pass- 
ing stone up to the driver, who cords the stone on the rack, will 
load 1 cu. yd. solid stone in 13 mins. when working rapidly, but 
this is too high an average to be maintained steadily for a 
full day. A driver will unload 1 cu. yd. solid (or 1.7 cu. yd. loose) 
from such a stone-rack, by rolling the stone off, in 7 mins. if he 
hurries, but he may take 20 mins. if he loafs. A man will readily 
load a wheelbarrow with stone already sledged and ready for the 
crusher at the rate of 12 cu. yds. solid (or 21 cu. yds. loose) in 
10 hrs. 

Cost of Handling Crushed Stone. — In handling stone after it has 
iDeen crushed to 2% -in. size, or smaller, a shovel is used, and the 
output of a man depends very largely upon whether he is shoveling 
stone that lies upon smooth boards or upon the ground. I have 
■often had 6 good shovelers unload a canal boat holding 120 cu. yds. 
loose measure of crushed trap rock (2-in. size) in 9 hrs., but after 
Tsreaking through to the floor the shoveling was comparatively easy ; 
this is 20 cu. yds. loose (or 12 cu. yds. solid) per man per day 
shoveled into skips. In shoveling from flat cars into wagons the 
same rate can be attained, but in shoveling from a hopper-bottom 
car, where there is at no time a smooth floor along which to force 
the shovel, an output of 14 cu. yds. loose measure (or 8 cu. yds. 
solid) is a fair 10-hr. day's work. In shoveling broken stone off the 
ground into wagons it is not safe to count upon much more than 
12 cu. yds. loose measure (or 7 cu. yds. solid) per man 
per 10 hrs. A careful manager will, if possible, pro- 
vide a smooth platform, preferably faced with sheet iron, upon 
which to dump any stone that is to be re-handled by shovelers. 
Small stone, % in. or less in diameter, is easily penetrated by a 
shovel and need not be dumped upon a platform. A clamshell 
Tiucket operated by a locomotive crane, or derrick, is doubtless 
the most economic method of loading broken stone from cars or 
stock piles, where the quantity to be handled warrants the in- 
stallation. 

Cost of Unloading Broken Stone With a Ciamshell Bucket.* — A 



*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 3, 1906. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 199 

novel expedient for Increasing the power of a derrick was prac- 
ticed recently in an extensive piece of concrete work Involving the 
unloading of broken stone from vessels into wagons. The work in 
<luestion was retaining wall work on track improvements on the 
New York Central & Hudson River R. R., at Ossining, N. Y. 
Scows brought broken stone to an adjacent wharf and the plan was 
to unload the stone into wagons, using a stiff leg derrick equipped 
with a clamshell bucket. The derrick at hand was an ordinary- 
affair, with 10 X 10-in. mast, 8 x 8-in. stiff legs, and a 40-ft. boom, 
operated by a 5 x 10-in. National double drum hoisting engine, 
capanle of handling a 3,000-lb. load with the ordinary single line 
rigging. As the clamshell weighed 2,500 lbs. empty and fully 4,700 
lbs. when loaded with broken stone, some expedient was necessary 
to carry out the plan. The problem was finally worked out as 
follows : 

The bucket was suspended from the boom by a chain of just suffl- 
cient length to allow it to open and close. The end of the hoisting 
line was also fastened to the end of the boom and run over a single 
block attached to the closing wheel on the bucket, then through 
the sheave of the boom and thence to the engine drum, making a 
double line which gave the engine sufficient power. The loss of 
speed resulting was of little moment. The stone was unloaded 
directly into wagons so that the hoisting distance was very small, 
and the time consumed in swinging was greater than the time nec- 
essary to hoist. The result was that there was practically no 're- 
duction of speed of operation. The hoisting was done, of course, by 
raising and lowering the boom, using the second drum of the 
engine. 

The derrick was operated by an engineman and a helper and 
handled regularly 100 cu. yds. per daj'. In addition to the derrick 
work there were 24 hrs. labor on a 500 cu. yd. boat load cleaning 
out the stone that could not be reached by the bucket. The labor 
cost of unloading vessels into wagons, using the apparatus de- 
scribed, can then be Itemized as follows : 

One engineman, at $2.50 2.5 cts. per cu. yd. 

One helper, at $1.50 1.5 cts. per cu. yd. 

Labor, cleaning 0.7 ct. per cu. yd. 

Total labor cost 4.7 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of fuel would not add more than 1 % ct. per cu. yd., making a 
total of about 5^/4 cts., to which should be added cost of erecting 
and removing the plant, and plant maintenance. 

The total cost of the derrick fitted as described was §1,500. The 
work in connection with which the derrick was used is being done 
by Ford & Waldo, Engineers and Contractors, Park Row Building, 
New York, N. Y.. and the double line rigging was devised by them. 

Unloading Scows With a Clamshell. — In building the masonry 
anchorage for the Manhattan Bridge, Mr. Gustav Kaufman used a 
1% cu. yd. Haj^ward clamshell bucket operated by a 50-hp. electric 
motor, and unloaded 600 cu. yds of broken stone per day from scows. 
In addition to the operator of the clamshell bucket, about 8 men 



200 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

were kept busy trimming up the stone in the scow not handled by 
the bucket. The clamshell bucket dumped into a 10 cu. yd. hopper 
provided with a shaking chute which fed the stone onto a Robins 
belt conveyor. Careful timing showed that the bucket made 1 1/9 
scoops per minute, averaging 0.9 cu. yd. per scoop. Tests showed 
that it required 20 hp. while loading, 42 hp. while lifting, 42 hp. 
while swinging loaded, and 20 hp. while swinging back empty. But 
if we assume a constant average expenditure of 30 hp., we have 
about 24 kw., or 240 kw. hrs. per day. Based upon these data we 
would have the following approximate cost: 

Per cu. yd. 
Per day. Cts. 

1 operator $ 3.00 $0.5 

240 K. W. hrs. electricity at 4 cts 9.60 1.6 

8 laborers at $1.75 14.00 2.4 

Total ?26.60 4.5 

Another % ct. per cu. yd. would cover the plant interest and 
maintenance. 

Cost of Handling Broken Stone With a Derrick. — Where crushed 
stone must be handled with a derrick, as in unloading boats, I have 
found the following to be about the best that can be done per day : 

Per day. 

6 shovelers, at |1.50 ". $ 9.00 

i hooker on 1.50 

2 tagmen (swinging the boom) 3.00 

, 1 dumpman 1.50 

1 water boy 1.00 

1 team on derrick 3.50 

1 foreman 3.00 

120 cu. yds. (loose) at 19 cts. = $22.50 

It commonly costs about 25 cts. per cu. yd. (loose measure) to 
unload a boat of broken stone using skips holding 18 cu. ft. each, 
and a team on the derrick for raising them. Where any great 
amount of such work is to be done, however, a hoisting engine and a 
derrick provided with a bull-wheel should be used. The follow- 
ing shows the cost of unloading flat cars containing broken stone 
(2-in. size), using a derrick with a bull-wheel for "slewing" the 
boom: 

5 shovelers, at $1.50 $ 7.50 

1 dumpman 1.50 

1 engineman 2.50 

1/2 ton coal at $3 '. 1.50 

100 cu. yds. (loose) at 13 cts. = $13.00 

In this case a stiff-leg derrick, 40-ft. boom, with a bull-wheel, 
operated by a double cylinder (7x10) engine, handled self-right- 
ing steel buckets holding 20 cu. ft. each. Water for the engine 
was delivered in a pipe. The engineman was the foreman. 

In neither of the two cases just cited is the cost of installing the 
derrick included, nor is the interest and depreciation of plant in- 
cluded. It takes 6 men and a foreman one day to dismantle and 
move a stiff-leg derrick a short distance (100 or 200 ft), and one 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 201 

more day to set it up again, or $26 for the two days' work. This 
includes moving the engine and the stones used to hold the stiff legs 
doivn ; and it applies to a slow gang of workmen. 

A guy derrick with a 50 or 60-ft. boom swung by a bull- wheel 
and a hoisting engine will often prove the cheapest device for load- 
ing cars with blasted rock. If the derrick is handling skips loaded 
with stone, the following is a fair average of the time elements in 
handling each skip load : 

Changing from empty to loaded skip 35 sees. 

Swinging (half circle) 20 sees. 

Dumping skip 15 sees. 

Swing back 20 sees. 

Total 90 sees. 

If there were no delays, it would be possible to handle 400 skip 
loads in 10 hrs. Usually, however, the loaders will cause more or 
less delay, so that it is safer to count upon what they will average 
rather than upon what the derrick can do. One derrick cannot serve 
a very long face, and the number of men that can be worked to ad- 
vantage in a given space is always limited ; hence I repeat that 
with a good derrick provided with a bull-wheel the derrick can 
ordinarily handle more stone than can be delivered to it by the 
men. The economic size of the skip load is entirely dependent upon 
the size of the hoisting engine, but a common size skip measures 
5 X 6 ft. X 14 ins. deep. Where much work is to be done a con- 
tractor should never try to get along with a derrick not provided 
with a bull-wheel for "slewing" the boom, for the wages of two tag- 
men would soon pay for a new outfit. 

Cost of Loading Blasted Rock With Steam Shovels. — A contractor 
who has never had experience in handling hard rock with steam 
shovels is almost certain to overestimate the probable output of a 
shovel loading rock. This is due very largely to the common 
tendency to think of all rock as being a material that differs only to 
moderate degree in hardness. On the Chicago Drainage Canal, two 
55-ton shovels, each working two 10-hr. shifts a day for four 
months, averaged 296 cu. yds. per shovel per shift of solid rock 
(limestone) loaded into cars, although it is stated that one day 
one of the shovels loaded 600 cu. yds. of rock in 10 hrs. The lime- 
stone on the Chicago Canal did not break up into small pieces upon 
blasting (a condition that is essential to economic steam shovel 
work in rock), but it came out in large chunks, much of which had 
to be lifted with chains, instead of being scooped up by the dipper. 
"When each separate rock must be "chained out" in this way, a 
steam shovel is really no better than a derrick, and is, in fact, 
not so good. 

On a large contract near New York City, where the rock is a 
tough mica schist that breaks out in large chunks even with close 
spacing of holes, a 65-ton shovel with a 2%-cu. yd. dipper averaged 
for several weeks about 280 cu. yds. of solid rock loaded in cars. 
Part of this rock was loaded with the dipper and part was chained. 

On the Jerome Park Reservoir excavation in New York City the 



202 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

rock is also a tough mica schist that blasts out in slabs even with 
heavy blasting. I am informed by Mr. R. C. Hunt, manager for 
Mr. John B. McDonald, contractor, that their 70-ton shovels loaded 
only 300 cu. yds. of solid rock per 10-hr. shift. Mr. Hunt says: 

"This was in the gneiss rock (mica schist) of this vicinity. The 
fibrous nature of Manhattan and adjacent rocks causes it to break 
in such large and awkward shapes that the shovel cannot do itself 
justice. I therefore abandoned the use of shovels in the rock cuts 
and find that I can handle the rock with derricks more eco- 
nomically." 

In thorough cut work on the Wabash Railroad, one 42-ton shovel 
loaded 240 cu. yds. of sandstone (solid measure) into dump cars 
in 10 hrs., as an average of a year's work; but about 10% of the 
working time was lost in breakdowns, etc. 

In shale, or any friable rock that breaks up into pieces which 
readily enter the dipper, the output of a steam shovel is far greater 
than in hard rock such as we have been citing. Through the kind- 
ness of Mr. George Nauman, assistant engineer, Pennsylvania Rail- 
road, I am able to give the output of several shovels working 
more than a year, in shale near Enola, Pa. Each shovel worked 
two 10-hr. shifts "per day, six daj's in the week. In cut No. 1 
there were nearly 2,000,000 cu. yds., of which 85% was rock. Of 
this rock a little was very hard limestone, some was blue shale 
nearly as hard, and most of it was red shale, somewhat softer. Ex- 
cluding the first two months, the average output of each shovel 
per month of doubt-shift work was nearly 31,000 cu. yds., equivalent 
to 15,500 cu. yds. single-shift work. There were, on an average, 
four shovels at work, averaging 60 tons weight per shovel. The 
best month's output was 47,300 cu. yds. per shovel in August, 1903, 
and the poorest month (after work was well started) was 20,800 
cu. yds. per shovel in February, 1904, workmg double shifts. 

For costs of operating a steam shovel see the section on Earth 
Excavation. 

Cost of Handling in Carts and Wagons. — Since a cubic yard of 
loose broken stone weighs about as much as a cubic yard of earth 
measured in place ; and since, ordinarily, 1 cu. yd. of solid rock 
becomes 1.7 cu. yds. when broken, we may say that a team will 
haul about 60% as many cubic yards of solid rock per day as of 
earth. In other words, if the roads are such that 1 cu. yd. of packed 
(not loose) earth would make a fair wagon load for two horses, 
then 0.6 cu. yd. of solid rock would be a fair load. On page 121 
the sizes of loads of earth that teams can haul are discussed, and it 
is only necessary to multiply the earth load as given there by 
6/10 (or 60%) to find the equivalent load of solid rock. 

Open-Cut Excavation. — This includes all rock excavation in open 
cuts (except trenches), where no special care is used to quarry the 
stone in certain sizes for masonry, but where explosives are used 
freely to break out the rock in sizes that can be handled with the 
appliances available. 

Spacing Holes in Open-Cut Excavation — A common rule is to 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 203 

place the row of vertical drill holes a distance back from the face 
equal to the depth of the drill hole, and to place the drill holes 
a distance apart in the row equal to their depth. Another rule is to 
place the row of holes back from the face a distance equal to three- 
fourths their depth, and the same distance apart in the row. In 
stratified rock of medium hardness these rules may be followed in 
making the first experiments, but they will lead to serious error if 
applied to dense granitic rocks. In the limestone on the Chicago 
Canal, not much of which was loaded with steam shovels, the holes 
were usually 12 ft. deep and placed in rows about 8 ft. back of the 
face and 8 ft. anart. These holes were charged with 40% dyna- 
mite. In a railway cut through sandstone the holes were 20 ft. 
deep, 18 ft. back from the face and 14 ft. apart in the row. These 
holes were "sprung" three times, and each hole charged with 200 
lbs. of black powder. In granite quarried for rubble for dam work, 
I have had to place the holes 414 to 5 ft. back of the face and the 
same distance apart, the holes being 12 ft. deep, about 2 lbs. of 
60% dynamite being charged in each hole. On railway work in tlie 
Kocky Mountains about the same spacing was found necessary in 
granitic rock that was to be broken up into chunks that a steam 
shovel could handle. In pit mining at the Treadwell Mine, Alaslia, 
ihe holes are drilled 12 ft. deep, in rows 2% ft. apart, the holes 
being 6 ft. apart in each row and staggered. This requires drilling 
1.7 ft. of hole per cu. yd. 

It is obviously impossible to lay down any hard and fast rule for 
the spacing of drill holes. In stratified rock that is friable, and in 
traps that are full of natural joints and seams, it is often possible 
to space the holes a distance apart somewhat greater than their 
depth, and still break the rock to comparatively small sizes upon 
blasting. In tough granite, gneiss, syenite and in trap where 
joints are few and far between, the holes may have to be spaced 3 
to 8 ft. apart, regardless of their depth, for with wider spacing the 
blocks of stone thrown down by blasting will be too large to 
handle with ordinary appliances. The mica schist, or gneiss, of 
Manhattan Island is a good example of rock that requires close 
spacing of holes regardless of depth. I have seen holes in it 20 ft. 
deep and only 4 ft. apart. 

The effect of spacing of holes upon the cost of excavation is best 
shown by tabulation of the feet of hole drilled per cubic yard exca- 
vated, as shown below : 

Distance apart 

of holes, ft.. 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 

Cu. yds. per ft. 

of hole 04 .08 .15 .23 .33 .45 .59 .75 .93 

Ft. of hole per 

cu. yd 27.0 12.0 6.8 4.3 3.0 2.2 1.7 1.33 1.08 

Distance apart 

of holes, ft.. 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 

Cu. yds. per ft. 

of hole 1.33 1.80 2.37 3.00 3.70 5.32 7.25 9.52 12.05 

Ft. of hole per 

cu. yd 75 .56 .42 .33 .27 .19 .14 .11 .08 



204 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Since in shallow excavations the holes can seldom be much 
further apart than 1 to 1% times their depth, we see that the 
cost of drilling per cubic yard increases very rapidly the shallower 
the excavation. Thus an excavation 2 ft. deep, with holes 2 ft. 
apart, requires 4.3 ft. of drill hole per cubic yard, as against 0.42 
ft. of hole per cu. yd. in a deeper excavation where drill holes are 
8 ft. apart. Failure to consider this fact ruined one contractor on 
the Erie Canal deepening, where rock excavation was only 2 ft. 
deep. Furthermore, the cost of drilling a foot of hole is much 
increased where frequent shifting of the drill tripod is necessary. 

By observing carefully the appearance of rocks in different locali- 
ties it is possible in a short time to become tolerably proficient in 
the art of estimating the probable distance apart that holes must 
be drilled for the best effect with given charges of given kind of 
explosive ; and with this end in view a young man should avail 
himself of every opportunity of studying prevailing practice in 
spacing drill holes in different localities. 

Cost of Excavating Sandstone and Shale. — In excavating shales 
and sandstones of the coal measures of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Vir- 
ginia, etc., I find that holes are usually 20 to 24 ft. deep, and 
spaced 12 to 18 ft. apart. On an average we may say that for 
every cubic yard of solid rock there is 0.1 lin. ft. of drill hole, when 
cuts are very wide, covering large areas of ground ; but in thorough 
cuts for railroads it is not safe to count upon much less than 0.2 
ft. of drill hole per cu. yd. The holes are almost invariably 
"sprung" with 40% dynamite to create chambers at the bottom of 
the holes, and then cnarged with black powder. As low as 1/50 lb. 
of dynamite per cu. yd. may be used for springing holes in shale, 
and as high as % lb. per cu. yd. in sandstone that is to be very 
heavily loaded. I should put the average at 1/20 lb. of dynamite 
per cu. yd. of shale, and 1/10 lb. per cu. yd. of sandstone. In gran- 
ite % lb. per cu. yd. is common. A very common charge is 
8 kegs (200 lbs.) of black powder per hole, or about 1 lb. per cu. 
yd. in side cuts, and 1% to 2 lbs. per cu. yd. in thorough cuts, 
although as high as 3 lbs. per cu. yd. have been used in thorough 
cuts in sandstone where special effort was made to break up the 
rock to small sizes for steam shovel work. The drilling of the 
deep holes costs not far from 40 cts. per lin. ft. where drilling is 
done by hand with wages at 15 cts. an hour, and it may be as low 
as 12 cts. a lin. ft. if well drillers are used. Soda powder costs 
about 5 cts. per lb., and 40% dynamite 12 cts. per lb. We have, 
therefore, the following: 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

Drilling 1/10 ft. to 2/10 ft. at 40 cts 4.0 to 8.0 

Dynamite 1/20 lb. to 1/10 lb 0.6 to 1.2 

Powder, 1 lb. to 2 lbs 5.0 to 10.0 

Total for loosening the rock 96 to 19.2 

The rock is commonly loaded with steam shovels, and it is not 
safe to count upon more than 500 cu. yds. of shale, or 250 cu. yds. 
of sandstone per shovel per 10-hr. shift. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 205 

Summary of Open Cut Data. — The two cost items that the inex- 
perienced man should seek flrst to inform himself upon, are : (1 ) 
The number of feet of hole drilled per cubic yard in difterent kinds 
of rock; and (2) the number of pounds of explosive required per 
cu. yd. under varying conditions. Below I have given a sum- 
mary of these items as applying to open cut work discussed in 
this book ; the table does not apply to trenching, tunneling or other 
narrow work. Two examples are given for sandstones and two for 
shales, such as occur in the coal measures of Pennsylvania. In a 
thorough cut on railroad work, we have conditions that approach 
trench work, requiring more feet of hole and more powder than in 
open side cuts : hence the difference between Examples 5 and 
6, 7 and 8. It will be observed that the large amount of drilling 
in Example 2 is due to the shallowness of the face or lift, and in 
Examples 9 to 12 it is due to the toughness of the rock. 

I shall greatly appreciate further contributions of similar data 
from my readers, for use in future editions. The greater the 
number of records, such a.z those in this table, the better will read- 
ers be able to judge the range and the average for each class of 
rock. 





JT CI 


6 


riu J. « 

V 










"o 


d 


C 




£ 


s 


w 


mc 





o2 




9i 


o 


to 


-M 


^1 




<a 


<D 


.Q 


£! 






P 


^ 


H^ 


hJ 




1. .. 


12 


.40 




.75 


40% : 


2. . . 


6 


1.00 


. 


.7 


40% 


3. .. 


20 






.37 


50% : 


4. . . 


IS 


'.'43 


. . . 


26 


50% : 


5... 


20 


.10 


l.U 


.1 


40% 


6... 


20 


.20 


2.0 


.2 


40% i 


7. . . 


24 


.08 


.7 


.03 


40% 


8... 


.. 24 


.20 


1.5 


.10 


40% 


9... 


16 


1.36 


. . . 


.20 


60% 


10. .. 


12 


1.33 


. . • 


.60 


40% ' 


11. . . 


14 


.63 


... 


.50 


40% 


12... 


12 


1.70 


. . . 


.67 


40%, 


13. . . 


. . 12% 


.32 


. . . 


.44 


52% : 


14... 


. . 14 


.35 


. . . 


.20 


75% 


15.. . 


16 


1.00 




.70 


40% ' 


16.. . 


25 


.10 




.80 


50% ' 



Kind of Rock. 

Limestone, Chicago Canal. 

Limestone, for crushing. 

Limestone, for cement. 

Limestone (holes sprung). 

Sandstone, side cut. 

Sandstone, thorough cut. 

Shale, soft, side cut. 

Shale, hard, thorough cut. 

Granite, for rubble. 

Gneiss, New York City. 

Gneiss, New York City. 

Syenite, Treadwell mine. 

Magnetic iron ore. 

Trap, seamy. 

Trap, massive. 

Granite, Grand Trunk Pa- 
cific (holes sprung, half 
the dynamite being used 
in springing). 

By applying the preceding data as to unit costs of drilling, 
blasting, loading and hauling, it will be seen that rock excavation 
in open cuts ranges from about $0.50 to $1.50 per cu. yd., the lower 
price being for shales and sandstones and the higher price for cer- 



206 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

tain granites and traps where holes are close spaced. It is a very 
common assumption that rock can be profitably excavated in open 
cuts at a contract price of $1 per cu. yd., but it will be seen that 
each case requires special study. 

Cost of Excavating Gneiss, New Yorl< City. — I am indebted to 
Mr. John J. Hopper, civil engineer and contractor, for the follow- 
ing data. The work involved the excavation of 29,iS95 cu. yds. of 
gneiss (or mica schist) at One Hundred and Twenty-seventh street. 
New Yoixi. City. The drilling of the main holes was done with 
four 31/^-in. Inger oil steam drills, and two "baby drills" were usei 
for drilling block holes. The average height of the lifts was 12 to 
15 ft., and the cut ranged from 2 to 63 ft. deep. Hand drillers and 
sledgers received $2 per 10-hr. day ; laborers handling stone and 
loading wagons received $1.50 ; one of the machine drillers re- 
ceived ?3, and the rest of the drillers received $2.75 a day. The 
"baby drills were used only on the largest pieces thrown down by 
the blast ; the ordinary sized stone from the blast was broken 
up by hand-drilled holes and by sledges to sizes suitable for build- 
ing rubble foundation walls. A good deal of the stone was piled 
up during the winter until it could be sold. The drilling part of the 
plant cost .H.SOO ; the boilers, derricks, hoists, etc., cost $1,080 ; 
40% dynamite, costing 20 cts. per lb., was used. There were 18,433 
lin. ft. of main holes drilled (not including block holes) in exca- 
vating: 29,295 cu. yds. of solid rock. The total cost of the work. 
Including the plant, cartage, sledging, etc., was $52,635. The item- 
ized cost was as follows : 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

Foremen and timekeepers 8.0 

Engineers and drillers 10.9 

Sledgers 38.3 

Derrickmen and helpers 9.6 

Labor, loading, etc 24.7 

Hand drillers 11.7 

Blacksmith and helper 5.3 

Hauling away in wagons 40.5 

Explosives 9.8 

Coal, coke, oil, etc 6.0 

Repairs to drills 1.0 

Repairs to boilers, derricks, etc 1.2 

Total per cu. yd $1.67 

Mr. Hopper informs me that in sound rock where 2'0-f t. holes 
could be drilled, a drill would average 70 ft. in 10 hrs. ; but in 
shallow drilling the drills would frequently not average over 
25 ft. each. 

This is about as high a cost as need occur in open cut rock work 
of any kind, when wages are as above given. 

See the section on Railways for cost of excavating gneiss for the 
New York Subway. 

Cost of Gneiss Excavation for Dams. — Mr. J. Waldo Smith is 
authority for the statement that on several dam jobs done under 
his direction, near New York City, it had cost the contractors $1.65 



ROCK EXCAVATION. QUARRYING, ETC. 207 

per cu. yd. to excavate gneiss In open cuts, when wages of com- 
mon laborers were $1.65 cts. per 10-hr. day. At Catena it had cost 
the contractors $3.50 per cu. yd. to excavate gneiss in the founda- 
tion for the dam, where no blasting was allowed. At Boontown, 
N. J., under similar conditions, it had cost $3.30 per cu. yd. 

Summary of Costs on Chicago Canal. — The summary in Table 
X has been compiled by Mr. W. G. Potter. Common laborers in 
all cases receiving $1.50 for 10 hrs. work, all delays of 1 hr. or 
more being docked. Wages paid the other classes of men are given 
in my "Rock Excavation." The tabulated costs do not include shop 
repairs, but do include field repairs. The drilling item appears not 
to include the cost of drill sharpening. Plant interest and depreci- 
ation are not included either — a very important item where such 
expensive machines are used. Explosives include caps and dyna- 
mite, 12 cts. per lb. for the 40% dynamite being assumed to cover 
the cost of explosives. General expenses include superintendence, 
watchmen and incidentals. 

Table X. — Cost in Cents Per Cu. Yd. (Solid). 

1 6 

;§ M, i S • "^ S 8 £ 

Brown Cantilever 3.9 4.1 8.0 3.2 1.0 3.6 14.6 0.0 38.3 

Lidgerwood Cableway. .3.7 3.8 8.4 2.7 1.0 3.6 15.6 0.0 38.8 
Hullett-McMyler Der- 
rick 3.9 4.0 7.4 2.5 1.8 5.3 18.3 0.0 43.2 

Hullett Conveyor 4.1 3.7 8.5 3.8 1.2 6.2 21.4 0.0 48.9 

Car Hoist No. 1 3.7 3.9 9.1 2.7 0.8 3.1 24.8 5.1 53.1 

Car Hoist No. 2 3.9 3.6 8.9 3.2 0.9 1.2 22.9 2.3 47.1 

Car Hoist No. 3 4.0 5.0 10.7 3.1 1.2 1.2 26.4 4.8 56.5 

The descriptions of each of the foregoing machines and methods 
of excavating and transporting the rock (limestone) are given 
in my book on "Rock Excavation." The detailed cost of chan- 
neling per square foot is also given there. 

Trenching in Rock — This is a subject upon which practically 
nothing has ever been written. In consequence there is probably no 
class of rock work that is so often mismanaged ; and, as a further 
consequence of the prevailing ignorance, engineers' estimates of 
cost are often far too low and occasionaily as far too high. In city 
specifications for sewer trenching in rock it is customary to pay 
the contractor only for rock excavated within specified "neat 
lines." If he excavates beyond the "neat lines" he does so at his 
own expense. In sewer work the most common practice is to 
specify that payment will be made for a trench 12 ins. wider than 
the outside diameter of the sewer pipe, and 6 ins. deeper than the 
bottom of the pipe when the pipe is laid to grade. The most ra- 
tional specification that I have seen for general use in rock trench- 
ing is as follows : "All trenches in rock e.x;cavation will be esti- 



208 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

mated 2 ft. wider than the external diameter of the pipe and 6 ins. 
below the sewer grade." 

Different rocks vary greatly in the way the sides and bottom 
shear ofE upon blasting. The sides of trenches in soft rocks can 
be cut off clean when the blast holes are properly loaded ; but 
tough granites, traps, etc., leave jagged walls, generally involving 
excavation beyond the "neat lines" specified. 

In excavating thin bedded, horizontally stratified rocks the drill 
holes seldom need to go much, if any, below the neat lines ; that is, 
6 ins. below the bottom of the pipe. But in excavating thick 
bedded and tough limestones and the like, it is generally necessary 
to drill 12 ins. below the bottom of the pipe. In tough granites, 
traps, etc., it is often necessary to drill at least 18 ins. below grade 
in order to leave no knobs or projections after blasting that would 
require breaking off with bull points and sledges. Obviously the 
shallower the trench the greater is the importance of making due 
allowance for this extra drilling. 

The common practice in placing drill holes is to put down holes 
in pairs, one hole on each side of the proposed trench ; and, if the 
trench is wide, one or more holes are drilled between these two 
side holes. However, it is not always necessary to drill the two 
holes (one on each side) ; but in narrow trench work, such as for 
a 12-in. water pipe, one hole in the middle of the trench will usu- 
ally Drove sufficient if it is made of large enough diameter to hold 
a heavy charge of dynamite. For example, in trenching for a 
12-in. water pipe in New Jersey trap rock, holes were drilled in the 
center of the trench, 6 ft. deep, and 2 ft. apart. The result was a 
great saving in the cost of drilling per cubic yard. 

Cost of Drilling and Blasting in Trenches. — Next to tunneling 
there is no class of rock excavation requiring so much drilling 
per cubic yard as does trench excavation. In granites, if shallow 
holes are drilled by hand, the holes are frequently spaced not more 
than 1% ft. apart. If in a very narrow trench 1% ft. wide two 
holes are drill©! in a row, one on each side of the trench, and if the 
rows are 1% ft. apart, we have two holes drilled in a square 1% ft. 
on a side ; that is, for every 2 % cu. ft. of rock we must drill 2 ft. 
of hole, or 24 ft. of drill hole per cu. yd. If the cost of drilling is 
25 cts. a foot, we have $0.25 X 24 = $6 per cu. yd. as the cost 
of drilling alone. It is seldom, however, that such narrow trench- 
ing is done. Trenches for small pipes are usually 2 % to 3 ft. wide ; 
two holes are usually drilled in a row, and rows are usually about 
3 ft. apart. A trench 3 ft. wide with two holes in a row, and 
rows 3 ft. apart, requires 6 ft. of drilling per cubic yard. "With 
drilling costing 50 cts. per ft., as it often does where hand drills are 
used in granite, the cost is then $3 per cu. yd. for drilling alone. 
Unless the job is too small to pay for installing a plant, hand 
drilling should never be used in trench work, because the drilling 
forms such a very large part of the cost. 

In a trench 6 ft. wide in hard New Jersey trap rock three holes 
were drilled in a row, one close to each side and one in the middle. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 2U9 

and the rows were 3 ft. apart, thus requiring 4% ft. of drill hole 
per cu. yd. of excavation. The drilling was done with steam drills 
at a cost of 30 cts. per lin. ft., for the holes were only 4i/^ ft. 
deep, the rock was hard, and the men slow, about 35 ft. being the 
day's work per drill. The contractor had to drill 1% ft. below 
grade in this rock to insure having no projecting knobs of rock. 
While it cost $1.35 per cu. yd. to drill the 31/2 ft. for which pay- 
ment was made, to this must be added nearly 30%, or $0.40 per 
cu. yd., to cover the cost of drilling the extra 1 ft. for which no 
payment was received, making the total cost of drilling $1.75 per 
cu. yd. of pay material. About 2 lbs. of 40% dynamite were 
charged in each hole, making about 2.6 lbs. of dynamite per cu. yd. 
of pay material. The explosives thus added another $0.40 per 
cu. yd., making a total of $2.15 per cu. yd. for drilling and 
blasting. 

In the same trap rock, where the trench was 8 ft. wide and 12 
ft. deep, there were three holes in a row and rows were 4 ft. apart, 
requiring 2.53 ft. of hole per cu. yd. of pay excavation, plus 0.21 ft. 
of hole per cu. yd. of pay material to cover the cost of drilling the 
last 1 ft. of hole below the "neat line." Each drill averaged 45 ft. 
of hole in 10 hrs., and the cost was 23 cts. per ft. of hole ; hence 
$0.23 X 2.74 = $0.63 per cu. yd. was the cost of drilling. About 4 
lbs. of 40% dynamite were charged in each hole, or 1.1 lbs. per 
cu. yd. of pay material, making the total cost 80 cts. per cu. yd. for 
drilling and blasting. A comparison of this cost of 80 cts. with the 
$2.15 above given brings out strikingly the fact that each problem 
of trench work must be considered in detail by itself. 

In a city where the contractor must fire comparatively small 
shots in order to avoid accidents to buildings and suits for dam- 
ages arising from "disturbing the peace," it is seldom possible to 
space the holes more than 3 or at most 4 ft. apart. In trenching 
in soft sandstone in Newark, N. J., where the trench was 14 ft. 
wide and 10 ft. deep, there were five holes in a row (the distance 
between holes being 3% ft.) and rows were 4 ft. apart, making 2.4 
ft. of hole per cu. yd. Bach hole was charged with 4.12 lbs. of 
40% dynamite, making practically 1 lb. per cu. yd. About half 
the dynamite was charged at the bottom of each hole, then tamp- 
ing was put in, and the other half was charged up to about 214 ft. 
below the mouth of the hole. Each steam drill averaged 90 ft. of 
hole Der 10 hrs., making the cost of drilling 10 cts. per ft. of 
hole, or 24 cts. per cu. yd. Including the cost of dynamite and the 
placing of timbers over each blast, the cost of drilling and blasting 
was 40 cts. per cu. yd. This is probably as low a cost for break- 
ing rock in a wide trench as can be counted upon under favorable 
conditions. In this rock there was no necessity of drilling below 
grade. 

The cost of throwing rock out of shallow trenches or of loading 
it into buckets to be raised by the engine of a derrick, a locomotive 
crane or a cableway, is somewhat greater than the cost of handling 
rock in open cuts. A fair day's work for one man is 6 cu. yds. 



210 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of rock handled, when there is little sledging ; but the output may- 
be only 4 cu. yds. where there is a large amount of sledging to be 
done. 

If cableways or derricks are used for hoisting the rock, bear in 
mind that they will be idle most of the time, for the drilling limits 
the output. With a given number of drills to a cableway, estimate 
the number of cubic yards of rocK that the drills will break per day 
and divide this yardage into the daily cost of operating the cable- 
way. Thus, in a trench 6 ft. wide, if the holes are 3 ft. apart, each 
cubic yard of rock requires 4% ft. of hole, and each drill will break 
13% cu. yds. per day where 60 ft. of hole is a day's work. With 
four drills per cableway the daily output is 4 X 13% = 53% cu. yds. 
The cableway would be capable of handling several times this out- 
put v/ere it not limited by the drilling. Notwithstanding that all 
this seems self-evident, I have known more than one contractor to 
overlook the fact that the cost of handling rock from trenches is ' 
very much greater than in open cuts where holes are farther apart 
and where a few drills can keep a cableway busy. 

I am indebted to Mr. F. I. Winslow for the following data on 
trench work in Boston, Mass. : For house sewer trenches, con- 
tractors are allowed 3 ft. width, and trenches for water pipe (16 
ins. or less), 2% ft. width. The rock is granite, and the drill holes 
are usually 3 ft. apart drilled along the center of the trench, but 
staggered a little off center. On small jobs hammer drills are used, 
one man holding and two striking. For a hole 10 ft. deep the 
starting bit is 2% ins. and the finishing bit is 1% ins. diam. A 
drilling gang of three men averages 8 to 10 ft. of hole in 10 hrs., 
although in very soft rock 20 ft. may be drilled in 10 hrs. In a 
trench 10 ft. deep, the rock is usually excavated in two 5-ft. 
benches, but some contractors drill the full 10 ft. and take it out 
in one 10-ft. bench. Forcite containing 75% nitroglycerin is com- 
monly used, % to 3 sticks being charged in a hole. Force account 
records for gran.te trenching, on jobs of less than 100 cu. yds. 
each, show that the average cost during the past 15 years has been 
$3.80 per cu. yd., including excavating and piling up the rock along- 
side the trench. The wages paid hand-drillers were $1.75 per 10-hr. 
day; and to laborers, $1.40 per day. 

I am indebted to the Harrison Construction Co., of Newark, 
N. J., for the following information : In a sandstone trench about 
6 ft. wide the holes were spaced about 3 ft. apart, thus requiring 
4% ft. of hole per cu. yd. In seamy rock, shallow holes 4 to 6 ft. 
deep were drilled, and from 2 to 3 sticks of 50% dynamite were 
charged, each stick being 1% X 8 ins. This is equivalent to 0.55 
lb. per cu. yd. Where the rock was solid, the holes were drilled 8 
to 10 ft. deep and the dynamite charge doubled. 

Consult the sections on Water Works and on Sewers for further 
data on trenching. 

Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Trap. — The following data relate 
to quarrying New Jersey trap rock and crushing it in gyratory 
crushers. The quarry face was 12 to 18 ft. high. The output of 
the following gang was 200 cu. yds. of crushed stone per 10-hr. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 211 

day, each cubic yard of crusher run product weighing 2,700 lbs., 
no Diece being more than 2 ins. diameter. The weight of a solid 
cubic yard of this trap was 4,500 lbs., so that the voids in the 
crushed stone were 40%. Drill holes were spaced about 5 ft. apart. 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

3 drillers at $2.75 % 8.25 $0,041 

3 helpers at $1.75 5.25 0.026 

10 men barring out and sledging 15.00 0.075 

14 men loading carts 21.00 0.105 

4 cart horses 6.00 0.030 

2 cart drivers 3.00 0.015 

2 men dumping carts and feeding crusher... 3.00 0.015 

1 fireman for drill boiler 2.50 0.013 

1 engineman for crusher 3.00 0.015 

1 blacksmith 3.00 0.015 

1 blacksmith helper 2.00 0.010 

1 foreman 5.00 0.025 

2 tons coal at $3.50 7.00 0.035 

150 lbs. 40% dynamite at 15 cts 22.50 0.113 

Total $106.50 $0,533 

Interest, depreciation and repairs would add about $8 or $10 more 
per day, or 4 to 5 cts. per cu. yd., making a total of about 58 cts. 
per cu. yd. There was no earth stripping. 

The stone was loaded into one-horse dump carts, the driver tak- 
ing one cart to the crusher while the other cart was being loaded. 
The haul was 100 ft. The carts were dumped into an inclined chute 
feeding into a No. 5 Gates gyratory crusher. The stone was ele- 
vated by a bucket elevator and screened. All stone larger than 
2-in. was returned through a chute to a small No. 3 Gates crusher 
to be re-crushed. 

I should add that the trap rock was much seamed, so that upon 
blasting it was broken into tolerably small chunks, so that the 
cost of sledging was not high considering the small size of the 
crusher. 

Cost of Crushing at Newton, iVIass. — A. F. Noyes, City Engineer 
of Newton, Mass., gives the following cost data for the year 1891, 
on four jobs of crushing stone and cobbles for macadam. On jobs 
A and B the stone was quarried and crushed ; on jobs C and D 
cobblestones were crushed. A 9 X 15-in. Farrel-Marsondon crusher 
was used, stone being fed in by two laborers. A rotary screen 
having %, 1 and 2%-in. openings delivered the stone into bins hav- 
ing four compartments, the last receiving the "tailings" which had 
failed to pass through the screen. The broken stone was measured 
in carts as they left the bin, but several cart loads were weighed, 
giving the following weights per cubic foot of broken stone : 

Size 

%-in. 1-in 2% -ins. Tailings. 

Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 

Greenish trap rock, "A" 95.8 84.3 88.3 91.0 

Conglomerate, "B" 101.0 87.7 94.4 

Cobblestones, "C" and "D" 102.5 98.0 99.6 

A one-horse caut held 26 to 28 cu. ft. (average 1 cu. yd.) of 
broken stone: a two-horse cart, 40 to 42 cu. ft., at the crusher. 



212 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



A. 

Hours run 412 

Short tons per hour 9.0 

Cu. yds. per hour 7.7 

Per cent of tailings 31.8 

Per cent of 2%-in. stone 51.3 

Per cent of 1-in. stone 10.2 

Per cent of y2-in. stone or dust 6.7 18.8 25.5 23.4 



B. 


C. 


D. 


144 


101 


198 


11.2 


15.7 


12.1 


8.9 


11.8 


9.0 


29.3 


17.5 


20.5 


51.9 


57.0 


55.1 



-Job- 



A. B. C. D. 

Explosives, coal for drill and repairs. $0,084 $0,018 

Labor steam drilling 0.092 

Labor hand drilling 0.249 

Sharpening tools 0.069 0.023 

Sledging stone for crusher . . . . 0.279 0.420 

Loading carts 0.098 0.127 $0,144 

Carting to crusher 0.072 0.062 $0,314* 0.098 

Feeding crusher 0.053 0.053 0.033 0.065 

Engineer of crusher 0.031 0.038 0.029 0.036 

Coal for crusher 0.079 0.050 0.047 0.044 

Repairs to crusher 0.041 0.011 

Moving portable crusher 0.023 0.019 

Watchman ($1.75 a day) 0.053 0.022 0.030 



Total cost per cu. yd $0,898 $1,116 $0,445 $0.44'} 

Total cost per short ton 0.745 0.885 0.330 0.372 



♦Loading and hauling in wheelbarrows. 

Note. — "A" was trap rock ; "B" was conglomerate rock ; "C" 
and "D" were trap and granite cobblestones. Common laborers on 
.iobs "A" and "D" were naid $1.75 oer 9-hr. day ; on jobs "B" and 
"C," $1.50 per 9-hr. day ; two-horse cart and driver, $5 per day ; 
blacksmith, $2.50 : engineer on crusher. $2 on job "A," $2.25 on 
"B," $2.00 on "C," $2.50 on "D" : steam driller received $3, and 
helper $1.75 a day; foreman, $3 a day. Coal was $5.25 per short 
ton. Porcite powder 11% cts. per lb. 

Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Quartzite. — Mr. W. G. Kirchoffer 
gives the following data on the cost of quarrying and crushing 
quartzite for macadam, in 1903, at Baraboo, Wis. The plant was a 
municipal plant operated by day labor, and the costs were some- 
what higher than under contract work. The crusher was a No. 3 
Austin jaw crusher, 12 x 16-in. opening. Three sizes of screen holes 
in the rotary screen were used: %-in., 1%-in. and 2%-in. The 
first cost of the plant was as follows, in 1901 : 

Crusher $ 900 

Bins 108 

Steam drill 218 

Small tools 108 

$1,334 
The output of the crusher by years has been : 

Tear 

1901 1902 1903 

Total output, cu. yds 1,920 3,700 4,883 

Days worked 47 70 88 

Output per day, cu. yds 41 53 55^ 

In the year 1901, about 10% of the stone was screened out and 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 213 

thrown away. The wages paid per 10-hr. day were: Laborers, 
$1.50; quarrymen, $1.75; drill-runner, $2; engineman and engine, 
$3.50. The stone was measured in wagons built to hold just IVa 
cu. yds., by weight, 3,900 lbs., and the following costs for 1903 are 
based upon wagon measurement of the stone : 

Per cu. yd. 

Quarry rent $0.0207 

Labor quarrying, including foreman 0.3200 

Labor crushing 0.1980 

Tools 0.0148 

Dies for crusher 0.0636 

Dynamite (60% at 25 cts. per lb.), caps and fuse 0.0910 

Rent of engine and wages of engineman 0.0635 

Fuel for engine, $4.60 per ton 0.0477 

Oil and waste 0.0033 

Hauling water and supplies 0.0499 

Supplies 0.0137 

Superintendent of crusher 0.0476 

Depreciation of plant 0.0736 

Total $1.0074 

The cost of hauling 2% miles to the street was 50 cts. per cu. yd., 
wages of team and driver being $3 a day. 

The cost of the macadam pavement, including stone, hauling, 
grading, spreading stone, claying and rolling, has been a little less 
than 50 cts. per sq. yd. The macadam was 8 ins. thick at the 
center and 6 ins. at the gutters, measured after rolling. 

Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Limestone for Macadam. — The 

cost of operating a small quarry, and crushing with a portable or 
semi-portable crusher is obviously much higher than where a large 
plant is used. For some time to come the greater part of road- 
metal crushing will be done with small plants, under conditions 
such as I am about to describe, and at costs not far differing from 
those that will be given. 

In quarrying limestone, where the face of the quarry was only 
5 to 6 ft. high, and where the amount of stripping was small, 
one steam drill was used. This drill received its steam from the 
same boiler that supplied the crusher engine. The drill averaged 
60 ft. of hole drilled per 10-hr. day, but was poorly handled and 
frequently laid off for repairs. The cost of quarrying and crushing 
was as follows : 

Quarry. 

1 driller % 2.50 

1 helper 1.50 

1 man stripping 1.50 

4 men quarrying 6.00 

1 blacksmith 2.50 

% ton coal at $3 1.00 

Repairs to drill 60 

Hose, drill steel and interest on plant 90 

24 lbs. dynamite 3.60 

Total $20.10 



214 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Crusher. 

1 engineman $ 2.50 

2 men feeding crusher 3.50 

6 men wheeling 9.00 

1 bin man 1.50 

1 general foreman 3.00 

1/3 ton coal at $3 1.00 

1 gallon oil 25 

Repairs to crusher 1.50 

Repairs to engine and boiler 1.00 

Interest on plant 1.00 

Total $24.25 

Summary — 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

Quarrying $20.10 $0.84 

Crushing 24.25 0.41 

Total for 60 cu. yds $43.85 $0.75 

The "4 men quarrying" barred out and sledged the stone to sizes 
that would enter a 9x16 in. jaw crusher. The "6 men wheeling" 
delivered the stone in wheelbarrows to the crusher platform, the 
run plank being never longer than 150 ft. Two men fed the stone 
into the crusher, and a binman helped load the wagons from the 
bin, and kept tally of the loads. The stone was measured loose 
in the wagons, and it was found that the average load was 1% 
cu. yds., weighing 2,400 lbs. per cu. yd. There were 40 wagon loads, 
or 60 cu. yds. crushed per 10-hr. day, although on some days as 
high as 75 cu. yds. were crushed. The stone was screened through 
a rotary screen, 9 ft. long, having three sizes of openings, i/^-in., 
1%-in. and 2%-in. The cutout was 16% of the smallest size, 24% 
of the middle size, and 60% of tiie large size. All tailings over 
2% ins. in size were re-crushed. 

It will be noted that the interest on the plant is quite an im- 
portant item. This is due to the fact that, year in and year out, 
a quarrying and crushing plant for roadwork seldom averages 
more than 100 days actually worked per year, and the total charge 
for interest must be distributed over these 100 days, and not over 
300 days as is so commonly and erroneously done. 

The cost of stripping the earth off the rock is often considerably 
in excess of the above given cost, and each case must be estimated 
separately. Quarry rental or royalty is usually not in excess of 
5 cts. per cu. yd., and frequently much less. 

The dynamite used was 40%, and the cost of electric exploders 
is included in the cost given. Where a higher quarry face is used 
the cost of drilling and the cost of explosives per cu. yd. is less. 
Exclusive of quarry rent and heavy stripping costs, a road con- 
tractor should be able to quarry and crush limestone or sandstone 
for not more than 75 cts. per cu. yd., or 62 cts. per ton of 2,000 lbs., 
wages and conditions being as above given. 

The labor cost of erecting bins and installing a 9x16 jaw 
crusher, elevator, etc., averages about $75, including hauling the 
plant two or three miles, and dismantling the plant when work is 
finished. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 215 

The first cost of a quarrying, crusliing and macadam road build- 
ing plant is given in following paragrapli. 

Price of Road Building Plant— The following gives the first cost 
of a typical portable plant for quarrying and crushing rock, grad- 
ing, hauling and building a macadam road : 

Crusher Plant — 
1 jaw crusher (9x15 in.), with rotary screen. .$1,100 

Portable bins .200 

Engine to drive crusher (15 HP.) 200 

Boiler on wheels (20 HP.) 600 



Total crusher plant ?2,100 

Quarry Plant — - 

2 steam drills at $250 $ 500 

Steam pipe, waterpipe, etc 150 

Quarry and blacksmitli tools 150 

Steam boiler (15 HP.) 400 



Total quarry plant $1,200 

Road Plant — 
6 dump waeons for hauling stone at $125....$ 750 

6 dump wagons for grading at $125 750 

2 leveling scrapers at $100 200 

12 wheel scrapers at $50 600 

12 drag scrapers, shovels, picks, etc 150 

1 steam roller 2,500 

2 sprinkling wagons at $300 600 

Gasolene pump and portable water tank 500 

Total road plant $5,S50 

Grand total $9,150 

Cost of Jaw Crusher Renewals. — Mr. Thomas Aitken gives the 
following data as to costs in England, for a 9 x 16-in. jaw crushei- 
(Baxter) whose first cost complete was $1,500. The crusher aver- 
aged 66 long tons of trap per 10-hr. day. 

Life 
in tons 
crushed. 

Upper jaws (reversible) 8,000 

Lower jaws (reversible) 4,000 

Top rotary screen (plates ^ in.).. 24, 000 

Lower rotary screens 48,000 

Elevator belt (5 ply; 26 ft. long), 

plates, etc 32,000 

Elevator buckets (25) 8,000 

Toggles and bearings, etc 8,000 

Total 1.01 

This crusher has a capacity of 80 tons (of 2,240 lbs.) per day, 
is mounted on wheels, and has two short rotary screens (one above 
the other) mounted on the same framework with the crusher 
itself, and it carries a very small bin, also on the same frame. 
The machine is entirely self-contained, and thus is readily portable. 
Our American practice is to have large separate bins (sometimes 
on wheels), and consequently a much longer elevator. While the 
first cost of our American crushers of the same size is also about 
$1,500 complete, our repair parts will average nearly double the 
cost given by Mr. Aitken for English conditions. 



First 
cost of 
part. 


Cost per 

long ton, 

cents. 


$11 
11 
30 
23 


0.13 
0.26 
0.12 
0.04 


60 
10 

14 


0.18 
0.12 
0.16 



216 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Aitken states that 1 hp. (nominal) for each ton crushed per hour 
will drive the Baxter crusher, but it is noteworthy that he gives 
a coal consumption of 720 lbs. per day, which indicates far more 
than 8 hp. 

Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Limestone, IVlissouri.* — Mr. Cur- 
tis Hill gives the following relative to work done by contract in 
1908 for the Missouri Highway Department. The stone was a 
hard, bluish gray limestone. Two quarries were opened up near 
the road, and a total of 13,000 cu. yds. of crushed stone produced. 
Quarrying — Cost per cu yd. 

Foreman and. timekeeper, at $0.40 $0,056 

Drillers (hand), at 171/2 .018 

Drillers (steam), at 17% .031 

Laborers, at 17^ .224 

Teams, at 35 .021 

Powder, lbs. at 10 .059 

Caps, at 10 .002 

Fuse, ft, at 01 

Watchman, at 15 .017 

Water boy, at 10 .012 

Quarry rent, at .030 

Total quarrying $0,472 

Crushing — 

Foreman and timekeeper 40 .064 

Laborers 17% .121 

Engine and engineman 40 .067 

Watchman 15 .007 

Total crushing $0,259 

Grand total $0,731 

This does not include plant interest, repairs and depreciation, nor 
insurance of men. 

The stone was screened through three sizes of hole, %, 1% and 
3-in. 

The crusher was a portable jaw crusher, and its output was 
65 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day. 

The organization was about as follows : 

1 quarry foreman. 

1 steam driller. 

1 hand driller (% time). 

8 laborers, quarry. 

1 team C-A time). 

1 water boy. 

1 watchman. 

1 crusher foreman. 

4 laborers at crusher. 

1 engineman on crusher. 

Cost of Crushing and Hauling Cobblestones. t — Mr. W. A. Gillette 
is author of the following: 

It may be of interest to builders of macadam roads or crushers 



*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 4, 1909. 
"^Engineering-Contracting, April 28, 1909. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 217 

of stone to know how cheaply the work can be done with a good 
small plant and when the supervision of the plant is intelligently 
administered. My experience in the above class of work leads me 
to believe that few plants of a capacity similar to the one wliicli 
shows the output I will give below are giving such satisfactory 
results. The plant in question is owned by the City of Ventura, 
Cal., and the rock is used in the construction of petrolithic 
macadam. 

The engineering of the entire work has been done by J. B. 
Waud, and Mr. James M. Montgomery is the contractor. Mr. 
Montgomery has an exceptionally fine lot of stock, and the or- 
ganization of his work is about as near perfection as it could be. 

While looking over the work at Ventura the writer took occasion 
to make an inquiry regarding the cost per cubic yard for stone 
delivered on the street. This question was brought about from 
the fact that the wox'k was being done at an exceptionally low cost, 
and it was hard to understand just why the cost was so much 
less than that of other similar construction. 

I was told that the cost of the rock delivered on the street 
was something less than 50 cts. per cu. yd. It hardly seemed 
possible, when it was known that the average haul from the 
crusher to the work was about a mile, while the tough cobbles 
which are being crushed are gathered on the ocean beach and 
hauled in 1%-cu. yd. dump wagons to the crusher, a distance of 
about 1,500 ft., two teams with two wagons and drivers being used 
for this purpose. 

Eiglit laborers are used to load the cobbles into the wagons ; 
three men and the foreman do the work at the crusher and bins. 
The power to operate the crusher is electricity. 

Five teams and drivers with dump wagons holding 2 cu. j^ds. 
each haul the crushed stone to the streets. 

On this particular day all of the crushed stone was hauled 
% mile and the screenings were hauled I14 miles. The wagons 
were heaped up so that they reached the street more than full. A 
good part of this haul was over very rough roads, so the rock was 
well settled in the wagon boxes. 

The wages paid are as follows : 

Two-horse team, wagon and driver, $4.50 for 9 hrs. 

Foreman, $4 per day. 

Laborers, $2 per day. 

The following is an itemized statement of the 9-hr. day's work : 

One foreman, at $4.00 per day $ 4.00 

Eleven laborers, at $2.00 per day 22.00 

Two teams hauling cobbles to crusher, at $4.50 per day 9.00 

Five teams hauling crushed stone to street, at $4.50 per day.. 22.50 

Electric power, 67 kw. hours, at 3 cts 2.00 

Engine oil 1.00 

Total $60.50 

The total output for a large day's run was 132 cu. yds., as meas- 
ured In the wagon boxes at a cost of $60.50, or 45.8 cts. per cu. yd. 



218 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

delivered on the street, exclusive of plant interest and depreciation. 
The plant cost $3,000. It consists of a No. 3 Austin gyratory- 
crusher, having two 8y2x24-in. openings, driven by an electric 
motor. 

"Where the rock was crushed so that all of it would pass through 
a 2 -in. ring the average output was 90 cu. yds. per 9-hr. day, or 
67 cts. per cu. yd. for labor, hauling and power. 

The cost of interest and maintenance of plant is not included. 

Cost of Quarrying and Crushing Trap, and Ballasting, D., L. & 
W. Ry.* — Mr. Lincoln Bush is author of the following: 

Early in 1905 the D. L. & W. Ry. Co. acquired by purchase near 
Boonton, N. J., a granite quarry and crusher plant, together with 
other equipment in the way of cars, machinery, etc., that were 
utilized by a contractor in connection with the construction of a 
large masonry dam for a reservoir. This work having been com- 
pleted by the contractor, the Lackawanna Railroad Company ac- 
quired about 3 miles of railroad running from its main line to the 
quarry plant, together with about 56 acres of ground, tracks at 
crusher plant, etc. In adapting this plant to our use and re- 
arranging the tracks and crusher layout to meet our requirements, 
we expended at the outstart $21,904.33, and sold from the con- 
tractor's outfit certain equipment not required by us, which sale 
netted us $18,159.31, making the net cost to us of the quarry and 
plant at the time we started operating the crusher $26,245.02. 

The material obtained from this crusher plant is a very good 
quality of New Jersey granite, weighing 2,795 lbs. per cu. yd. of 
crushed stone. 

The quarry was well opened up when we acquired it from the 
contractor, and the face of the quarry has a depth of from 20 to 
60 ft. and a length of about 2,200 ft. The stripping on top of the 
quarry will average about 2% ft. 

The crusher machinery was manufactured by the Allis-Chalmera 
Co., and consists of one No. 8 and one No. 6 crusher, with a large 
bucket conveyor for conveying the broken stone from the crusher to 
the screens. There is one large 48-in. diameter screen, consisting 
of three sections, each 4 ft. in length, with ringings from % in. to 
2% ins. in diameter and a dust jacket for separating the ma- 
terials. Materials which pass through the %-in. ringing are not 
used for track ballast. The ballast product is conveyed on a 
Robins belt conveyor and deposited into a system of bins ; the 
finer material and dust pass directly over the dust jacket into the 
dust bin. 

The percentage of fine materials, i. e., dust and %-in. stuff, runs 
from 12% to 14% of the total output. 

The grades of tracks at the crusher plant are so arranged as to 
handle the cars after being placed by gravity. 

There is a powder magazine located on the property which has 
a storage capacity for about 10 tons of powder and explosives. 



* Engineering-Contracting, March 24, 1909. 



ROCK EXCAVATION. QUARRYING, ETC. 219 

There is also a water system for the boilers and a sprinkling plant 
to keep down the dust. 

The maximum grade of the track connecting our main line with 
tlie quarry is 3% ascending to the quarry, and in handling our bal- 
last we have been utilizing a locomotive which will handle 14 empty 
Rodger ballast cars up this 3% grade. 

The larger part of the stone is handled from the quarry to the 
crusher plant by means of a derrick system, the face of the 
quarry being located quite close to the crusher plant. We have 
in use 6 large derricks with 90-ft. masts, which, with 6 hoisting 
engines operated in connection with the derrick system, handle the 
stone in large stone boxes. The stone is quarried from the top of 
the face by a stepping system. 

To pass into the No. 6 crusher the stone has to be broken up in 
sizes from 16-in. to 20-in. The breaking of the material is done 
with a system of block hole drills, placing holes from 6 ins. to 
12 ins. apart, depending upon the size of the stone to be broken. 
We use from 3 to 6 block hole drills per day in breaking up the 
larger stone and some of the smaller stones are sledged instead of 
being block holed. 

In addition to the derrick system at this plant we also have a 
car system, by means of which cars are loaded with stone from 
the quarry are dropped by gravity to the crusher. These cars 
have from 12 to 16 cu. yds. capacity, and when the cars reach 
the crusher plants are dumped by one of the derricks. The bot- 
tom of these cars is constructed of wood and metal, with a chain 
attached, and the false bottom of the car is picked up on one end 
by the derrick, and the stone dumped by this means without manual 
handling. After the cars have been dumped at the crusher they 
are returned to the quarry by a haulage system, operated by a 
hoisting engine. The stripping from the top of the quarry is dis- 
posed of by piling it back from the face of the quarry. 

In operating the quarry and crusher we have employed an aver- 
age of 125 men, including rock men, drill men, engineers, me- 
chanical men and laborers required at the quarry and crusher. We 
employ two blacksmiths for handling the drill work and a pipefitter 
for taking care of the steam-pipe system and steam drills. One 
mechanical foreman with the necessary help has charge of the 
crushing plant and one general foreman has charge of the quarry. 
One engineer handles the engine in the crusher plant and one fire- 
man does the firing. 

We utilize a 150-hp. boiler for generating steam for the drills, 
and in addition to this we have two 150-hp. boilers for furnishing 
the balance of power for the derricks and at the crushers. 

We started operating the quarry and crusher plant in May, 1905. 
The plant was shut down on January 15, 1906, and operations re- 
sumed in March, 1906. The detailed statements of the cost of 
quarrying and crushing stone at this plant have been carefully kept 
and are reliable as to the cost as well as to output. The cost 
includes the quarrying and crushing, and includes the material 
loaded on cars at the bins. 



220 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The costs were as follows : 



Month 
and Year. 






3 

o 

637 
048 
267 
722 
017 
321 
219 
882 
233 
516 
594 
622 
894 
183 



m 
-a 
>. . 
. >> 

p C53 
O'O 
(B 
5?^ 

TO (D 
U rv 

a) *-* 
!> 

<1 

246 
B71 
241 
323 
270 
243 
235 
249 
269 
301 
429 
' 409 
436 
377 
307 



>>« 

f. TO +J 

S3" 

-w 
CO :-. 
O o 

46.2 

50.6 

55.9 

51.1 

55.2 

56 

47.9 

57.5 

39.2 

51.5 

40 

47 

45.5 

49 

49 



"O - 

pS 

02 

3 ai 

01 o o 

ft 

8.9 

7.6 

6.6 

5.3 

6.6 

7.2 

5.8 

7.6 

6.3 

6.7 

5 

5 

6 

6 

6.5 



-a-d 
3 so 



2!» 



K 



ftCg 



IcS 



o 



for the four months of May to 



6^ 

55.1 
58.2 
62.5 
56.4 
61.8 
63.2 
65.1 
53.7 
45.5 
66 
50 
52 
52.5 
55 
55.5 
August, 1906, 



May, 1905.. 
June, 1905 . 
July, 1905 . . 
August, 1905... 
September, 1905 
October, 1905.. 
November, 1905 
December, 1905 
January, 1906.. 
April, 1906 
May, 1906 
June, 1906 
July, 1906 
August, 1906 
Average . 

The average cost 
was as follows ; 

Per cu. yd. 
Quarrying : cts. 

Labor 38.4 

Supplies 6.6 

Total quarrying 45.0 

Crushing: 

Labor 3.5 

Supplies 2.5 

Total crushing 6.0 

Grand total 51.0 

These costs do not include interest and depreciation of plant, but 
do include all other items, even to current repairs. 

We have used the crushed stone from this plant at various 
points along our line on the Morris and Essex Divisions, and during 
the present season we put on a ballast gang for ballasting a 4%- 
mile section of double track located between Hopatcong and 
Wharton, N. J. 

In handling the ballast on this 4% -mile section we had an aver- 
age of 31 laborers at 14 cts. per hour per hay of 10 hrs. and one 
foreman at $75 per month. In addition to the regular ballast gang 
we had 8 section laborers on the 4% -mile section that were em- 
ployed in digging out, changing ties, placing drain tile and filling 
for changes in alignment and easement curves. 

The amount of ballast used on the 4% -mile section of double 
track was 28,458 cu. yds., or an average of 6,324 cu. yds. per mile 
of double track. The average distance which the ballast was 
hauled from the crusher to the section ballasted was 13 miles. 
On the 4% -mile section of track ballasted there was a total length 
of curve line of 1.56 miles and a total length of tangent 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 221 

of 2.94 miles. We used in this work 24 Rodger ballast 
cars, and in figuring the cost of transportation the cars were placed 
at a value of $600 each. Our records show a cost of 5% cts. per 
cu. yd., covering transportation charges, interest on the Rodger 
ballast cars valued at $600 each at 5%, plus interest at 5% on the 
Viet investment of the quarry and crusher plant. The cost for 
quarrying, crushing and loading cars at the crushing plant was 
55 cts. per cu. yd. ; the cost of placing ballast under track, includ- 
ing lining, surfacing and dressing, was 20 1^ cts. per cu. yd., 
making a total cost per cubic yard of the ballast in the track of 
81 cts. for the 4%-mile section above described. 

On the west end of our Buffalo Division we have an accurate rec- 
ord of the cost of 27,120 cu. yds. of crushed limestone ballast put 
In on a stretch of double track during the season of 1906. For this 
work we purchased the crushed stone delivered to us in our own 
Rodger ballast cars at an average cost of $0.6017 per cu. yd., and 
received an average of 222 cu. yds. per day, the quarry being lo- 
cated on our own lines. Thirty Rodger ballast cars were used 
for this work and the average haul was 13.4 miles. The ringing 
used in preparing this ballast was from % in. to 2^2 ins. diameter 
and the stone weighed 2,410 lbs. to the yard. As above stated, we 
received on an average 222 cu. yds. per day, and a larger quantity 
per day would have reduced the cost per yard somewhat. In com- 
paring this cost with the cost of ballasting with materials obtained 
from the Boonton crusher plant, it will be noted that the ballast 
on cars from the Boonton plant cost practically 5 cts. per cu. yd. 
less than the material used on the Buffalo Division. The work 
on the Buffalo Division cost a total of 88.1 cts. per cu. yd., in track, 
which cost incluued ^le material, engine service, labor, tie renewals 
and spacing, and interest on ballast car equipment. 

Cost of Quarrying, Crushing and Ballasting^ and Life of Ballast.* 

— From tests of trap and other rocks, it is seen that a material 
saving can be effected by the use of trap for ballast purposes. 
Less stone will be required to maintain the track, and it can be 
used in smaller sizes, as its higher percentage of hardness and 
toughness will insure less breaking under traffic and tamping. 
Figures taken from comparison of line and surface in trap with 
that in stone whose quality is about the same as limestone, show 
that line and surface cost approximately $20 less per mile in trap 
than in limestone. 

Cost of Plant. — From published figures, the cost of building a 
plant of 1,000 tons daily capacity, and its cost of operation to 
quarry, is as follows : 

Capacity, 1,000 tons daily 300,000 tons annually 

900 cu. yds. trap per 10-hr. day.... 270,000 cu. yds. annually 

Crushers. 4, 250-ton Farrel, at $1,250 $ 5,000 

Engines, 4, 60-hp., 14x12, at $500 2,000 

Foundations 100 

Belting, 13-in., 200 ft., at $2.75 550 



*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 1, 1909, abstract of a report to 
the Am. Ry. Bng. and Mn. of Way Assoc. 



222 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Boilers, 2, 200-hp. and setting 7,500 

Steam fittings 4,000 

Boiler house 2,500 

Engine house 1,500 

Stack 2,000 

Scales, 60-ft., including foundations and timber 1,225 

Bins 600 

Elevators with clatforms, 4, at $1,500 (for tailings) 6,000 

Pump for water supply, 5,500 gals, per hour 200 

Tank, 50,000 gals 1,200 

Steam drills, with tripods connecting hose, 20, at |245 4,900 

Screeps, rotary, 54-in., 4, at $950 3,800 

Small tools, forges, bars, wedges, hammers, etc 1,200 

Derrick, small stiff leg , 150 



Total $44,425 

Contingencies, 8% 3,553 



$47,978 

Land, 50 acres, at $150 per acre 7,500 

Cable railway and dump cars for haul to crusher, this being 

a varying item as quarry is worked 5,000 

Total cost of quarry $60,478 

Cost op Operation of Quarry Plant. 
Capacity, 270,000 Cu. Yds. Per Annum. 

18 drillers, at $3 per day, 300 days $ 16,200 

18 helpers, at $1.75 per day, 300 days 9,450 

3 blacksmiths, at $3 per day, 300 days 2,700 

50 bar sledgers, at $1.75 per day, 300 days 26,250 

60 car loaders, at $1.75 per day, 300 days 31,500 

8 crusher men, at $1.75 per day ,300 days 4,200 

1 quarry boss, at $5 per day, 300 days 1,500 

1 fireman, at $2.50 per day, 300 days 750 

1 engineer, at $3 per day, 300 days 90O 

4 bin men, at $1.75 per day, 300 days 2,100 

1 scale man, at $2 per day, 300 days 600 

1 carpenter, at $3 per day, 300 days 900 

10 laborers, at $1.75 per day, 300 days 5,250 

1 clerk, at $750 per year 750 

Fuel, 2,700 tons of coal, at $2.70 7,290 

Oil, waste, etc 500 

Dynamite, .7 lb. per cu. yd., 270,000 cu. yds. — 189,000 lbs., 

at 15 cts 28,350 

Drill reuairs — 

1 machinist, at $4 1,200 

1 helper, at $2.50 750 

Supplies at $1.25 per month per drill 270 

Blacksmiths included above ... 

Total ...'..' $141,410 

4% on first cost of plant $2,418 

10% depreciation on machinery, except crusliers. . 2,160 

16% % depreciation on crushers 833 

5,411 

$146,821 
Contingencies, 8% 11,750 

$158,571 

This shows a cost per yard of 59 cts. 

With this figure, the estimated saving shown from the use of 
trap rock (Gabbro) over limestone now used, from Martinsburg 
quarry, on the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, in a 16 -mile section, 
double track, or 32 miles of single track, based on changing the 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 223 

entire ballast in a five-year period, and using 2,200 cu. yds. of trap 
roclt per mile, 8-in. under the tie, would be as follows: 

Gabbro — 

Quarrying $0.60 

Placing in track 15 

Average haul, 18 miles, at .001 02 

Total estimated cost per cu. yd $0.77 

Limestone — 

Quarrying $0.5o 

Screenings, 33% 18 

Placing in track 15 

Average haul, 98 miles, at .001 10 

Total actual cost per cu. yd $0.98 

Summary. 

Limestone, 14,080 cu. yds., at 98 cts $13,798.40 

Gabbro, 14,080 cu. yds., at 77 cts 10,841.60 

Saving per year during ballasting, due to use of 

trap rock $ 2,956.80 

As to saving in maintenance 300 cu. yds. of trap rock per mile 
per year will maintain track as efficiently as 400 cu. yds. of lime- 
stone. 

32 miles singrle track X 400 cu. yds. limestone X 98 cts $12,544 

32 miles single track X 300 cu. yds. trap rock X 77 cts 7,392 

Saving per year due to use of tran rock after track is 

fully ballasted ? 5,152 

Saving in line and surface, 32 miles, at $20 640 

Total saving cer year after track is fully ballasted .... $ 5,792 
The saving in maintenance labor during ballasting would be : 

1st year 

2d year, 6.4 miles X $20 $128 

3d year, 12.8 miles X 20 256 

4th year, 19.2 miles X 20 384 

5th year, 25.6 miles X 20 512 

Total five vears labor saving during ballasting 

(maintenance) $ 1,280.00 

Five years saving in first post, due to use of trap rock. . 14,784.00 

Total five years saving during ballasting $16,064.00 

Average saving per year during ballasting 3,212.80 

Saving per year after fifth year 5,792.00 

These figures give an idea of the savings which may be effected 
by going into such questions thoroughly, and- getting accurate data. 
Such comparisons may be worked up for stone, gravel and cinder, 
and estimate made which will show a railroad management how far 
they are justified in going into such economies. 

[There is clearly an error in the assumption that it will take 
anything like 300 or 400 cu. yds. of stone yearly to maintain a 
mile of ballasted track. See the section on Railways for cost of 
maintenance of way.] 

Cost of Crushing with City Plant, Boston. — In Engineering-Con- 
tracting, Aug. 11, 1909, is a long abstract from the Metcalf & Eddy 
report to the Boston Finance Commission, of which the following 
is only a meager abstract: 

The crusher plant occupies an area of 570,000 sq. ft., pur- 



•224 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

chased in 1882 for $30,000 and having an assessed value in 1907 
of $79,800. The tract is used in part for other than quarrying 
and crushing purposes. The plant consists mainly of a 30 x 13 -in. 
Farrel crusher, a 72 x 16-in. Atlas engine, a 66-in. x 17-ft. tubular 
boiler, the usual elevators, bins, extra parts and tools, and of three 
large and one baby steam drills. The estimated cost of the plant 
was $16,653; interest was calculated at 4% and depreciation at 
6.75% annually, which gives an amount of $1,791, which in the 
costs following was applied on a monthly basis. The charge for 
steam drills is based on a rental of 50 cts. per working day. 

Force Employed. — The force employed, with wages, was in gen- 
eral as follows ; 

Labor at Ledge : Per day. 

1 sub-foreman, at $3.50 $ 3.50 

1 blacksmith, at $3 3.00 

1 blacksmith's helper, at $2.25 2.25 

3 steam drillers, at $2.25 6.75 

3 steam drillers' helpers, at $2.25 6.75 

10 stone breakers, at $2.25 22.50 

5 hand drillers, at $2.25 11.25 

1 powderman, at $2.25 2.25 

9 loaders, at $2.25 20.25 

Total $ 78.50 

Labor at Crusher : 

1 engineer, at $3.50 $ 3.50 

1 fireman, at $3.25 3.25 

1 weigher, at $3.50 3.50 

1 oiler, at $2.25 2.25 

3 feeders, at $2.25 6.75 

1 pitman, at $2.25 2.25 

Total $ 21.50 

Teaming : 

6 single teams, at $3.50 $ 21.00 

Total $121.00 

The force consisted largely of men who were in some degree 
skilled in rock work. The majority of the men were young and all 
were vigorous and skilled to such an extent that the force as a 
whole was skillful and efficient. There was a marked lack of 
interest on the part of some of the employes, which undoubtedly 
had its effect in reducing the amount of work done considerably 
below the amount which would be done under contract conditions ; 
on the other hand it should be stated that some of the men took 
a lively interest in the work and did their full duty. 

In this connection it should be noted that the capacity of the bins 
being only about 400 tons, they were sufficient only for about 2^2 
days output of the crusher as it was operated. The normal capac- 
ity of the crusher is claimed by the manufacturers to be about 
250 tons per day, while the maximum output for any one day 
during this test was 225 tons. 

During three weeks in July, three drills were operated, but this 
was found to be inadvisable because the force of laborers was 
unable to handle the rock as fast as it was blown out. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 225 

The duration of this test was from May 28 to September 10, 1908, 
inclusive. Tlie work accomplished during tlie test may be sum- 
marized as follows: 

Work Done : 
Stripping removed (a large part of the stripping had 
been done prior to the beginning of this test and 

is not included herein) 384 tons 

Holes drilled C2%-in. diameter) by steam drill 4,160.1 ft. 

Unbroken stone on hand at beginning of test none 

Unbroken stone on hand at expiration of test (esti- 
mated) 200 tons 

Broken stone ready for crusher at expiration of test . . none 

Broken stone on hand at expiration of test none 

Total output of crushed stone during test : 

Dust 1,970 tons (22%) 

Stone 6,983 tons (787c) 

Total 8,953 tons 

Total Cost 
Labor: cost. per ton. 
Supervision (foreman) : 

Quarrying and breaking, 90 7c; $ 253.58 $0,028 

Crushing, 107o 28.17 0.003 

Buildings 93.36 0.010 

Installing drilling plant 77.21 0.009 

Removing and storing drilling plant 18.00 0.002 

Operating drills 453.95 0.051 

Furnishing steam for operating steam drills. ... 114.16 0.013 

Cleaning rock for drills and moving same 100.66 0.011 

Blacksmith on ledge tools and pipe fittings 382.57 0.043 

Blasting and care of explosives 182.29 0.020 

Breaking stone 1,362.42 0.152 

Hand drilling (block holes) 515.55 0.058 

Loading stone 1,010.87 0.113 

Removing and loading stripping 124.00 0.014 

Weighing stone 181.57 0.020 

Weighing stripping 19.67 0.002 

Feeding crusher 331.61 0.037 

Crusher operation (engineer, fireman, oiler and 

pitman) 539.74 0.060 

Crusher repairs 55.54 0.006 

Absent with pay 27.58 0.003 

Holidays 705.75 0.079 

Teaming: 

Buildings 4.50 0.001 

DriUing plant 3.00 0.000 

Hauling stone to crusher 929.28 0.104 

Hauling stripping 111.47 0.012 

Hauling product to pile 281.15 0.031 



Total labor and teaming $7,907.65 $0,882 

Material, Rental, Interest and Depreciation: Cost per ton 

Ledge Rock : Cost, on output. 

Blacksmith's coal, 1.32 tons $ 5.54 $0,001 

Battery repairs 4.86 0.001 

Dynamite, 757o, 1¥> in., 1,060 lbs 214.60 0.024 

Dynamite, 757o, 1^4 in., 641 lbs 129.80 0.015 

Dynamite, 607o, 1% in., 356 lbs 63.22 0.007 

Black powder, 6 lbs 0.66 

Connecting wire, 50 ft 0.28 

Electric fuses. 389 : 

8 ft. long, 49 2.13 

10 ft. long, 19 0.92 

12 ft. long, 257 13.67 0.005 

14 ft. long, 64 3.71 



226 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Material, Rental, Interest and Depreciation (Cont'd): Cost per ton 

Ledge Rock : Cost. on output. 

Cotton fuse, 3,522 ft 10.15 

Percussion caps, 1,183 8.88 

Stone dust for tamping holes, 3 tons 3.00 

Cylinder oil, 20 gals 6.32 .. . ' 

Machine oil, 40 gals 0.64 001 

Waste, 22 lbs 1.65 

Steaming coal, 30 tons 126.11 0.014 

Rental of small tools (at $0.05 per man per day) 

1,815 man days (excluding blacksmith and 

helper) at $0.05 90.75 0.010 

Rental and repairs of steam drills (including 

piping, hose, etc.), 153 drill days, at .?0.50.... 
Buildings 

Crusher : 

Steaming coal, 30 tons 

Cylinder oil, 14 % gals 

Machine oil, 126 gals 

Waste, 51 lbs 

Sal soda, 48 lbs 

Rosin, 1 lb 

Belt lacing, 300 ft 

Sheet steel (111/2 ins. by 1^ ins.), 14 ft 

Crusher plates (two new, over half worn), at 

'RSl 1 SO less 50% 
Rubber belting installed (new), $89.12, less' 90% 
Rental on small tools (at $0.05 per man per 

day), 250 man days (exclusive engineer, fire- 
man, oiler and weigher), at $0.05 12.50 0.001 

Interest and depreciation on plant, three mos., 

at $149.25 447.75 0.050 

Adjusting scales 4.76 0.001 

Total material, rental, etc $1,550.51 $0 174 

Labor and teaming 7,907.65 o!882 

*Total charged to output $9,458.16 $1,056 

Permanent repairs : Repairs to scales 68.44 0.008 

Total cost of test $9,526.60 



76.50 


0.008 


38.51 


0.004 


126.10 


0.014 


5.28 




22.17 


0.003 


3.81 




0.36 




0.04 


0.001 


4.50 




6.00 


0.001 


105.90 


0.012 


8.91 


0.001 



*Does not include estimated cost of stripping done prior to be- 
ginning of test, amounting to $223.83, and does not include cost of 
quarrying 200 tons of stone remaining unbroken at end of test 
amounting to $50. 

The report states that large stone contractors in the vicinity of 
Boston sell stone f. o. b. cars at about one-half the above given 
cost with city forces. Yet this test was made with the full under- 
standing that it was to be a crucial test of the city forces. 

Data on Jaw Crushers. — The size of jaw crushers is commonly 
denoted by the size of opening through which the stone passes to the 
jaws. A 9 X 15-in. crusher is one having an opening 9 ins. wide 
by 15 ins. long; which is the common size for portable plants. To 
move such a crusher a few miles from one location to another, 
set up the bins, etc., preparatory to crushing, costs about $75, 
according to the author's experience. The main part of this cost 
consists in tearing down and rebuilding the bins, mounting the 
rotary screen and adjusting the bucket elevator. There are several 
makes of portable bins on wheels now in the market, and with 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 227 

these the cost of moving should be much reduced. A large bin 
capacity, however, is desirable to "tide over" any irregularities in 
the hauling and in the operation of the crusher itself. Bins should 
always be used to save the cost of shoveling the broken stone into 
wagons. 

Data on Gyratory Crusher. — The gyratory crusher is now largely 
used on large permanent plants. The following are the sizes of the 
style "D" Gates gyratory crusher; 











Size 


Weight 




HP. for 






Diameter 


of each 


of 


Tons 


crusher. 


Size. 




at 


top 


receiving- 


crusher, 


per hr. to 


elevator 


No. 




out to out. 


opening. 


lbs. 


2 1/2 -in. size. 


and screen. 


1 


3 


ft. 


6 ins. 


5X18 ins. 


5,500 


4 to 8 


8 to 10 


2 


3 


ft. 


10 ins. 


6 X 21 ins. 


8,000 


6 to 12 


12 to 15 


3 


4 


ft. 


6 ins. 


7 X 22 ins. 


14,000 


10 to 20 


20 to 25 


4 


6 


ft. 


8 ins. 


8X27 ins. 


21,000 


15 to 30 


25 to 30 


5 


7 


ft. 


10 ins. 


10 X 30 ins, 


30,000 


25 to 40 


30 to 40 


6 


8 


ft. 


7 ins. 


11 X 36 ins. 


42,000 


30 to 60 


40 to 60 


TVi 


10 


ft. 


8 ins. 


14 X 45 ins. 


63,000 


75 to 125 


75 to 125 


8 


11 


ft. 




IS X 63 ins. 


94,000 


125 to 200 


100 to 150 



The output is given in tons of 2,000 lbs. per hour of rock crushed 
to pass a 2 14 -in ring. 

In the section on Concrete will be found the cost of crushing with 
a No. 7 Gates crusher for a retaining wall on the Chicago Canal. 
The first cost of the crusher was $12,000. Its output averaged 210 
cu. yds. per 10 hr. day. The crusher was capable of a much greater 
output, for we have already recorded a 200 cu. yd. daily output with 
a No. 5 Gates (see page — ), which is itself not a big record. 

In large crushing plants the general practice is to have one large 
gyratory crusher that receives the bis chunks of rock, and a smaller 
gyratory, or a jaw, crusher that re-crushes all that does not pass 
through a 2l<2 or 3 in. screen. 

The following data of output w^ere published in Engineering- 
Contracting, July 21, 1909, and relate to limestone. 

The Lake Shore Stone Co., Belgium, Wis., have a plant consist- 
ing of a No. 9 Gates crusher and a No. 6 Austin, and their average 
output of all sizes of stone up to 2% ins. is 600 cu. yds. per 10 hrs., 
with a maximum output of 750 cu. yds. The stone is fed to the 
crusher from a hopper by one man. Stone is delivered to the hop- 
per by cars, 44 men being engaged in loading these cars. The stone 
is a very hard dolomitic limestone. 

The Elk Cement & Lime Co., Petoskey, Mich., have a plant of one 
No. 5 Austin and a No. 3 Gates. They break 450 tons per 10 hr. 
day, the maximum output being 500 cu. yds. Two men feed the 
crusher. No crushed stone is larger than 2% ins., hard limestone. 

Holmes and Kunneke, Columbus, O., run a No. 3 Austin. The 
output is 80 to 120 cu. yds. per 10 hr. day, no stone being over 2 
ins. in size. Two men feed the crusher. The rock is hard lime- 
stone. 

A No. 8 Gates gyratory crusher having a hopper 11 ft. in diame- 
ter, operating at a speed of 140 gyrations per minute, and having a, 
total weight of 45 tons, was installed in 1896 at the quarries of the 



228 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Pittsburg Limestone Co., Newcastle, Pa. Mr. Geo. "W. Johnson, 
president of the company, states that in 14 mos. the. •output was 
556,000 long tons of limestone crushed for blast furnaces. The best 
month's work was 47,472 tons in August, 1896, the ^.verage of the 
14 mos. being slightly less than 40,000 tons per month. During the 
14 mos. only 14 days were lost. The best day's work- was 2,250 long 
tons in 10 hrs. I have been unable to secure a statement as to the 
size of the broken stone, but stone crushed for a blast furnace is 
larger than for macadam, ballast or concrete, usually being about 
6 ins. diameter. 

Cost of Breaking Stone by Hand. — I have found that in breaking 
limestone, a good 10 hrs. work for a skilled man is 3 cu. yds. broken 
to 2-in. sizes, but 2 cu. yds. are all that an inexperienced man can 
break. yr 

Aitken states that in England a good hand-breaker can produce 
3 to 4 cu. yds. of ordinary macadam per day "out of such material 
as flints, the harder limestones, field stones and river gravel." He 
says that 2 to 2% cu. yds. of brittle whinstone, or % to 1% cu. 
yds. of basalt, granite and the tougher kinds of whinstone, consti- 
tute a good day's work. 

In Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 15, 1909, the results are given 
of a test (in England) with different kinds of hammers used to 
break quartzite. It was found that chisel hammers produced 28% 
less fines (under 1% in. size) than round hammers, the percentage 
of fines with the chisel hammers being only 51/3% of the total of 
500 tons broken, as compared with 7%% with round hammers. 

Diamond Drilling. — For determining the nature of bridge founda- 
tions, the character of proposed canal or railway excavations and 
for prospecting for mineral deposits, the diamond drill is an in- 
valuable machine. The bit of a diamond drill consists of a number 
of diamonds mounted on the end of a hollow tube. This bit is rotat- 
ed by hand, steam, air or electric power, while at the same time 
wafer is pumped down the hollow drill rods and passes up outside of 
the rods, carrying away the rock dust made by the grinding of tlie 
diamonds against the rock. The bit cuts an annular channel, leav- 
ing a core of rock inside the core barrel. When the drill has pene- 
trated the rock a distance of 6 to 10 ft., the drill rodg are raised 
and the act of raising them breaks off the rock core, which is 
brought to the surface in the core barrel and kept for examination. 

The diamonds are preferably black diamonds, known in the trade 
as "carbons" : but where the rock is soft, white diamonds, known 
as "bortz," may be used. Sometimes both kinds are used in one bit. 
A bit usually has 6 to 8 carbons weighing 1 to 1% carats each. 
Small stones are not economical because after a carbon has been 
worn down so that it weighs less than about % carat it cannot be 
reset. In selecting carbons reject those showing a cokey structure, 
also those having thin, sharp edges. Carbons having straight edges 
with sides forming an obtuse angle of 95° to 140° are most dur- 
able. The cleavage should be tested with a pair of hand pincers. 
Old stones that have been used are to be preferred since a poor 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 229 

stone will break in use, and no test is so satisfactory as the test 
of usage. The carbons selected for a bit should be quite uniform 
in size. 

When diamond drilling was first introduced into tliis country it 
was predicted that it would be used exclusively for drilling blast 
holes, and in fact diamond drills were used on the Sutro tunnel for 
a while, and in sinking one or two shafts by the "long hole" method, 
which involved drilling holes several hundred feet deep, filling them 
with sand, then removing the sand for about 8 ft., charging with 
powder, firing, and so on. The development of machine drills using 
steel bits and the steady rise in price of carbons have together 
shown these early predictions to have been fathered by hope rather 
than by reason. 

The following cost data on diamond drilling have been abstract- 
ed from my book on "Rock Excavation" : 

The sizes of holes and cores are as follows: 

Hole, diam. in ins is^ 1% 2 2% 3 9/16 

Core, diam. in ins 15/16 1 3/16 1 7/16 2 2% 

Price of Diamonds. — In 1S73 the price of carbons per carat was 
$8 to $12. I am indebted to the Standard Diamond Drill Co., of 
Chicago, and to the Yawger-Lexow Co., of New York, for the fol- 
lowing statements as to the average cost of carbons per carat from 
1895 to 1903: 
1895. 1896. 1897. 1898. 1899. 1900. 1901. 1902. 

$36 $50 $60 $55 $50 $45 $50 

$18.50 $28 $35.50 $35.50 $36 $51.50 $48.50 $47 

It will be noted that these firms do not agree very closely as to 
prices prior to th" year 1900. The American Diamond Rock Drill 
Co., of New York, quoted $52 per carat for best selected carbons 
and $16 per carat for best selected borts in November, 1902. 

There is no import duty on carbons in the United States, Canada 
or Mexico. 

Water Required. — In boring a 2-in. hole where the progress is 
abcJut 10 ft. per 10-hr. shift, from 100 to 125 gals, of water are 
required to wash out the sludge formed in drilling, provided the 
water is used but once. In cases where the water is expensive it 
is customary to collect the return water in a settling tank and use 
it over and over ; and, unless a large amount of water escapes 
through crevices, 30 or 40 gals, per shift will be consumed by evap- 
oration and leakage. 

Price of Diamond Drills. — A hand power drill that can be used 
to bore a 1%-in. hole (giving a 15-16-in. core) up to a depth of 350 
ft. ; or a 2%-in. hole (giving a 2-in. core) up to a depth of 250 ft., 
will cost approximately $850 f. o. b. New York or Chicago. This 
includes 300 ft. of pipe, 6 carats of carbons, all tools, etc., neces- 
sary. The machine alone weighs 330 lbs., and can be divided into 
packages weighing 40 lbs. ; but the whole outfit packed for shipment 
weighs 2,800 lbs. If it is desired to run this drill by horse power, 
$60 additional will purchase the horse power equipment. A hand 
power plant capable of drilling 50 per cent deeper than the above 
costs about $1,400. 



230 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A steam power plant that can be used to bore a 1%-in. hole 800 
ft. deep, or a 2% -in. hole (2-in. core) 500 ft. deep, costs about 
12,400, including the 8 hp. boiler on wheels; the drill itself cost- 
ing $1,100, the boiler $400; 1 set of carbons (9 carats), $450, and 
the balance for sundries. The drill itself weighs 600 lbs., but the 
full outfit packed for shipping weighs 10,000 lbs. 

A steam power plant that can be used to bore a 1%-in. hole 1,500 
feet, or a 2%-in. hole 1,000 feet, can be purchased for $4,600; of 
which $2,400 is for the drill, $500 for the 15 hp. boiler on wheels, 
$600 for 12 carats of carbons and the balance for rods and sun- 
dries. This outfit weighs 20,000 lbs. 

Cost of Diamond Drilling in Virginia. — There is a great deal to 
be found in print relative to the cost of diamond drilling, but un- 
fortunately the records as published are in such form as to be of far 
less value than they should be. By this I mean that any record 
of any kind of drilling to be of great value should give: (1) The 
rate of penetrating a given kind of rock when the drill is actually 
cutting; (2) the speed, power and weight of the machine; (3) the 
time lost in raising the drill to change biis, remove cores, or the 
like ; ( 4 ) the time required to shift from one hole to the next ; 
(5) the average time lost in repairs, breakdowns, etc. ; (6) 
the diameter and depth of hole; (7) the time consumed in driving 
and pulling casing. No record in print contains all these factors. 
Strangely enough, one of tlie earliest printed accounts contains more 
of these factors than any subsequent record. I refer to an admir- 
able paper by O. J. Heinrich, in Trans. Am. Inst. Min., Eng., 1874, 
from which I have abstracted the following: 

The diamond drill crew consisted of three men, two to run the 
drill and one to help raise the drill rods, beside a foreman. The 
shift was 12 hrs. long, and the following was lae cost of operating a 
shift : 

Foreman, or boring master $2.50 

Mechanic, or engineer 2.00 

Assistant 1.50 

Laborer 1.00 

Total labor $7.00 

The coal consumed was 10 lbs. per hp. per hr. For holes up 
to 1,000 ft. deep an 8-hp. engine was used, the drill rods weighing 
4,500 lbs. ; but up to a 1,500-ft. hole a 12 hp. engine was used, with 
rods weighing 7.000 lbs. The drill had a 2-in. bit, on which were 
mounted never less than 12 carbons, better 16. The drill rods were 
raised after every X\i ft. of drilling. The drilling was done in Ches- 
terfield county, Va., prospecting for coal, in 1873. The cost of ope- 
rating per shift is given, as follows : 

Labor $ 6.50 

% ton coal at $3 1.00 

Oil 0.50 

Diamonds and repairs 11.00 

Interest and depreciation 1.92 

Total per day $20.92 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 231 

The Drice of carbons was $10 oer kt. Rates of wages were 
also much lower then, and it should be noted that the allowance 
for interest and depreciation is too low for a plant costing $7,200, 
as it is stateu this 8 hp. plant cost. 

Depth of hole in earth and rock 419 850 1,142 

Depth boied in rock 396 826 1,118 

No. of 12-hr. shifts actually boring 13.88 44.41 59.29 

No. of 12-hr. shifts raising rods 15.87 53.34 116.46 

No. of 12-hr. shifts incidentals 3.25 15.25 68.25 

No. of 12-hr. shifts total 33.00 119.00 224.00 

Ft. progress per hr. while boring 2.37 1.55 1.57* 

Ft. progress per hr., average 0.038 0.578 0.308 

Cost of labor, per ft $0.36 $0.59 $1.02 

Cost of fuel ($3 ton) per ft $0.53 $0.14 $0.17 

Cost of all other items, incl. materials and 

blacksmithing $1.29 $1.43 $2.05 

Interest $0.16 $0.27 $0.38 

Total cost per ft $1.86 $2.43 $3.62 

From the data eiven by Mr. Heinrich I have prepared the fol- 
lowing formulas to be used in computing the number of hours re- 
quired to drill a hole of given depth. 

Let 
T = Total number of minutes required to bore the hole. 
n = total depth of hole in feet. 

I = length of each coupling rod = 10 ft. in this case. 
t = the number of minutes required to bore 1 ft. of the hole. In 
the formation given by Heinrich t=19 mins. per ft. of 
hole up to a depth of 300 ft., to which add 5 mins. per ft. 
for each 100 ft. of increased depth. 
r = time in minutes required to raise and lower the rods includ- 
ing 2 mins. to uncouple and couple up. 

r = 7 mins. for hole up to 300 ft plus % min. for each 
additional 100 ft. 
s = number of lengths of coupling rod. 

The time consumed in actual boring in feet is obviously nt. The 

time consumed in raising and lowering the drill rods is the sum 

of an arithmetical series in which s = the number of terms and 

r=the common difference; hence the sum is %s (2r-|-[s — 1])?", 

s ( 1 + s)r. 

which reduces to ■. The total time is therefore : 

2 
(1+s) 

T = nt-\- s r 

2 . 

n 
a = — 
I 

n H -f- n) 

T = nt -\ ■ r 

2 P 
If 1 = 10 

n (10 + n) 

T = nt-\ r 

200 
n" r 

T = nt -\ , nearly. 

200 



232 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

For holes of the following depths we have 

Ft. Ft. Ft. 

n = 400 800 1,200 

t (minutes) = 24 44 64 

r (minutes) =7 1/3 8 2/3 10 

T (minutes) = 14,300 63,000 148,800 

T (hours) = 240 1,050 2,480 

On Heinrich's work about 10% more time than the above was 
required to cover losses from delays arising from various causes. 
The point that is strikingly brought out by Heinrich's records is 
the rapid falling off in the rate of speed of drilling each foot of 
hole with increased depth. The cause is obvious, however, for the 
longer the line of drill rods the greater the friction of the rods upon 
the sides of the drill hole, and consequently the slower their revo- 
lution with an engine of limited horse power. The increased weight 
of the rods with increased depth also reduced the rate of speed with 
which they are hoisted by the engine ; and this is a very important 
factor in adding to the labor and fuel cost of drilling deep holes. 
Heinrich's estimates of the time required to drill holes, including all 
10% allowances for delays, are as follows: 

400-ft. hole 288 hours 

800-ft. hole 960 hours 

1,200-ft. hole 2,616 hours 

It will be observed that these times check fairly well with the 
times obtained by applying the formula that I have given ; but it 
should be added that the constants in the formula need further veri- 
fication by other observers. The material penetrated in the 800-ft. 
hole was : 

Hard silicious sandstone 210 ft. 

Medium silicious sandstone 262 ft. 

Argillaceous sandstone and slate 237 ft. 

Limestone 18 ft. 

Total 827 ft. 

Heinrich's estimates of time, and my own formula based thereon, 
assume a uniform sandstone throughout in the three holes. Had 
the rock been uniform throughout, the cost would have been: 

400-ft. hole, at $1-26 % 504 

800-ft. hole, at 2.10 1,680 

1,200-ft. hole, at 4.00 ,. 4,800 

Cost of Diamond Drilling in Leiiigh Valley. — Mr. L. A. Riley is 
authority for the following work done in 1876 : Two machines be- 
longing to the Lehigh Valley Coal Co. were used. A No. 2 drill 
with 16 hp. boiler and 1,000 ft. of 2-in. rod cost $3,000. which 
with diamonds, etc., came to $5,000 ; the weight being 3,500 lbs. 
Carbons cost ?9 per carat, and borts cost $11. Five diamonds 
werghing 18 carats were used per bit, drilling a 2-in. hole and 
bringing u» a 1%-in. core. There were 24 holes, aggregating 
9,902 ft, the deepest being 900 ft. The average rate of drilling 
these holes was 19 ft. per day per machine, at an average cost of 
$2.22 per ft. The rock was a very hard sandstone and conglom- 
erate. The force on each drill was one foreman, one engineer and 
one fireman. The average cost per ft. of hole was : 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 233 

Labor $1.15 

Diamonds 66 

Supplies and repairs 41 

Total $2.22 

The cost of the 900-ft. hole (the deepest) was $1.95 per ft, 
which indicates that with a powerful (16 hp.) engine there is no 
such great increase in cost per ft. with increased depth as Heinrich 
found with an 8 he. engine. The 16-hp. plant used by Riley was 
capable of drilling a 2,000-ft. hole. Note especially that both 
Riley and Heinrich paid less than $10 a carat for carbons and that 
Riley does not say what proportion of carbons to borts were used. 
Cost of Diamond Drilling on Croton Aqueduct. — Mr. J. P. Carson, 
gives the following: 

Fourteen holes, total. 2,084 ft., were drilled in the year 1895. 

Actual days worked 189 days 

Moving drill 15 days 

Idle 18 days 

Holidays and Sundays 39 days 

Total 261 days 

Daily progress. Cost 
Feet. per ft. 

847 ft. hard gneiss 11 to 12 $3.97 

814 ft. decomposed gneiss 23.1 to 28 1.15 

572 ft. clay, gravel and boulders 6.7 to 9 4.07 

351 ft. clay and gravel 25 

2,084 ft. Average 10.2 $2.91 

Crew, 1 foreman at $125 mo. ; 1 assistant foreman at $70 ; 4 
men at $65. 

Wages, 8.1 mos $3,785 

Team moving 80 

66.7 tons coal (189 days) 360 

Supplies, Diamond Drill Co 472 

Foundry 291 

Lumber, rope, etc 53 

Interest on $6,000 plant at 12% 8.1 mos 486 

Renewing diamonds 250 

Diamond bit lost 300 

Total, 204 days $6,077 

Average per day $29.79 

Average per ft $ 2.91 

Note that the item of interest is evidently intended to include de- 
preciation, but, if so, it is altogether too low. 

Cost of Hand Diamond Drilling in Arizona. — Mr. J. B. Lippincott 
gives the following data on diamond drilling at the Gila River Dam 
site, Arizona, in 1899. The machinery was in two distinct parts, (1) 
the hand pile driver for sinking casing pipe to bed rock; (2) the 
diamond drill. The hammer, made by the Pierce Well Co., 120 
Liberty street. New York, is in sections, so that its weight can be 
varied up to 190 pounds; it is raised by a hand winch, and tripped 
by nippers; maximum drop 11% ft. A tool-steel head is screwed 
Into the top of the pipe and receives the blow. The pipe is 3%, 
21/^ and 2 in., extra heavy, screw pipe, 5 ft. sections, with extra 
heavy couplings, which have beveled edges. When the casing has 
reached bed rock, the sand inside is removed by using a chopping 



234 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bit and a water jet. The bit is screwed to a %-in. pipe througli 
which water is pumped by a hand pump, the water passing out 
through holes in the bit, thus bringing the sand to the top of the 
casing. In this manner a casing pipe 130 ft. deep can be cleaned of 
sand and gravel. If a boulder is struck, after the diamond drill has- 
penetrated it, four or Ave sticks of dynamite are lowered and dis- 
charged, shattering the boulder so that the casing can be driven, 
down. 

The diamond drill was made by the American Diamond Rock Drill 
Co., New York City. One inch core bits were usually employed. 
The drill was operated by hand power, six men being employed on 
this work as well as on driving the casing. The drill will penetrate 
200 ft. into rock, and will make 6 to 8 ft. per day in hard rock 
and 10 to 15 ft. per day in soft rock. The plant complete costs 
$1,000, including two diamond bits worth ?200 each, set with six 1- 
carat diamonds each. Two machines were used. The pipe cost 
$600 and freight, $100. 

Cost of operation per month, foreman $150 

6 laborers at $1.50 for 28 days 234 

1 cook 45 

$ 429' 
240 rations at 60 cts 144 

Total labor for one month $573 

Total repairs, pipe and lumber for one party for 10 months. .$ 500 

Team, feed, etc 350 

Moving 670 

Sundry incidentals 430^ 

Supervision 350 

Total supplies, etc., for 10 mos $2,300 

Total labor, 10 mos 5,730 

Total $8,030 

Total number of feet sunk 3,254 

Cost per ft $ 2.4ft 

52 holes, cost per hole $154.42 

Total Depths Penetrated. 

Earth, ft. Rock, ft. Total, ft. 

The Buttes 1,621.2 196.0 1,817.2 

Queen Creek 357.8 55.6 413.4 

Riverside 729.8 40.2- 770.0 

Dykes 80.0 0.0 80.0 

San Carlos 143.2 30.4 173.6 

2,932.0 322.2 3,254.2 

A month's time of one party was lost due to continual breaking 
of the casing pipe under the hammer. Note that 90% of the drill- 
ing did not involve the use of diamonds but consisted in driving 
through the earth covering overlying the rock. This is characteris- 
tic, however, of testing dam sites. 

Cost of Diamond Drilling in Pennsylvania.* — Mr. E. E. White is 
author of the following: 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 21, 1909, reprinted from "Engi- 
neering and Mining Journal." 



1 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 235 

The following notes on progress and cost of drilling in the coal 
measures of Greene county, Pa., were taken from April 20, to July 
13, 1908. I was on the ground practically all of the time, represent- 
ing the company who had optioned the coal, and so had a chance to 
obtain correct figures on the progress of drilling. The costs are not 
as accurate, but are essentially correct. 

The cost of superintendence and carbons is estimated. The super- 
intendent, C. C. Hoover, of the Birdsboro Steel Foundry & Machine 
Co., which concern took the contract for drilling, was on the ground 
only one day. As he was looking after about half a dozen other 
drills, the estimated cost for superintendence is liberal. The cost 
for carbons would have been much less but for the fact that 2% 
carats were broken at a depth of 21 ft. in the first hole, probably 
by a piece of steel in the hole. This bore was abandoned and an- 
other started 2 ft. away. 

The drill only worked a day shift, and was run by two men, the 
drillman, H. N. Wighaman, and a fireman. Bits were set in the 
company's shop, not in the field. The hours in the progress table 
refer to the drill, that is, to two men, except in the case of hours 
setting bits. 

The drill had a hydraulic feed and a double-core barrel, taking 
a 21^-in. core. The outfit, with one good diamond bit, is furnished 
by the Birdsboro Steel Foundry & Machine Co., of Birdsboro, Pa., 
for about $3,500. 

Considerable trouble was experienced with the boiler on the first 
two holes, which was accountable for a large part of the hours' de- 
lay on these holes, shown by the progress table. The boiler was of 
the upright type, set behind the machine on the heavy wagon frame. 
There were no stay bolts, and the flues frequently had to be rolled 
every three or four days after the first week, and finally were rolled 
every day for three days in succession. After stay bolts were put 
in, the flues were not rolled again on the job. Except for the 
boiler and a troublesome donkey pump which supplied the water 
tank, the outfit was excellent. The delay on the last hole was most- 
ly waiting for water, which had to be pumped a little over a quarter 
of a mile. 

The expense of pumping on the last hole is not included, as it was 
borne by the owners of the coal. The contract read that water 
should be furnished within 100 ft. of each hole. The cost of moving 
on and off the ground is not included, as it would be variable, ac- 
cording to the distance and means of transportation. The distance 
moved between holes averaged about a mile by road. It was open 
country with good roads, so that moving was not expensive. 

The core obtained was practically complete, both of rock and 
coal. The surface was from 6 to 19 ft. deep, averaging 9 ft. 9 
ins. It was clay, with no boulders, and was drilled out with a mud 
bit. 

The table showing rates of drilling in different kinds of rock is 
the average of many observations on the five holes. The rate is. 



236 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



of course, dependent largely upon the drillman and how much pres. 
sure he cares to put upon the bit. 

Both cost and progress tables are from the time the drill reached 
the ground until ready to leave : 

Bits Used. 

Estimated 

Distance Carbon 

Drilled. Wear. 

Mud-bit 48 ft. 7 in. 

Diamond bit No. 1 (carbons broken 

by steel?) 2% carats 

Diamond bit No. 2 (hole No. 1) 369 ft. 8 in. Va carat 

Diamond bit No. 3 (hole No. 2) 339 ft. in. 1/2 carat 

Diamond bit No. 4 (holes Nos. 3. 4).. 500 ft. 1 in. % carat 

Diamond bit No. 5 (hole No. 5) 562 ft. 8 in. % carat 

1,820 ft. in. 4 J4 carats 

Ratp, of Boring. 

Ft. per Hour 
Kind of Rock. Actual Cutting. 

Shale 7.05 

Fire clay 7.10 

Limestone 7.20 

Sandstone 9.35 

Coal 15.15 

Cost Tablr. 

Cost. Cost per ft. 

Drillman $ 307.70 $0,169 

Fireman 192.31 0.106 

Blank bits 5.00 0.003 

Setting bits 10.00 0.005 

Carbons (4% carats, at $90) 382.50 0.210 

Fuel (1,050 bus. coal) 67.17 0.037 

Oil and waste 11.00 0.006 

Repairs 24.85 0.014 

Moving 36.00 0.020 

Superintendence 200.00 0.110 

Total working cost $1,236.53 $0,680 

Depreciation of outfit (20% on $2,000 for 

3 mos.*) 100.00 0.055 

Total costs exclusive of freight and haul- 
ing on drill and wages and expenses 
of drillmen to and from Greene 
county $1,336.53 $0,735 

*The outfit exclusive of the bit is worth about $2,000. 

Table XI shows the time and progress of drilling. 

Mr. Hoover, of the Birdsboro Steel Foundry & Machine Co., makes 
the total cost $1.13 per foot, taut I think that figure must be rather 
high. Four holes put down by the same company in Raleigh coun- 
ty. West Virginia, are said to have cost $2.90 per foot. 

Consumption of Diamonds in Diamond Drilling, Tennessee. — The 
cost of carbons and borts consumed in boring 39 underground holes 
at the Burra Burra and London mines, Ducktown, Tenn., is shown 
in Table XII. The holes were drilled in 1907 with two Sullivan ma- 
chines of the "S" type, and all but three holes, aggregating 284 ft., 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING ETC. 



237 



fjaj oooco|ffaiMt-|iM 



ri bo 

t; > 



cq CO t- 

OO N iH 



to 



t- C3 N 

OH tn 00 

OJ -^ t^ 



VIA 

O o 



OlAllAOtAlO oiao 

t--O500|t-Ot-ir3 IflrHia 

odir30lCDCOCO|CD _^ OO-Tj^t^ 
CO CO 



lis 



IM 






in) o I ii3 iri 

Ml ■^ CO I t- c- 

O t>- 00 I irt 00 

CO IM 1-1 •* rH 



CO la (M 
00 tH to 

C> LO 00 



o 
!z; 
3 

M 

BS 
P 

o 



t^ CO O LO o 



Si 



m 

« 
O 

a 



O O I o 13 O I lO 
_2<^' O O O I o N O I C<1 
O ^ 00 o 



M 5 



n 
< 



K^ 



-^ 7-1 I ifl o o I u:> 

-^^ 00 I c^^ in o I t- 

-rJH od I CO 1:0 O I Ci 

LO CO I crs o cq I t* 



bo o 

I^ o 



02 K 

u u 
o o 



P^ ffl ffi 



o 

bo B 

.s 
s ^ 

(U o 



•a 



m m m 

h p ^ 

o o 



3 

o 



3 

o 






"» bo 1^ 

. a 

* S 3 

s fe « 

p. ft ft 



0) (U (P 
0) OJ 01 

fo fe fe 



o 



-M bo 

S .S 

bo -y 

■^ Oi 

4-) 

<D 02 

3 

m o 

*- si 

3 -^ 

S =• 






238 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



o 

»-* 

tu 

w 
Z 
o 
O 

z 
o 

m 

Ix, 

o 









a 


:> 


-* 


ia 


o 


C 


t. 




o 


to 


e<i 


Oi 




a>^ 


00 


00 


t- 


M 


o 


CC 


ft-g 


T-( 


CO 


N 


o> 


ia 


C 


-tJ o 


o 


o 


O 


d 


d 


c 


o^ 


69- 










w 


U 
















^ 


ii 


^ 


4jJ 


jd 


^ 


So 


rH 




■* 




<x. 




to 




CO 




Tf< 


in 


^o 


T)<C- 


Tf rt^ 


■^00 


■* 


00 


U^ 


i~i 


toco 


■X>rH 


tocq 


toco 


«o 


tH 


oS. 


tA 




tH 




iH 




CO 




<=> 




«H 


_j 




, , 




, — > 






01 


O 
CO 


co^ 


kO 


Tt-tO 


to 


0< 


o 


o ^ 


m 


00 o 


to 


t£ 


U 


od 


c<iin 


o 


oj^ 


t-^ 


Ct 


,_, 


t-co 


c« 


CTJlO 


M 


C£ 


B 


tH 


cq 


rH 


■* 


C 


o 


ee- 












iri 






















W 



c3 



h 


O 


i4 




<! 




Is; 




1 




M 




t-H 




>< 


0) 


3 


C P 


« 


o w 


■< 


■t^ C 


Eh 


Wo 




U 



99- «■ 

-t-> -»-' 



o o 
fqpQ 



to 



M 



CO O 
O 03 



be 

> 
-a 

C! 



a 
o 

u 






ROCK EXCAVATION. QUARRYING, ETC. 239 

were horizontal across the formation. The core was 15/16 in. diam- 
eter and the holes 1% ins. in diameter. 

The highest cost per foot was $3.66, in a horizontal hole started 
in the footwall and drilled to a depth of only 8 ft., consuming 
1.61/64 k. of $15 borts. Excepting this hole, which penetrated very- 
Hard blue quartz, the highest cost for a hole drilled with borts was 
$0.8338 per ft. This hole was drilled in the footwall of the Burra 
Burra mine to a depth of 52 ft., 37 ft. being in hard silicious vein 
material and 15 ft. in country rock; 2.57/64 k. of $15 borts were 
consumed in boring it. 

The lowest cost per foot was $0.0321, and was obtained from a 
horizontal hole bored to a depth of 190 ft. in the hanging wall of 
the Burra Burra mine. This hole penetrated 10 ft. of vein ma- 
terial at its mfluth, and the remainder cut tlirough soft mica schist 
so thinly foliated that there were but few pieces of core recovered 
more than % in. thick. Tlie stone consumption was only 39/64 k. 
of $10 borts. 

Cost Using Carbons. — The highest cost of a hole drilled with car- 
bons was $1,155 per ft. This tiole was drilled in the footwall of 
the London mine to a depth of 9" ft and penetrated 22 ft. of vein 
and 70 ft. of country rock. The loss in stones was 1% k. at $85. 
The lowest cost with carbons was $0.0718 per ft., from a hole in the 
footwall of the London mine which penetrated 30 ft. of vein and 
44 ft. of country rock. The stone consumption for the hole was 
1/16 k., at $85. 

Cost Using Borts. — The stone consumption given in the tables 
does not take into account the loss from scrap borts in the drilling. 
This loss was: 4.58/64 k. at $15, $73.59; 5.57/64 k. at $10, $58.90; 
total, 10.51/64 k., $ii52.49. The above amount distributed to the 
2,948 ft. drilled wholly and in part with bo.-ts gives an additional 
cost of about 4% cts. per ft. for holes drilled with these stones. 
There was no loss in c xrbon scrap, this loss occurring usually when 
the stones have worn too small to be utilized in a bit. 

Summarizing and leaving out of the calculations those holes 
where both borts and carbons were used, the costs with borts were 
for 2,7sl ft. drilled, «687.12, or the cost per foot, $0,247. The addi- 
tional loss for scrap, which amo- d to $0,045 per ft., brings the 
cost up to $0,292 per ft. This is considerably less than the carbon 
cost of $0.5090, given in the table. 

Adaptabiliti/ of Each Stone. — Borts may be profitably used in 
drilling soft ground, but in liard material they are useless, as the 
stones, all of which contain flaws, will shatter when encountering 
hard rock. It is doubtful if borts could have been used with 
cheaper results in drilling the 840 ft. that were drilled with carbons. 
Some of this ground they would not have cut without great waste. 
Where part carbon and part borts were used, the carbons were sub- 
stituted for the borts when it was found that the borts would 
not stand the work. 

In some formations, where there are strata or zones of varying 
degrees of hardness, bits set with carbons might alternately be 



240 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

used with those set with borts, but the bits could not very well be 
set in advance owing to the varying gage of the hole. 

Cost of Diamond Drilling in British Columbia.* — ^Mr. Frederick 
Keffer is author of the following: 

Two years ago I contributed to the Institute a paper on the re- 
sults of diamond drilling as carried on at the mines of the British 
Columbia Copper Company, Limited during 1905. That paper gave 
some details as to costs, and the period covered was but 8% 
months. Since that year drilling has been carried on more or less 
continuously in the mines of the company, and the results of this 
work, so far as progress and costs are concerned, are given in detail 
in the following tables. 

Table XIII gives the monthly results of work as well as the year- 
ly totals. It is, of course, important to know the general character 
of the rock drilled in order to institute comparisons with other 
localities. In the narrow limits of this table it is not possible to 
give details as to rocks, but as nearly as possible the rocks com- 
prise diorites, compact garnetites and certain very hard and silicious 
eruptives occurring in Summit camp. The medium hard rocks in- 
clude all ores, and, in Deadwood carfip, much of the greenstone coun- 
try. The soft rocks are the limestones porphyries and serpentines. 
Of all rocks drilled the garnetites proved much the most severe in 
diamond consumption, as is illustrated by the work from May to 
August, 1907, which was mainly conducted in garnetite with some 
silicious limestones. 

Eight hours constitute a shift underground, and nine hours on the 
surface. On Sundays no work is done apart from repairs to ma- 
chinery. In May, 1906, the labor was contracted as an experiment, 
but was abandoned as being unsatisfactory. 

The employes were, normally, a runner and a setter. Extra help 
was required at times for blasting places for good set ups, for laying 
pipe lines, moving plant, etc. In August, 1907, two shifts were em- 
ployed. In June and July of that year the increase in labor costs is 
mainly on account of the long pipe lines required. 

The power consumed is taken as being equivalent to that re- 
quired for a 3% -in. machine drill, that is to say, about 20 hp. 
When drilling at a mine, where for example 15 machines are used on 
each shift, the diamond drill is charged with 1/31 of the total 
power costs — it being in this instance run on one shift only. 

Where steam power is used either directly or through a steam 
driven air compressor, the costs are much increased. Where, as in 
some cases, an isolated 24-hp. boiler was used, the power costs are 
still higher, as an engineer has to be provided as well as a team 
to haul wood. 

Tools, repairs, etc., include these items as well as all small mis- 
cellaneous expenses. The increasing cost of diamonds ($80 per 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908 ; abstract of a paper be- 
fore the Canadian Mining Institute, with additional data furnished 
by the author. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 241 



09 

o 
o 
l-l 



"a o^^ 2 o o 

n ,-, »-" Lj 



c4 



V 



M , 



JO 

jaio'BJ'Bqo 



o o 
o o 



(0 CO 

— ' 3 u iL <D ( 









''5*-' o".3 <d'3 t^ rt aj cd 



^ o o o 

■goo 0_, >« ni 

g, !» >> >>.-ii ni g) 

n sh t, oj M 53 

c c c <«* i* 

.a t, t, t, CS a) <D ° (B 



-IIIJP J3Ci -1^^^, 



.CO Ncqcq 



fq N CO cq t«3 N tH 



CO CO CD ^O CO CO CD CO CD CO I CO CO CD CO CD CO CO CO 

I I I r I I I I I I I r I I I I I I 

•naQn <3TP TT>^^ rHt^UOasCOlC^COOiOOO CDCOOt—OOTj^CDCQ 

IJrfbll "-J'^'^'^kJ CDTt-COiraCOCqTHH-«< I lO lOCOrH rH 

cocoiHinco eqiN-^ 



l_ 'SOIOll JO "O^I CD CO U5 t- ■* C- O ■* CO CO I no CO C<1 lO rH CO CO CD 00 It- 



El (MCOCq tH 

3 "SJaoq IBlOi moqooco 

CO 1-4 rH C^l tH 



COCOCDOOOOCOCDCO 
05rHl-IOOrH(Me<l 

■<^c^c<i<Me^N(Meq 



<B 

-a 

C 



o 

c 

a> 
u 
o 

<H 

<B 
Sh 
<U 

A 
+j 

<P 

c3 

•d 



-d 
■t-> 



)4 

o 



•0^3 • 

-1.9S 'S9TOII cOTt<t-m •oocococooo it-t-Ssooc-coovco 

Ai.au o; Sut '*'=^'^"= -^ lOcoTxI^i ■ 

-Aoui sanojj 



i-t U5 t- IM N lO CO (N 1^^ CO 



COt)<1jOCD -OCTllOt--* CO Ol t- O iH CO t- CO 
OOOt* •CDCsJOSUStJ* t- LO CO CO 00 CO 00 o 



•sujnijp I'B 



'^83J OrHOO^COOOCOlOiHCO 

T'BIO.T. ■S9T0U t-asCTlTHCD005COrHrH 
* ^ *'*^ _ ^ ^ -^ _j f-r\ r^t vH i*-v ^.1 ^*i i-^i 

JO ^:^(I^a 



rH iH CO C<I ■* lO cq-*CO 



(MrH00O'*Ot-O 
Oi-IC--*CDOt-0 
O-^COUSrMorjlt* 



«». 



CO 



•©l^fT 



-.vOCOO 'to 

COCD C^O"^^ ^CO 

rHrH . jj-iH « " r-l 

- - 0-3 >> 3 " » r « 

?3 <u =3 Ag 3 57o o^ 



O r 

t-5 



-2ot-t-t- 

> f2 « ■= "^ => 

H » i-II-It-i 

CD^ a^ 33 



o 
m 



o 

J3 



■3^3 

!>.S « 

t- N N 

CD 5? C 
S O O 



^CD 






o 

-M 
C 

o 
o 

C 4>' 



o 

B 

bill's 



£0 



ft J- 



CO q Eb+' 



CS tUtoO^COcO 

-d aio!-'- -LO 

O ?^ W .-" hn hf! fii -x 



EO O 

ni 






C C S;^ t, 

£j O .. OcD 

il^g^Sco-^- 

* rt « la CO t- m 



242 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

carat in 1907 as compared with ?60 in 1906) added materially to 
cost per foot in 1907. 

The carats used per foot were 0.572/64, or in more intelligible 
decimals, .00893 carats, so that one carat on the average drilled 
111.9 ft. All holes over 30 degrees dip are classed as vertical, and 
ft. per hr. in horizontal holes is about 15% greater than in vertical 
ones. The average depth of holes is 81.3 ft., and diameter of cores 
Is 15/16 ins. 

In comparing these costs with contractors' prices, it must be 
borne in mind that contractors usually require air (or steam) and 
water to be piped to the work, and the mine must in addition furnish 
the air and water free of charge. In the present cost sheets all 
these items are charged against costs of drilling. 

The drill runner set and was responsible for the diamonds. He 
was paid a salary of $175 per month, while two helpers, during the 
period of time given, received $3.50 per day. Since the decline in 
the Drice of copcer, helpers are only paid $3.30 per shift. The com- 
pressor men receive $4 per day. 

Wood for fuel costs $3.50 to $5 per cord, according to locality. 
Electric power costs $33 to $40 per hp. per year. 

The drilling was done with a "Beauty Drill," of the Bullock type, 
made by the Sullivan Mchy. Co., of Chicago. The machine has been 
in service three years and is in excellent condition. The catalog 
price of the drill is $1,500, with its equipment, including 2 bits 
ready for carbons, but not including carbons. The shipping weight 
is 1,160 lbs. It will drill to a depth of 800 ft., making a hole 
1 9/16 ins. diam. and giving 15/16 in. core. 

The following were the unit costs in 1906 and in 1907, also In 
March, 1907, when the lowest unit cost was secured: 

Cost in 1906 (3,002 Ft. Drilled). 

Per lin. ft. 

Labor $0,786 

Power f 0.205 

Repairs, oil, etc 0.109 

Carats (28 56/64, cost $1,728) 0.576 

Total $1,676 

Cost in 1907 (3.667 Ft. Drilled). 

Per lin ft. 

Labor , . $0,715 

Power 0.280 

Repairs, oil, etc 0.100 

Carats (30 47/64, cost $2,323) 0.633 

Total $1,728 

Cost in March. 1907 (540 Ft. Drilled). 

Per lin ft. 

Labor $0,492 

Power 0.099 

Repairs, etc 0.049 

Carats (2 37/64, cost $219) 0.405 

Total $1,045 

Mr. Keffer estimates 16% per year will cover the interest and de- 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 243 

preciation, or $240 per year to be added to the costs above given, or 
about 8 cts. per lin. ft. of hole when 3,000 ft. are drilled per year. 

Costs of Calyx Core and Diamond Drill Borings, Nova Scotia.* — 
To further the interests of the mining industry in Nova Scotia the 
Department of Mines of that province has since 1900 owned and 
■operated a number of core drills for prospecting purposes. In the 
report of the department for 1908 there are given a summary of 
the depths of holes bored and the cost of the work for each year 
from 1900 to 1908, inclusive, and also the itemized cost of the work 
done during 1908. The following data are compiled from these 
records. 

During 1908 the department had 5 drills in operation, 2 of the 
Sullivan diamond pattern and 3 of the Calyx shot type. The work 
of these drills is given as follows : 

Drill No. 5. — This was a steam Calyx drill, producing a 6-in. 
core ; its work comprised two holes in the Cape Breton coal meas- 
ures, one 769 14 ft. deep and one 1,170 ft. 11 ins. deep. 

The first hole, 769% ft. deep, was through sandstone, shale and 
coal. "Work was begun Jan. 15, 1908, and the hole was finished 
March 21, 1908. The average fate of drilling was 0.6 ft. of hole per 
hour; the maximum rate was 3 ft. of hole per hour. The boring 
was done with a double shift. The cost of the hole was as follows. 
Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor including truckage $ 664 $0,862 

Management 241 0.313 

Coal 171 0.222 

Light, oil, waste, etc 7 0.009 

Shot 56 0.072 

Gravel 3 0.004 

Lumber, etc 30 0.040 

Casing pipe 5 0.006 

Totals $1,177 $1,528 

The second hole, 1,170 ft. 11 ins. deep, was, like the first, through 
sandstone, shale and coal. Work was begun March 30, 1908, and 
the hole was finished July 11, 1908. The average rate of drilling 
was 0.58 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 3 ft. per hour 
through sandstone. The boring was done with a double shift. The 
cost of the hole was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor including truckage $ 995 $0,849 

Management 331 0.282 

Coal 200 0.171 

Light, oil, waste, etc 8 0.007 

Shot 68 0.058 

Gravel 5 0.004 

Lumber 15 0.013 

Casing pipe 14 0.012 

Short bits and core barrels 168 0.143 

Totals $1,804 $1,539 

Drill No. 2. — This was a steam diamond drill, producing a 

*Engineering-Contracting, July 28, 1909. 



244 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

15/16-in. core ; its work comprised 6 holes in the Nova Scotia coal 
measures, 1 at Merigomish, Picton County, and 5 near New 
Glasgow. 

At Merigomish the hole was through red and gray sandstone and 
shale and was 536 ft. deep. Work was commenced Sept. 18 and 
the hole was finished Oct. 30, 1907. The average rate of drilling 
was 1.46 ft. per hour, and the maximum rate was 4 ft. 8 ins. per 
hour in gray sandstone. The boring was done with a single shift. 
The cost of the hole was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight and truckage..? 133 $0,248 

Management 245 0.457 

Fuel 11 0.021 

Light, oil, waste, etc 1 0.002 

Carbon wear 5 0.009 

Lumber 2 0.004 

Core lifters and bits 13 0.024 

Totals $410 $0,765 

Details of the drilling of only 4 of the holes sunk at New Glas- 
gow are given. The rock penetrated was gray sandstone and shale 
and black shale, with frequent hard bands. 

Hole No. 1, 909 ft. deep, was begun Dec. 9, 1907, and finished 
Feb. 14, 1908, boring single shift. The average rate of drilling was 
1.4 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 5 ft. in one hour in 
hard gray standstone. The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight $131 $0,144 

Management 336 0.369 

Coal 36 0.040 

Light, oil, waste, etc 6 0.007 

Carbon wear 2 0.002 

Lumber 17 0.019 

Casing, pump, pipe, etc 33 0.036 

Core lifters and bits 21 0.023 

Totals $582 $0,640 

Hole No. 2, 842 ft. deep, was begun March 4 and finished May 30, 
1908, working single shift. The average rate of drilling was 1.2 ft. 
per hour and the maximum rate was 3 ft. 6 ins. per- hour in gray 
shale. The cost of the hole was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight $130 $0,154 

Management 364 0.431 

Fuel 30 0.036 

Light, oil, waste, etc 55 0.065 

Steel shot 4 0.004 

Blank bits, core lifters, shells, etc 32 0.038 

Repairs to engine 20 0.023 

Totals $635 $0,751 

Hole No. 3, 646 ft. deep, was begun June 11 and finished Aug. 4, 
1908, working a single shift. The average rate of drilling was 



'otal. 


Per ft. 


$ 80 


$0,124 


249 


0.385 


21 


0.032 


9 


0.014 


20 


0.031 


13 


0.020 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 245 

1.4 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 5 ft. per hour in coal. 
The cost of the hole was as follows: 

Item. 

Labor 

Management 

Fuel 

Oil, waste, etc 

Carbon wear 

Core lifters, bits, core shells 

Totals $392 $0,606 

Hole No. 4, 500 ft. deep, was begun Aug. 11 and finished Sept. 19, 
1908, working a single shift. The average rate of drilling was 

1.5 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 5 ft. in one hour in 
gray sandstone. The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including truckage $ 67 $0,134 

Management 180 0.360 

Fuel 15 0.030 

Light, oil, waste, etc. 4 0.008 

Carbon wear 31 0.062 

Black bits, core lifters, steel shoes 15 0.030 



Totals $312 $0,624 

Drill No. 3. — This drill was a hand diamond drill, producing a 
15/1 6-in. core, and its work consisted of boring 6 holes in sandstone, 
shale and limestone to develop a limestone suitable for the manu- 
facture of cement. The holes were of the following depths : 

No. 1 65 ft. 8 ins. 

No. 2 30 ft. 1 in. 

No. 3 31 ft. ins. 

No. 4 44 ft. 6 ins. 

No. 5 36 ft. 8 ins. 

No. 6 36 ft. ins. 



Total 243 ft. 11 ns. 

The aggregate cost of the 6 holes was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $219 $0,857 

Management 130 0.532 

Freight and truckage 12 0.049 

Casing pipe 16 0.068 

Carbon wear 123 0.504 



Totals $500 $2,007 

This same drill was employed to sink one hole in the coal meas- 
ures, as follows: The hole was 134 V^ ft. deep, through shale and 
sandstone ; work was begun July 22 and the hole was finished 
Aug. 12, 1908, working a single shift. The average rate of drilling 
was 0.74 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 1 ft. 3 ins. in one 
hour. The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor $107 $0,798 

Management 50 0.363 

Light, oil, waste, etc 0.55 0.004 

Carbon wear 61 0.455 

Freight, truckage, repairs, etc 36 0.267 

Totals $254 $1,887 



246 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Drill No. 5. — This drill was a steam Calyx drill, producing a 6-in. 
core. It was employed in putting down four holes in the Cape 
Breton coal measures, as follows: 

Hole No. 1 was begun Feb. 27 and finished April 13, 1908, work- 
ing double shift. The average rate of progress was 2% ft. per hour 
and the maximum rate was 6 14 ft. in one hour. The hole was 424^4 
ft. deep and its cost was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight and truckage... $294 $0,691 

Management 150 0.353 

Coal 35 0.083 

Light, oil, waste, etc 6 0.014 

Shot 18 0.042 

Gravel 3 0.007 . 

Lumber 45 0.106 

Totals $551 $1,296 

Hole No. 2, 208% ft. deep, was begun May 20 and was finished 
May 30, 1908. The average rate of drilling was 1 ft. per hour and 
the maximum rate was 5% ft. per hour. A double shift was worked. 
The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight and truckage... $127 $0,612 

Management 33 0.158 

Fuel 15 0.072 

Light, oil, waste, etc 2 0.009 

Shot 10 0.048 

Gravel 1 0.005 

Lumber 12 0.058 

Casing 5 0.024 

Totals $205 $0,986 

Hole No. 3. 367 ft. deep, was begun June 4 and finished June 27, 
1908, working deutale shift. The average rate of drifting was 
0.9 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 8 ft. in one hour with 
cutters. The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including freight and truckage .. . $272 $0,741 

Management 75 0.204 

Fuel 21 0.057 

Light, oil, waste, etc 5 0.013 

Shot 27 0.073 

Lumber 8 0.022 

Shot bits 7 0.019 

Totals $415 $1,129 

Hole No. 4, 502 ft. deep, was begun on July 8 and was finished 
on July 29. 1908. working double shift. The average rate of 
drilling was 1.2 ft. per hour and the maximum rate was 8 ft. 
in one hour with shot. The cost of the hole was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per ft. 

Labor, including truckage $251 $0,500 

Management 72 0.143 

Fuel 22 0.043 

Light, oil, waste, etc 4 0.008 

Shot 15 0.029 

Lumber 7 0.013 

Pumping water 80 0.159 

Shot barrels used 15 0.029 

Totals $466 $0,924 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 247 

In presenting these results we have computed and added the 
columns of costs per foot drilled. The report says : 

The average cost per foot for boring by drills was $1.06. The 
cost per foot for all boring by diamond drills was 80 1^ cents, and 
by Calyx drills $1.34. The carbon cost per foot in boring by 
diamond drills was $0,077, and the shot-cost per foot by Calyx 
drills, $0,056. These costs compared with last year's results were 
as follows : 

1907. 1908. Inc. or Dec. 

Cost per foot for all boring $1.23 $1.06 Dec. 17c 

Cost per foot for all Calyx boring 1.71 1.34 Dec. 31c 

Cost per foot for all diamond boring. . .73 .845 Inc. lie 

Shot-cost per foot boring by Calyx drills .047 .056 inc. .009c 

Carbon cost per foot boring by diamond .0129 .0/7 Inc. .041c 

Cost of Core Drilling With a Well Driller.* — In this article we give 
the cost of drilling holes through rock with a well-drilling machine. 
Holes Nos. 1 and 2 were holes from which cores were taken, being 
put down through limestone at Paris, Ky., for the Blue Grass- 
Mining and Development Co. For these two holes a Cyclone steam, 
four-core drill, class E 1, was used, taking a 3% -in. core. This, 
drill will take cores of 2^, SVt and A'^/s ins., to a depth of 300 ft. 
It is the lightest four-core drill made by the Cyclone Co., of 
Orrville, Ohio. Equipped ready for work, it is sold for less 
than $1,000, but for our purpose of estimating depreciation and 
interest on the machine we will consider the price as $1,000, as. 
this figure will cover the freight and other incidental expenses of 
buying the machine. This machine can be operated by a drill 
runner and one assistant. 

Hole No. 1. — This hole was entirely in limestone and was drilled 
to a depth of 104 ft. in 50 hrs. actual time of running the machine; 
the average rate of drilling per hour waG 2 ft. 1 in. The men 
worked more than 50 hrs., the actual time they worked being 
charged against the hole. The cost was : 

Moving drill $ 3.50 

Coal 4.85 

Water 3.00 

Driller, 60 hrs. @ $0.50 30.00 

Helper, 66 hrs. @ $0.15 9.90 

Supplies, shot and bits 5.00 

Depreciation, repairs and interest per day 

assumed at $1.50 9.00 

$64.25 
This gives a cost per lineal foot of hole for each item as follows : 

Moving drill : . . .$0.03 

Coal 05 

Water 03 

Labor 38 

Supplies 05 

Depreciation, repairs and interest OS 

Total $0.62 

Hole No. 2. — This hole was 158 ft. through limestone, 80 hrs. 



"Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 9, 1908. 



248 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

being consumed in drilling it. This meant a rate per hour of 
about 2 ft. The total cost of the hole was as follows : 

Moving drill $ 3.75 

Coal 6.00 

Water 4.00 

Supplies, shot and bits. 10.00 

Driller, 80 hrs. @ $0.50 40.00 

Helper, 88 hrs. @ $0.15 13.20 

Depreciation, repairs and interest, per day- 
assumed at $1.50 12.00 

Total $88.95 

This gives a cost per lineal foot of hole for each item as follows: 

Moving drill $0.02 

Coal .04 

Water 03 

Labor 34 

Supplies 06 

Depreciation, repairs and interest 08 

Total $0.57 

Holes Nos. 4 and 5 were drilled with cable tools, a No. 4 
Cyclone drill being used for putting down a 5 -in. hole. The work 
was done near Arritts, Va., for the Low Moor Iron Co. The No. 4 
drill is a standard well-drilling machine, and will sink a hole to a 
depth of 500 ft. It has an 8-hp. boiler and a 7-hp. engine, mounted 
on traction wheels, weighing in all over 6,000 lbs. This machine can 
also be rigged to take cores. Depreciation, repairs and interest on 
it per day will be about the same as for the other drill. Two men 
operate it. 

Hole No. 3. — This hole was drilled through the following 
materials : 

Ft. 

Clay 7 

Shale 113 

Cap rock (disintegrated) 8 

Sandstone 14 

Total 142 

The time consumedin drilling this was 32 hrs., making a rate of 
4 ft. 5 ins. per hour. The cost of the work was as follows: 

Coal $ 4.00 

Water 2.40 

Driller, 40 hrs. @ $0.20 8.00 

Helper, 40 hrs. @ $0.15 ' 6.00 

Depreciation, repairs and interest per day, 

assumed at $1.50 6.00 

Total $26.40 

This includes moving the machine. The cost per lineal ft. for 
each item was : 

Coal $0,03 

Water 02 

Labor 10 

Depreciation, repairs and interest 04 

Total $0.19 



ROCK EXCAVATION. QUARRYING, ETC. 249 

Hole No. 4. — This hole was 67 ft. deep, being drilled through the 
following materials: 

Ft. 

Shale 25 

Cap rock 2 

Ore 10 

Sandstone 16 

Flint 9 

Total 67 

Thirteen hours were consumed in drilling this hole, making a 
rate of progress of 5 ft. and 1 in. per hour. The cost of the work 
was: 

Coal $ 1.00 

Water 30 

Driller, 20 hrs. @ $0.20 4.00 

Helper, 20 hrs. @ $0.15 3.00 

Depreciation, repairs and interest, per day $1.50 3.00 

Total $11.30 

This gives a detail cost per lineal foot of the following : 

Coal $0,015 

Water 0.005 

Labor 0.100 

Depreciation, repairs and interest 0.040 

Total $0,160 

All these holes, it will be noticed, were through soft rock, but 
the costs for the work are very reasonable. 

Cost of Diamond Drill and Wash Borings Near New York City.* — 

Mr. F. Lavis is author of the following. — The following costs of 
making diamond drill borings were obtained on work in New York 
City in the fall of 1905. The work was started in October and ran 
through to the early part of January, there being more or less 
delay during the latter part of the work (on the diamond borings) 
due to snow and ice. 

The average depth of the holes was about 40 ft., partly in earth 
and partly in rock, the depth of the latter below the surface 
varying from 2 to 25 ft, and it being generally overlaid by more or 
less fine sand. A 2% -in. wrought iron pipe casing was sunk to 
the rock by a separate crew by the wash method and firmly seated 
thereon. A 1^4 -in. core was obtained of the rock and samples of 
the washings were taken and preserved in glass jars. The rock was 
the ordinary New York gneiss and mica schist, which affords easy 
drilling where seams are not encountered which tend the drill off 
line and bind the bit. 

The crew of the wash machine consisted of 1 foreman at $3 per 
day and of 3 laborers at $2 per day. A proportion of the superin- 
tendence, water supply, watchman, etc., was also charged to this 
part of the work. This crew sank all the casings to the rock ready 
for the diamond machine, the work occupying about 15 working 
days. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 9, 1907. 



250 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Power for the diamona drill was furnished by a small upright 
boiler and much time was wasted in shifting the boiler and drill 
apparatus from one hole to another ; had these been both mounted 
on wheels the expense for drilling would have been cut down at 
least 10 per cent and probably more. After the first two moves 
had been made an extra laborer (sometimes two) was put on 
during the time of moving at $2 a day, with the result that the 
time was cut down half, from 12 to 16 hours' actual working time 
to 6 or 8. 

A superintendent, who also set all the diamonds, devoted about 
half his time to the work and was paid $100 per month, and $100 
per month rent was paid for the use of the diamond drilling 
machine. The boiler and wash boring outfit were on hand, having 
been used previously, and no cost is included for their use. The 
costs do include an allowance for all pipe used, cost of fuel and 
other materials and of repairs to diamond machine on completion 
of work, and new grate bars for the boiler. 

The pay-roll was as follows : 

1 Superintendent ( % time) $100.00 per month 

Rent of machine 100.00 per month 

1 Foreman 3.50 per day 

1 Rigger 2.25 per day 

2 Laborers 2.20 per day 

1 Night watchman . . 1.50 per day 

1 Inspector of city water department 3.00 per day 

Water was obtained from the city hydrants and cost about $25 
for permits, etc., besides the $3 ner day for the inspector. 

The costs shown below are considered Quite low (at least $1 
per ft. less than usual), this being due to a large extent to the 
very small abrasion of the diamonds. This latter is a most impor- 
tant matter and the favorable results in this case, the loss in 
some holes being as little as % carat, and seldom over %, was 
due to the fact that stones were available which had been pre- 
viously used (and therefore tested), and that the superintendent 
who set the stones was an expert at this work. With diamonds at 
$60 per carat, the importance of properly selected stones, skilful 
setting and manipulation is apparent. 

The following is a summary of the cost: 

Wash Borings, 206.8 Lin. Ft. 

Per 
Total. lin. ft. 

Labor $ 276.92 $1.34 

Engineering 35.00 0.17 

Total .$ 311.92 $1.51 

Diamond Drill Borings, 460.9 Lin. Ft. 

Per 
Total, lin. ft. 

Labor $1,888.73 $4.09 

Engineering 315.00 0.69 

Total $2,203.73 $4.78 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 251 

Diamond Drill and Wash Borings, 667.7 Lin. Ft. 

Per 
Total, lin. ft. 

Labor $2,165.65 $3.25 

Engineering 350.00 0.52 

Total $2,515.65 $3.77 

Rock Excavating Using Well Drillers.*— Mr. R. M. Hulbert is 
author of the following. — The quarries of the Atlas Portland Cement 
Company at Northampton, Pa., are two in number and are situated 
close to the works of the company. No. 1 quarry is the nearest to 
the works and is 1,600 to 1,800 ft. long on the face. No. 2 quarry 
is at a distance of a mile or so from the works and is approximately 
1,000 ft. long on the face. These faces range from 42 to 100 ft. in 
height. 

The rock was formerly excavated by benches, i. e., steam or 
compressed air rock drills were used for drilling holes 20 ft. deep 
which were charged with dynamite and blasted. The dislodged 
rock was cleaned up by hand labor after which the drills were 
again set up and the process repeated. In this way the face of 
the quarry was removed by three benches, all material being carried 
away in standard gage freight cars running on tracks laid on the 
bottom bench, or floor of the quarry. 

The drills used for this part of the work were ordinary com- 
pressed air rock drills capable of drilling holes 20 ft. in depth 
with a bottom diameter of 2% ins. It was thought that by drilling 
holes below grade and blasting larger quantities of rock at a 
time, the cost of handling the excavated material would be 
materially reduced, all hand labor being practically eliminated and 
the rock removed by steam shovels running on railroad tracks on 
the floor of the quarry. It was therefore decided to introduce well 
drills for this work in place of the rock drills formerly used and the 
results achieved have nacre than warranted the change. 

The character of the rock, however, makes the work of drilling 
with well drills of an exceedingly difficult nature as this limestone 
is not only hard and tough but is honeycombed with seams running 
at every conceivable angle. In spite of this handicap the drills 
are averaging approximately 1% ft. per hour taking into considera- 
tion all delays due to blasting, sharpening steels and for other 
purposes. There are seven drills actually engaged on the work 
and these are not only able to keep four steam shovels busy in 
the two quarries, but have drilled many holes ahead. As a general 
rule, however, it has been found that drilling holes ahead does not 
always pay as the magnitude of the blasts often throws some of 
the holes out of plumb and discretion has to be exercised in 
planning ahead on this part of the work. The drills were manu- 
factured by the Star Drilling Machine Co. of Akron, Ohio. 

It sometimes happens that well drilling machines cannot be 
used to advantage, and an instance of this is to be found in the 
case of quarry No. 2 of the Atlas plant. Here the entrance to the 
quarry consists of a narrow opening with high vertical faces on 

*Engineering-Contractinp, June 5, 1907. 



252 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

each side. It would be obviously impracticable to widen this 
opening by means of heavy blasts as by so doing there would be 
danger of closing up the opening, it being a singular fact that in 
blasts of this character, the material at the base of the hole is 
blown outward to a considerable distance, while that at the top 
settles down vertically and is scarcely thrown out at all. In the 
case of quarry No. 2 of the Atlas plant, the narrow entrance is 
being widened by the bench method, eight compressed air rock 
drills being used. As soon as the face is moved back far enough, 
however, well drills will be substituted and the holes drilled to 
grade. 

At both quarries the holes are drilled at a distance of 20 ft. from 
the face and approximately 18 ft. apart, it being the customary 
practice to space these holes by moving the machine a distance 
forward equal to its own length, which in this case is about 18 ft. 
In No. 1 quarry there are two well drilling machines, operating on 
compressed air and working in two shifts of 10 to 13 hrs. each. 
Besides these there are the eight compressed air rock drills engaged 
in opening up the entrance by the bench method. In No. 2 quarry 
there are five well drills operated by steam generated in a 135-hp. 
central boiler plant. The steam pressure is maintained at 110 lbs. 
except when blasting occurs, at which times it is lowered to 35 
lbs., as it was found that the detonation of a heavy blast tended to 
"start" the tubes in the boiler if the pressure was not reduced. 
A 3-in. steam line leads from the boiler plant to the drills, but this 
line can also be used for compressed air if desired and, in fact, 
compressed air is used to operate the drills during the night shift. 
Of course, it is impossible to install a very high class steam 
plant for this work owing to the fact that there is no element of 
permanency in the installation. The plant has already been moved 
twice and will probably have to be moved again within the next 
twelve months. In spite of this fact, however, very good economy 
is obtained, care being taken to thoroughly lag the steam lines which 
are, in no case, more than 300 ft. in length. 

The depth of holes in this quarry ranges from 45 to 85 ft., the 
diameter being 5 ins., and it is the usual practice where holes are 
only 45 ft. deep, to drill them with one bit, the wearing away of the 
gage being in about the -ight proportion to the depth of hole to do 
away with the need of changing steels. In the deeper holes, bits are 
changed at regular intervals until the last 35 ft. is reached when 
one bit is used to the bottom. As a general rule, however, it might 
be said that drills are sharpened every 10 ft. 

The very diiHcult nature of the ground and the fact that frequent 
stops have to be made to straighten holes and during blasting, 
makes the average of 1% ft. per hour, taking into consideration 
all delays, a very good one. But it must be remembered that the 
real element of economy is not so much in the speed of drilling 
as in the greater efficiency in blasting, more rock being displaced 
by blasting holes drilled below grade than by successive lifts of 
20 to 25 ft. In working in these benches each bench has to be 
cleaned off by hand labor, except the final one at grade which 
may be cleaned off by steam shovels. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 253 

Cost of An Artesian Well.* — Mr. Wm. G. Fargo, consulting engi- 
neer, of Jackson, Mich., has furnished us with the following data 
regarding the cost of an artesian well : 

The well was sunk at the J^ansing, Mich., sub-station of the 
Commonwealth Power Co. It was 3 ins. in diameter and 107 ft. 
deep. Of this depth 50 ft. was through soft material and 57 ft. 
through rock. This meant that only 50 ft. needed sheathing, which 
was done by 50 ft. of 3-in. pipe at a cost of 32 cts. per foot, making 
a total cost for pipe of $16. 

The well drillins: machine, a small one. was hired for the work, 
60 cts. Der hour being paid for the use of the machine and the 
services of the man to run it. One laborer assisted this man in 
drilling the well. Record was not kept of the fuel used. 
The cost was as follows : 

71 hours' use of machine at $0.60 $42.60 

69 hours' labor at $0.20 13.80 

58 ft. 3-in. pipe at $0.32 16.00 

Total $72.40 

This gives a cost per lineal foot of well of 67.6 cts. 

For other data on the methods and costs of sinking wells see 
the index under "Well Drilling." 

Cost of Drilling Limestone With Well Driller, For a Quarry.f — 
There has been some demand in large blasting work for a well 
drilling machine operated by electric power instead of by the usual 
boiler and engine. "Where blasting operations are conducted within 
city limits some inconvenience and a large item of expense are rep- 
resented in providing a licensed engineer, as required by law, for 
each separate steam driven machine. There is also economy in 
generating all power at a central plant. In some locations also 
it is impossible to use a boiler. To meet these difficulties some 
contractors have operated a number of drillers from one centrally 
located steam or compressed air plant, carrying pipes to the 
several machines. These last plans, however, involve the constant 
relaying of steam or air lines with bother and loss of power from 
condensations, leakage, etc. To obviate these and other disad- 
vantages connected with the steam machine as used fn certain 
classes of work, the Keystone Quarry Drill Co., Beaver Falls, Pa., 
has designed an electric driven machine and one of these has now 
been at work for some time in the Belleville, 111., quarries of James 
& A. C. O'Laughlin, of Chicago, 111. The following data relate to 
this machine and its work : 

The machine is eauiooed with a lO-hp. specially geared motor 
placed over the rear truck and belted to the drilling mechanism, 
wliich is back geared and balanced so as to run lightly and smootlaly. 
The controller box is located at the front of the machine close to the 
driller's hand. Tlie drilling tools comprise a stem weigliing about 
3.000 lbs., a drill bit weighing 150 lbs., and a rope socket weighing 
about 50 lbs., or about 1,200 lbs. together. The bit cuts a 5%-in. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Anril 8. 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting , July 21, 1909. 



254 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

hole and the stem is 3% ins. in diameter and 22 ft. long. As the 
stroke is from 30 to 36 ins., a blow of from 3,000 to 3,500 ft. lbs. is 
obtained at each stroke. The machine is built with gear hoist, 
capacity 500 ft., or with friction hoist, capacity 350 ft. The makers 
consider the latter style of machine probably the best for quarry 
and rock cut work where the tools are being constantly raised and 
lowered as in tamping a charge, and where the holes will rarely 
exceed 150 ft. in depth. This machine is made with a traction 
attachment for self propulsion if desired ; while it is impracticable 
to move the machine over great distances by this means, on account 
of carrying along the electric feed wires, for short moves from hole 
to hole or from one side of the quarry to the other it has been 
found to be of great advantage. 

In operating at the full speed of the motor the tools make about 
60 strokes per minute. As the hole becomes deeper or clogged with 
cuttings, before sand pumping, the rapidity of the stroke is grad- 
ually reduced to say 50 strokes per minute in order that the cutting 
bit may deliver its blow with best effect. This change of speed is 
produced by reducing the speed of the motor. 

Besides doing the drilling this machine is used for loading the 
holes. For this service the regular drilling bit is removed and in its 
place a wooden rammer is placed on the drill stem. From 5 to 8 
sticks of dynamite having been dropped into the hole the drilling 
tool is lowered after them, forcing them to the bottom. The tools 
are then withdrawn and the operation repeated until all the charge 
is placed. The placing of the firing cap and wires and the tamping 
are done by hand. 

At the James & A. C. O'Laughlin quarry limestone is being 
drilled and blasted for crushed stone. The machine was furnished 
by the makers on the guarantee to drill to a depth of 60 ft, at the 
rate of 40 ft. per 10-hour day, or 4 ft. per hour. In the tests 
made on delivery of the machine the following records were ob- 
tained : The machine was set up on June 5 at 5 o'clock and ran for 
1 hour, drilling 9 ft. of hole. From the following Monday morning 
until Friday forenoon, something over 4 days, working 10 hours a 
day, four 66 ft. holes or 264 ft. of hole were drilled. In the follow- 
ing week four holes 105 ft. deep or 420 ic. of hole were drilled. 
These figures are furnished by the Keystone Quarry Drill Co. In 
a letter to us the James & A. C. O'Laughlin Co. state that in actual 
work the machine is averaging 40 ft. of 5% -in. hole per 10-hour 
day, and is giving good satisfaction. The daily operating expenses 
are as follows : 

One drill runner at $2.50 . $2.50 

One helper at ?2 2.00 

Cost of electric current 2.00 

Oil, drill sharpening, etc 1.50 

Total per day $8.00 

This gives a cost per foot of hole drilled of 20 cts. 

In a blast of four 5% -in. holes 66 ft. deep, the charge consisted of 

5,500 lbs. of dynamite packed solidly in the holes to within 25 ft. 

of the top and then tamped with screenings. The quarry manager 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING. ETC. 255 

estimated that 20,000 cu. yds. of stone were thrown down by this 
blast. The breast was 105 ft. hieh, and. as will be seen, the holes 
were put down only about half way. In recent work the holes have 
been drilled the full aepth of the breast. 

Cost of Drilling Rock With a Well Drilling Machine.* — The fol- 
lowing is a record of some holes drilled, and the cost of drilling 
them, at Mussellshell and Roundup, Montana, for the Republic Coal 
Co. of Chicago, 111. 

The work was done with a No. 2 Cyclone drill, manufactured by 
the Cvclone Drill Co., of Orrville, Ohio. The machine was equipped 
with hollow rod tools. This machine is meant to drill holes from 
500 to 700 ft. deep ; it is equipped with a 7-hp. engine run with 
gasoline. Holes from 23 ft. to 517 ft. were drilled. The bits used 
were 2% ins. Two men, the drill runner and a helper, were em- 
ployed on the machine. The work was done in prospecting. The 
record of each hole is given in the table. 

Record of Holes Drilled. 
Average drilled 
Hole No. Depth. per shift. Material. 

1 391 ft. 7 in. 39 ft. 1 in Shale and sandstone. 

2 2:33 ft. 36 ft. 7 in. Shale and sandstone. 

3 284 ft. 47 ft. 4 in. Shale and sandstone. 

4 347 ft. 49 ft. 7 in. Shale and sandstone. 

5 103 ft. 51 ft. 6 in. Shale and sandstone. 

6 297 ft. 42 ft. 5 in. Shale and sandstone. 

7 36 ft. 6 in. 52 ft. Soil and gravel. 

8 23 ft. 11 in. 32 ft. Soil, gravel, shale. 

9 51 ft. 8 in. 47 ft. 8 in. Soil, gravel, shale. 

10 27 ft. 3 in. 33 ft. Soil, gravel, shale. 

11 53 ft. Sin. 30 ft. Soil, gravel, shale. 

12 517 ft. 36 ft. 11 in. Shale and sandstone. 

13 463ft. 57ft. Sin. Shale and sandstone. 

Total... 2, 885 ft. 4 in. 41 ft. 10 in. 

In all, 69 days were worked, making the average nearly 42 ft. 
drilled per 10 lb. shift, as shown in the table. 

The cost of the work is shown below. A two horse team was 
used to haul water and other supplies. The machine used 4 gals, 
of gasoline per day. It will be noticed that the cost of the team 
was nearly SO per cent of the total cost. 

Drill Runner, 69 days @ $2.50 $172.50 

Helper, 69 days @ $2.00 138.00 

Team, 69 days @ $4.00 276.00 

276 gals, gasoline @ 12 cents 33.12 

Total $619.62 

This gives a cost of 21% cents per ft. of hole. To this should be 
added an allowance for plant and superintendence. It will be 
noticed that some of the holes a.re very shallow, thus necessitating 
frequent moves of the machine. 

Cost of Drilling Copper Ore With Well Drillers. t — The following 
costs on drilling and blasting, and the methods of mining copper ore 
with a steam shovel at the Copper Flat Mines in Nevada, are 
abstracted ftom "Mines and Minerals." 

* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 18, 1908. 
■\Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 9, 1908. 



256 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The ore lies in a flat, and is estimated to be more than 200 ft. in 
depth, the ore occurring in a porphyry. It is capped with earth and 
rock to a depth of about 87 ft. This stripping and the ore are 
worlced in trenches 50 ft. deep. 

Cost of Drilling. — The holes are put down by two Keystone No. 5 
traction drills, owned by the mining company and kept continually 
at work drilling to loosen ground for the steam shovels. The 
Keystone No. 5 machine is built specially for mineral prospecting 
and mine work, it being the largest machine made by the Keystone 
Driller Co., of Beaver Falls, Pa. The boiler is mounted on the 
same trucks with the engine, and the machine is propelled on 
traction wheels. The engine is 14-hp. The derrick is 34 ft. high. 
The machine weighs 16,000 lbs. and costs, without tools or equip- 
ment, $1,375. This machine will drill holes from 1,000 to 1,200 ft. 
deep. 

The drills use a 5% -in. bit which gives a hole about 61/^ ins. 
in diameter, and the holes are put down to a depth of about 60 
ft. The holes are spaced on 3 5 -ft. centers and are back from the 
breast of the bench 4 ft. This is the usual spacing ; however, 
where hard masses of tough carbonate ores are encountered, holes 
are about 15 ft. apart and 15 ft. from the breast. Each machine 
requires a driller, who is paid $4 per day, and an assistant, who is 
paid $3 per day. Nine-hour shifts are worked. A 60-ft. hole is put 
down in two shifts, or 18 hrs., thus 3 ft. and 5 ins. of hole is drilled 
per hour. For each hole the boiler burns 1% cords of wood, costing 
$6 per cord. The cost of drilling one 60 ft. hole is as follows: 

Driller, 2 days $ 8.00 

Assistant, 2 days 6.00 

Fuel 10.00 

Oil and waste 0.55 

Extra parts, repairs, renewals 2.15 

Rope wear per hole 3.50 

Estimated interest and depreciation 2.00 

Total $32.20 

This gives a cost per lineal foot of hole as follows : 

Per 
lin. ft. 

Labor $0.23 

Fuel 0.17 

Oil and waste 0.01 

Repairs and renewals 0.04 

Rope wear '. . 0.05 

Interest and depreciation 0.03 

Total $0.53 

Cost of Blasting. — In blasting any material the amount of ex- 
plosives used naturally varies with the location and depth of holes 
and with the hardness of the materials. However, the average 
amount of explosives used in this work was obtained, and was as 
follows: The holes were sprung with two 50-lb. boxes of 40 per 
cent dynamite, costing $15.40 for 100 lbs. Then the hole was 
reamed out, and from 20 to 30 kegs of black powder were used in 
the blast, the average being 25 kegs or 625 lbs., costing $2.25 per 
keg. This gave a total cost for explosives of $71.65. 



ROCK EXCAVATION, QUARRYING, ETC. 2ol 

Assuming that a block, 35x40x60. ft., is brolten by the hole, we 
have a total of 3,111 cu. yds. of material moved by the black powder 
per cu. yd. of material, or 0.23 lbs. of explosives per cu. yd. for 
both springing and blasting. This is a very small amount of 
powder to be used for rock blasting. The total cost per cu. yd. 
for drilling and blasting was: 

Per cu. yd. 

Drilling ?0.010 

Blasting 0.023 

Total $0,033 

This cost of 3% cts. per cu. yd. is very low for the hard material. 
On the other hand, for the earth capping this cost is a little high ; 
however, the cost given is an average for the two materials. 

Steam Shovel Work. — Three 9 5 -ton and one 70-ton Bucyrus steam 
shovels are used to load the blasted material. The dippers are 
equipped with manganese steel teeth, the repairs on them being 
very light. The shovels load the stripping into two wayside dump 
cars of 314 cu. yds. capacity. The trains are pulled by 45-ton 
locomotives. Ten cars make up a train. 

The ore is loaded into 50-ton bottom-dump cars for direct trans- 
portation to the concentrator. Tlie ore is hauled by the railroad 
company and not by the mining company. Exact records of the 
cost of the steam shovel work are not available, but the work done 
by them in the first six months shows that the cost is much less 
than other methods in vogue in that part of the west, the saving 
being enough to make profitable the mining of low grade ores with 
this method, when it is not possible to make a profit on higher 
grade ores with other methods. 

Cost of Tunneling, Shaft Sinking and Mining, Cross- References. — 
Data on these subjects will be found in the following sections of this 
book : Railway's, and Sewers. Consult the index under "Tunnels," 
"Shafts." Consult Gillette's "Rock Excavation." 

Cost of Subaqueous Rock Excavation. — On jobs of size sufficient 
to warrant the installation of a good plant, the cost of drilling, 
blasting and dredging rock of the consistency of hard limestone 
averages about $2.50 per cu. yd., although I have records of work 
where the actual cost (including plant repairs, interest, and depre- 
ciation), was less than ?2 per cu. yd. For discussion of methods 
and for cost records, see my book on "Rock Excavation." 

Costs of Chamber Blasting. — By this method, one or more small 
tunnels are driven into the face of a rock hill that is to be quarried. 
Generally such a tunnel runs in not more than 50 ft., and then it 
branches right and left, forming a T. Heavy charges of black 
powder or of Judson are placed in the branches of T, and fired. 
As much as 350,000 tons of rock have thus been shattered at one 
blast. Costs as low as 31^ cts. per cu. yd. (solid) are on record 
for breaking rock in this way. See Gillettes' "Rock Excavation." 

A similar method has often been used on a smaller scale for 
blasting hardpan that was so full of boulders as to make drilling 
very expensive. 



SECTION IV. 
ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS, ETC. 

Definitions. — Asphalt Pavements. — In the broad sense of the 
term, an asphalt pavement is any pavement composed of mineral 
particles cemented together with asphalt. This definition includes 
ordinary asphalt pavement, Bitulitliic, Petrolithic, etc., as well as 
"oiled roads" of the California type, also "asphalt macadam." All 
these, in reality, are species of asphalt pavement. Asphalt pave- 
ment, however, is a term generally used in a narrower sense, and 
applies usually to a class of pavement (sometimes called "sheet 
asphalt" to distinguish it from "asphalt block" pavement), tlie wear- 
ing coat of which is composed of sand, limestone dust and asphalt, 
mixed hot in a mechanical mixer, laid upon a "binder course" and 
rolled. The "binder course," or "binder" is usually a thin layer of 
finely broken stone mixed hot with asphalt, spread upon a concrete 
base and rolled. However, it is frequently the practice to use only 
a "naphtha binder," wliich is merely a coat of what might be called 
an asphalt paint applied with brushes to the surface of the con- 
crete base. In either case, the object of the "binder" is to prevent 
the asphalt wearing surface from creeping along or peeling away 
from the concrete base. 

"Lake asphalt" is an asphalt obtained from Trinidad Lake, or 
other similar deposit. 

A "rock asphalt pavement" is one made of rock which is found 
in deposits that are impregnated with asphalt. 

An "asphalt block pavement" is made of blocks or bricks, com- 
posed of graded sizes of broken stone, sandstone dust mixed with 
asphalt, and compacted in a block machine under great pressure. 
The standard size for blocks is 3x5x12 ins. (See Peckham's 
"Solid Bitumens," p. 310.) 

Barrel. — The most common size of barrel in which asphaltic oil 
is shipped holds 42 gals. The standard size of tar barrel appears to 
be 52 gals. 

Base. — The artificial foundation on which the "wearing coat" 
of a pavement rests. The most commonly used base is concrete, 
generally 6 ins. thick. The word base is preferable to the word 
foundation. 

Belgian Block Pavement. — A stone block pavement, the stones 
being rectangular in shape and of a size about 3x6x10 Ins., 
although varying more or less, except in the matter of thickness 
which is usually 6 ins. Granite and sandstone are about the only 

258 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 259 

kinds of stone used in America, although trap was formerly used 
to a considerable extent. 

Berm. — The "shoulder" or "wing" of earth between the edge of 
the paved part of a country road and the edge of the ditch. 

Binder. — A term used in several senses: (1) The screenings, or 
soil, used to bind a macadam road together; (2) the "binder coat" 
between a concrete base on an asphalt wearing surface (see 
Asphalt Pavement) ; (3) any bituminous material used to bind min- 
eral fragments together. 

Bitulithic Pavetnent. — A wearing coat composed of broken stone, 
sand, stone dust and a bituminous cement, usually asphalt, mixed in 
a machine, and laid upon a base of concrete or other material. 

Bitumen. — No generally accepted definition of this term exists. 
Peckham's "Solid Bitumens," p. 80, contains the following : "Bi- 
tumen, a generic term including- substances occurring in nature, in 
outflows or springs, and in veins, as natural inflammable gas, fluid 
petroleum, viscous maltha and solid asphaltum and asphaltite. It 
also occurs saturating and mixed with limestones, sandstones, sand 
or earthy matter. These mixtures are called asphalte." Asphalt, 
pitch, tar, etc., are commonly included in the generic term bitumen. 

Blind. — A surfacing of screenings or gravel on a macadam road. 

Blind Train. — A trench filled with broken stone. 

Block Pavement. — A pavement made of stone, brick, wood, or 
asphalt blocks. Vitrified bricks of large size (3i/4 x 8^/2 x 4 ins.) are 
called "blocks," to distinguish them from bricks of a smaller size 
(2% X 31/2 X 4 ins). 

Bottoming. — The base of a Telford pavement, consisting of 
large stones set on edge forming a rough pavement. On this "bot- 
toming" is laid the macadam wearing coat, the whole forming a 
Telford pavement or road. 

Box Culvert. — A small culvert with an opening of rectangulai- 
shape. Originally such culverts had rubble masonry sidewalls for 
the sides, cobble pavement for the bottom and slabs of stone 
("coverstones"), resting on the sidewalls, for the top. Box culverts 
are now made entirely of concrete, as a rule. 

Box. — The unit of measure of mixed ingredients for an asphalt 
pavement is commonly the "box" of 9 cu. ft. The amount of 
compression of the mixture used to make an asphalt wearing coat is 
variously estimated at 1/6 to %. Hence a 9-cu. ft. "box" of mix- 
ture will yield 7I/2 to 6 cu. ft. of compacted wearing coat, which 
will make 5 to 4 sq. yds. of wearing coat 2 ins. thick— 5 sq. yds. 
if the shrinkage is only 16%% ; 4 sq. yds. if the shrinkage is 33%% 
under the roller. 

Brick. — Vitrified paving brick are made of selected clay or shale 
burned so as to produce an exceedingly hard and tough brick. 

Broken Stone. — Stone that has passed through a rock crusher (or 
has been broken to small size with hammers), also called "crushed 
stone." "When it has not been screened into different sizes, it is 
called "run of crusher," or "crusher run." The smallest size, gen- 
erally % or % down to dust, is called "screenings." Sometimes a 



260 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

macadam road is called a "broken stone road," but the term ma- 
cadam is preferable. Broken stone is sometimes called "ballast," 
which is only objectionable because of possible confusion with the 
ballast of a railway track. 

Catch-Water. — ^A broad, shallow paved ditch across a road built 
on a steep grade, for the purpose of diverting surface water to side 
ditches. In climates where snow accumulates, giving a sharp 
crown to a road does not serve sufficiently well to divert the melting 
snow to the side ditches. Hence the use of catch-waters on steep 
grades where melted snow would follow the wheel tracks down the 
center of the road and do damage to its surface if not diverted at 
short intervals. 

Cement Curt. — A curb made of concrete faced on the front and 
top with cement mortar. 

Cement Walk. — A footway, or walk, having a concrete base and a 
cement mortar wearing coat. 

Coal Tar. — See Tar. 

Cobblestone Pavement. — A pavement of rounded cobbles. Seldom 
used except for paving gutters. 

Corduroy. — A crude road made of split or round logs (usually 
about 6 ins. diameter) laid side by side, not unlike railway ties 
spaced so close as to touch one another. For a cheap road over 
marshy ground, the corduroy road is often used in a timbered 
country. 

Cover Stone — See Box Culvert. 

Creosoted Wood Block. — Dried timber blocks impregnated with oil 
of creosote (dead oil of tar), 16 to 20 lbs. of oil per cu. ft. of tim- 
ber. Creosote weighs 8.8 lbs. per gal. 

Crossing. — A footwalk across a street, usually made of stone 
slabs. 

Crown. — The arch or camber of the surface of a road or street ; 
the transverse profile of a roadway. 

Crushed Stone. — See Broken Stone. 

Crusher Run. — See Broken Stone. 

Culvert. — A waterway under a roadway. See Box Culvert. 

Curb. — A miniature retaining wall at the outside of a sidewalk 
and forming one side of the gutter ; an edge stone. 

Cushion. — A thin layer of sand or screenings under the wearing 
coat of blocks (stone, brick, etc.). 

Cu,shion Coat. — A coat of %-in. of asphaltic mixture' upon which 
the wearing or surface coat of an asphalt pavement is laid. Now 
replaced by the "binder coat." See Asphalt Pavement. 

Flagging, or Flag Stone. — A thin slab of stone for a crosswalk 
or sidewalk. 

Foundation. — The base (usually of concrete) which supports the 
wearing coat of a pavement ; also cinders, gravel, broken stone, 
or the like, under a cement walk. It is preferable to use the word 
base when speaking of the concrete foundation of a pavement. 

Gage. — The "track" of wagon wheels, measured from center to 
center of the tires ; usually 4 ft. 8 ins. to 5 ft. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 261 

Gallon. — The U. S. gallon contains 231 cu. ins. = 0.13368 cu. ft. 
A cu. ft. contains 7.48 gals. A gallon of water weighs S.34 lbs. ; 
or 1 lb. of water = 0.12 gals. See Barrel. 

Grade. — The rate of per cent, of rise or fall of the longitudinal 
profile of a road. A I'/o giade means a rise of 1 ft. vertical in 100 
ft. horizontal. Grade is also a verb, meaning to excavate or fill to 
grade lines. 

Grader. — A "road machine" having a steel blade for leveling, 
scraping or "drifting" eartli. Tlie word "grader" is also applied to 
an "elevating gictuei," a macliine having a plow that casts the 
earth upon an em^iess belt whicli elevates the earth into a wagon 
traveling aiong&i^e, or aeposits it in an embankment alongside. 

Granolithic Wack. — A cement walk whose surface coat contains 
finely broken stone. 

Great /square. — ^n area of 10,000 sq. ft. (or 100 "squares"), 
sometimes useu as tlie unit of street sweeping. It is preferable to 
retain the oid unit of 1,000 sq. yds. for that purpose, since the sq. 
yd. is the unit of first cost of pavements. 

Grout. — A flowing mortar, either of pure cement and water, or of 
cement, sana ana water. Commonly used for filling the joints of 
brick pavement ; aiso, in some places, for filling joints of Belgian 
block pavement. 

Grub. — To remove roots and stumps. 

Guard Rail. — A fence along an embankment, or a bridge, to pre- 
vent vehicles from running over its edge. 

Halwood Block. — A paving brick made of "mica shale," clay and 
sand ; size, 3x4x9 ins. 

Hand Rail. — ^Same as Guard Rail. 

Hassam Pavement. — A concrete pavement made by grouting 
broken stone with Portland cement mortar and rolling with a steam 
roller. 

Hot Stuff. — The hot mixture of sand, stone dust and asphalt, used 
for making an asphalt pavement. 

Leveler. — A machine somewhat similar to a "road machine," but 
much smaller ; used for leveling earth subgrades, also for leveling 
or spreading the broken stone for a macadam road. 

Macadam. — A pavement made of graded sizes of broken stone 
held together by the mineral colloids of the stone. This "mineral 
glue or jelly," as the colloids may be called, is not visible, and its 
binding action was not recognized until the recent investigations of 
Cushman, Chemist of the Office of Public Roads, U. S. Dept. of 
Agriculture. 

Asphalt macadam is a macadam in which the binder is asphalt. 
Ditto, tar macadam. 

Mastic. — A mixture of bituminous limestone and refined asphalt, 
formerly much used for sidewalks. 

Metal. — The broken stone used for macadam ; often called "road 
metal." Perhaps a better term is ballast. At least it is no more 
ambiguous. 



262 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mile. — 5,280 ft., 1,760 lin. yds. A mile long and 10 ft. wide con- 
tains 5,866% sq. yds. =: 1.21212+ acres. A mile long and 16 ft. 
-wide contains 9,386.7 sq. yds. 

1 mile long x 10 ft. wide x 1 in. deep = 162.96 cu. yds. 

1 mile long x 10 ft. wide x 6 ins. deep = 977.76 cu. yds. 

1 mile long x 16 ft. wide x 1 in. deep = 260.737 cu. yds. 

1 mile long x 16 ft. wide x 4 ins. deep = 1,042.95 cu. yds. 

1 mile long x 16 ft. wide x 6 ins deep = 1,564.42 cu. yds. 
Oiled Road. — An earth road sprinkled with asphaltic oil so as to 
form a crust of mineral matter bound together with asphalt. This 
is the "surface oiled road" originally developed in California, but 
greatly improved in recent years by mechanical mixing of the 
asphaltic oil with the soil to a depth of several inches and com- 
pacting with a rolling tamper. 

Pavement. — A floor-like covering built upon the soil to form a 
firm, unyielding roadway for wheeled vehicles and animals. 

This definition includes any artificial highway covering built upon 
an earth subgrade, from the cheapest "gravel road" to the most 
■expensive granite block pavement. English engineers have been in 
the habit of not calling macadam a pavement, but, as macadam 
performs every function that any pavement performs, there is no 
logical reason for excluding it from the list of pavements. 

Every pavement has three functions to perform : 

(1) Distributing concentrated wheel loads over the earth sub- 
grade. 

(2) Roofing the earth subgrade so as to prevent its saturation 
with water. 

(3) Giving a hard, clean, smooth (but not slippery) surface that 
reduces rolling friction. 

Pavements generally consist of two parts, (1) a "base" which 
performs the function of distributing the wheel load, and (2) a 
wearing coat which sheds rain and provides a durable, smooth 
surface. The wearing coats commonly used for road and street 
pavements may be divided into 6 types : 

Type 1. Granular minerals bound with mineral glue (or mineral 
jelly). 

Type 2. Granular mineral bound with bitumen. 

Type 3. Gi'anular mineral bound with Portland cement. 

Type 4. Stone blocks. 

Type 5. Wooden blocks. 

Type 6. Brick. 

By the term "granular mineral" we mean fragments of mineral 
matter of any size from dust up to fragments as large as hens' 
eggs, or even larger, whether the fragments have been produced 
artificially by crushing or pulverizing, or by the forces of nature. 

By the term "mineral glue" we mean the "colloids" which Cush- 
man has proved to be the cementing element of rock dust, which 
causes macadam to bind, and to which the "sticky" properties of 
clay are attributable. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 263 

Type 1 includes : 

(a) Sand-clay roads. 

(b) Gravel roads. 

(c) Shell roads. 

(d) Macadam. 
Type 2 includes: 

(a) Oiled roads. 

(b) Tar macadam, or tar concrete. 

(c) Asphalt macadam, or asphalt concrete. 

(d) Asphalt pavement, (1) sheet and (2) block. 

(e) Bitulithic pavement. 

(f) Petrolithic pavement. 
Type 3 includes: 

(a) Concrete. 

.(b) Macadam grouted with cement (Hassam pavement). 

Types 4, 5 and 6 are self explanatory. 

Paveis. — Men who lay paving blocks ; also the blocks themselves, 
particularly the small size paving bricks (2i/^x8^x4 ins.), as dis- 
tinguished from the large size called "blocks" (3i/4 x8%x4 ins.). 

Paving Cement. — A mixture of asphalt tar and still wax. 

Petrolithic Pavement. — A pavement made of mineral matter 
(soil, broken stone or the like) mixed with a bituminous binder 
(asphaltic oil or tar) and compacted into a unifoi-mly dense mass 
with a rolling tamper (a roller provided with projecting tampers, 
feet or "spuds"). Where the traffic is light, natural soil is ploughed 
up, pulverized and mixed with asphaltic oil, using a road machine 
and a "cultivator" for mixing. Then it is tamped so as to form a 
pavement 4 to 8 ins. thick. Where the traffic is heavier, the pave- 
ment base is made of the natural soil as just described, but a wear- 
ing coat is provided, consisting of broken stone or gravel of graded 
sizes mixed with the bituminous binder and tamped so as to form 
a layer 2 to 4 ins. thick. This is often called Petrolithic macadam. 

Pitch. — Any tar or asphalt, or mixtures of the same, jnay be 
called pitch. The term is not definite. See Peckham's "Solid 
Bitumens." 

Profile. — The line of intersection of a vertical plane with the 
earth's surface ; ordinarily applied to the longitudinal profile of the 
ground over which a road is to be built. The transverse profile is 
the cross-section. 

Ravel. — When the stones of a macadam road are displaced by 
traffic, it is said to "ravel." 

. Right of Way. — The land owned by the public for highway pur- 
poses. 

Road. — In America the term road is applied only to country high- 
ways. In England it is applied also to city streets. 

Road Machine. — See Grader. 

Road Oil. — A bituminous (generally asphaltic) oil for sprinkling 
on a road to lay the dust. 

Run of Crusher. — See Broken Stone. 

Roller. — ^The ordinary steam roller is a 10 to 15-ton locomotive 



264 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

with broad-tired wheels, A corrugated roller is generally a horse- 
drawn roller having several rolling discs on the same axle, discs 
of large and small diameter alternating so as to produce a "corru- 
gated" appearance. This type of roller is supposed to be more 
effective than a smooth roller for compacting earth embankments. 
A tamping roller, or rolling tamper, is a roller having projecting 
tampers (or feet, or "spuds") which penetrate the loosened earth 
and begin compacting it from the bottom up. 

Sand Cushion. — A thin layer of sand underneath a brick or block 
pavement. See Cushion. 

Scarify. — To pick up or loosen old macadam preparatory to resur- 
facing it. 

Screenings. — The fine product of a rock crusher, usually from dust 
up to Vs to % in. in size. See Broken Stone. 

Shaping. — The process of giving the final finishing to a subgrade, 
including the rolling of the subgrade. 

Shoulder. — See Berm. 

Slope Stake. — A stake set to mark the toe of a "flll" (embank- 
ment) or the top outer edge of a "cut" (excavation). 

Spreader. — See Leveler. A "spreader wagon" is a dump wagon 
designed to discharge its load in a layer of uniform thickness. 

Square. — 100 sq. ft. ; a unit of area occasionally used in meas- 
uring pavements, but one not to be recommended now that the 
sq. yd. (9 sq. ft.) is the common unit. See Great Square. 

Subgrade. — The graded surface of the soil upon which a pave- 
ment rests. 

Tar. — Coal tar is a by-product in the manufacture of coal gas or 
coke. See Barrel. 

Tarvia. — A refined tar especially made for road use. 

Telford. — A pavement consisting of a base, or "bottoming," of 
large stones set on edge, supporting a wearing coat of ordinary 
macadam. See Macadam. 

Than'k You, Ma'am. — A catch-water. See Catch-Water. 

Tom.— Unless otherwise stated, the ton of 2,000 lbs. is used in this 
book. The "gross ton" of 2,240 lbs. is not ordinarily used in 
America as a unit for broken stone, asphalt, or, indeed, for any road 
or street material. 

Tractive Resistance. — The frictional resistance that a load on 
wheels offers. 

Wearing Coat. — 'The surface layer or coat of a pavement. See 
Pavement. 

Wings. — See Berm. 

Wood Block. — See Creosoted Block. 

Vitrified Brick. — See Brick. 

Yard. — When the word yard is used in reference to a pavement, 
the square yard (9 sq. ft.) is usually meant. The lineal yard is 
never used In America as a unit for road or street work. 

Water Table. — A horizontal slab of concrete or stone forming 
the floor of a gutter next to a curb. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 2G5 

Cross- References to Excavation and Rock Crushing.— Since the 
principal items of cost of excavating earth and rocii are often much 
tlie same, whether for a road or for a railway, I have given most of 
the data on excavation in the Earth Excavation and Embankment 
Section and in the Rock Excavation Section of this book. 

The cost of crushing rock for macadam, concrete, or other pur- 
poses, is also given in the Rock Excavation Section. Some examples 
of the cost of grading roads will be found, however, in this Road 
and Street Section. See page 332. 

Units Used in IVleasuring IVlacadam. — Due to the fact that ma- 
cadam is measured in various ways by different engineers, there 
has been much confusion in recording costs. The following are 
some of the different units that engineers have used : 

(1) Cu. yd. of consolidated macadam, measured in finished road. 

(2) Cu. yd. of loose stone, including screenings, measured in 
wagons. 

(3) Cu. yd. of loose stone, measured, on the road, but not in- 
cluding screenings or binder. 

(4) Sq. yd. of consolidated macadam. 

(5) Sq. yd. of loose stone (sometimes excluding screenings). 

(6) Ton (usually 2,000 lbs., but sometimes 2,240 lbs.) of stone 
used to make the macadam, usually including the screenings or 
binder, but not always. 

In view of the great uncertainty as to what may be meant by the 
expression "cubic yard of macadam" or "cubic yard of stone," every 
writer should be careful to tell exactly what he means. 

Of the various units above mentioned, I prefer the first — the cubic 
yard of completed macadam. 

However, the ton of 2,000 lbs. is often a convenient unit for 
measuring the material in a macadam road, and is also likely to be 
used extensively. When the ton is used as the unit, care should 
be taken to give the weight of the loose broKen stone per cubic 
yard, so that conversions can be made. 

Since loose broken stone consolidates about 10% when hauled a 
short distance in a wagon or car, care should be taken to state 
where the measurement of volume was made. 

Macadam roads vary so greatly in thickness, that it is particular- 
ly desirable to use the cubic yard of consolidated macadam as the 
unit, instead of the square yard ; but the thickness of the macadam, 
after compacting, should always be stated, for the per cent of 
screenings, or binder, aries with the thickness, and the amount of 
rolling is less per cubic yard for thick macadam than for thin 
macadam. 

Items of Cost of IVlacadam. — The following are all the items usu- 
ally involved in macadam construction done by a contractor: 

Materials : 

Broken stone (coarse). 
Screenings, or binder. 
Freight on stone and screenings. 
"Water for sprinkling. 



266 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor : 

Loading stone and screenings into wagons. 

Hauling stone and screenings. 

Spreading stone (coarse). 

Spreading screenings, or binder. 

Rolling. 

Sprinkling. 

Foreman. 
General Expense: 

Superintendent, watchman, waterboy, timekeeper, and clerks, 
insurance of workmen, etc. 
Supplies and Plant: 

Coal for roller. 

Oil and waste for roller. 

Interest, depreciation and repairs on roller. 

Interest, depreciation and repairs on wagons. 

Interest, depreciation and repairs on small tools. 
In the foregoing summary, it is assumed that the broken stone 
and screenings are either purchased, or that, if quarried and crushed 
by the contractor himself, the cost of quarrying and crushing is kept 
entirely separate from the cost of building the macadam. The 
reader will And costs of quarrying and crushing in the section on 
Rock Excavation and Quarrying. 

It is also assumed that the grading, including preparing the sub- 
grade, is likewise kept separately, for to do otherwise leads to great 
confusion, as the yardage and cost of grading have no relation wliat- 
soever to the yardage of macadam and its cost. 

While the size of each particular job should be recorded, stating 
length, width and thickness of the compacted macadam, writers 
only confuse their records by giving total costs of each of the above 
items. What a reader desires is U7iit costSj that is the cost of each 
item in terms of the cubic yard of compacted macadam as the unit. 
Then, if the writer has stated the total number of cubic yards in- 
volved, it is a simple matter of multiplication to arrive at total costs, 
should anyone desire totals. 

Quantity of Stone and Binder Required for Macadam. — About ten 
years ago I called attention to an error that had been copied in text 
books from a very early day down to the present, namely the state- 
ment that a layer of loose stone 6 ins. thick can be corhpacted under 
a roller till it is 4 ins. thick. No such compression is possible, but 
it often happens that the stone is driven 1 to 2 ins. into the sub- 
grade. On a hard earth subgrade, it never requires more than 1.3 
cu. yds. of coarse loose stone (exclusive of the screenings or binder) 
to make 1 cu. yd. of rolled or compacted stone, and where the stone 
is very tough the "compression" is even less. 

The percentage of binder or screenings required to fill the voids 
in the rolled stone varies somewhat with the thickness of the 
macadam. To ascertain the thickness of the coat of screenings nec- 
essary to fill the voids in the rolled stone, divide the thickness of the 
rolled stone by i and add % inch. Thus, for a 6-in. macadam road. 



ROADS, FAl'EMENTS, WALKS. 267 

there will be required (6-^4)+i^ = l 5/6 ins. of screenings. This 
is equivalent to 0.3 cu. yd. of screenings per cu. yd. of macadam. 
Therefore, to make a cubic yard of finished 6-in. macadam re- 
quires 1.3 cu. yds. of coarse stone and 0.3 cu. yd. of screenings, or 
1.6 cu. yds. measured in the wagons to make 1 cu. yd. of compacted 
macadam. Stated differently: 

7.8 ins. of loose stone (% to 2% -in.) will roll to 6 ins. 

1.8 ins. of screenings (less than %-in) will fill voids. 

9.6 ins. of loose stone and screenings will make 6 ins. of macadam. 

If the stone weighs 2,400 lbs. per cu. yd., we need 1.56 short tons 
of coarse stone and 0.36 short ton of screenings, a total of 1.92 tons 
required to make 1 cu. yd. of finished macadam. If the stone is a 
heavy trap rock, weighing 2,700 lbs. per cu. yd., we need 1.75 short 
tons of coarse stone and 0.41 short ton of screenings, a total of 2.16 
tons per cu. yd. of finished macadam. This estimate, based upon 
my own records, checks very well with records published by the 
Massachusetts Highway Commission. 

On 2.6 miles of 6-in. New York State macadam, 1,600 cu. yds. 
of screenings were required to bind 4,000 cu. yds. of macadam rolled 
in place. This is equivalent to 0.4 cu. yd. of screenings per cu. yd. 
of macadam, or a depth of 2.4 ins. of loose screenings to bind the 
6 ins. of rolled macadam. This large amount was due to the specifi- 
cation requirement that a "wearing coat" of screenings be left on 
the road. 

The contractor is cautioned against careless examination of road 
specifications, for many engineers require the contractor to grade the 
subgrade exactly to grade and then put on enough stone to bring 
the finished macadam up to the established road grade. This causes 
the contractor to lose all stone that is driven into the subgrade by 
the roller, which in sand, or in soft wet clay, may amount to 2 ins. 
or more of loose stone. 

Some specifications also foolishly require a %-in. "wearing coat" 
of screenings to be left on the finished road, and this also amounts 
to a good many cubic yards of wasted material in a mile. 

The roadmaker will do well to carry in mind the following data: 
A bed 1 in. thickj 10 ft. wide and a mile long, contains 163 cu. yds. 
A bed 6 ins. thick, 16 ft. wide and a mile long, contains 1,564 cu. yds. 

Few rocks are soft enough to yield a sufficiently large percentage 
of screenings to bind the macadam ; in which case screenings must 
be imported, unless the specifications permit the use of loam, sand, 
or clay. 

Macadam roads are usually made 4 to 6 ins. thick after rolling, 
and 12 to 16 ft. wide. I have often urged the more common use of 
single track macadam roads, 8 ft. wide, with turnouts (16 ft. wide) 
located every few hundred feet apart. 

Cost of Loading Stone From Cars Into Wagons. — ^A good work- 
man, shoveling stone from a flat car into a wagon, will load 20 cu. 
yds. (loose measure) per 10-hr. day, giving a cost of 7% cts. per 
cu. yd. when wages are $1.50. 



268 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Where the amount to be handled warrants the use of a derrick, 
and clamshell bucket, a much lower cost can be attained. Consult 
the section on Rock Excavation for details of cost of loading broken 
stone. (See page 197, etc.) 

Cost of Loading Stone From Bins Into Wagons. — If the broken 
stone is to be hauled direct from the crusher, bins should always be 
erected to receive the broken stone. The bottom of the bin should 
have a slope of not less than 1 to 1, and should be lined with sheet 
iron. If the slope is flat, say 1% to 1, a wagon cannot be loaded 
in much less than 7 mins., and then a potato-hook or hoe must be 
used to keep the stone moving. But, with a 1 to 1 slope, the stone 
runs freely, and a wagon can be loaded with 1% cu. yds. in 2 mins. 
or less. 

Usually one man operates the bin gates and assists the driver 
in trimming the load on the wagon. Hence the unit cost of loading 
from bins is the wages of the bin man divided by the total number 
of cubic yards crushed daily. If his wages are $1.50 and the crusher 
output is 65 cu. yds., the cost of loading from the bins is 2.3 cts. 
per cu. yd. 

Cost of Hauling Stone in Wagons. — When wagons are loaded from 
cars, it is not economic to have more than 4 men shoveling into a 
wagon. These men will load a cubic yard of broken stone in about 
6 or 7 mins., if working briskly. If a team (with driver) receives 
$3.50 per 10-hr. day, each minute of team time costs 0.6 ct. ; hence 
the lost team time while loading amounts to about 4 cts. per cu. yd. 
If the loading is done from bins, the lost team time is about 1% 
min. per cu. yd., or less than 1 ct. per cu. yd. 

The lost team time at the dump is 5 mins. for a load of 1% cu. yds., 
or more than 3 mins. per cu. yd., if slat-bottom dump wagons are 
used, costing nearly 2 cts. per cu. yd. for team time lost dumping. 
In dumping from a slat-bottom wagon, dump the load in 3 small 
piles, to reduce the labor of spreading. 

Up-to-date contractors are now using bottom dump wagons ex- 
tensively on roadwork. In dumping stone from such a wagon, fasten 
a chain around the body of the wagon so that the bottom doors can 
open only 6 ins. when the load is dumped, and keep the team 
traveling while dumping, so as to spread the load as much as pos- 
sible. When such wagons are used, there is practically no lost team 
time dumping. 

Special "spreader wagons" are frequently used, and, in that case 
also, therc' is practically no lost team time dumping the load. 

It will t'C seen that the lost team constitutes a fixed cost per cu. 
yd., which may range from 1 ct. per cu. yd., where loading is done 
from bins and unloading from bottom dump wagons, to 7 cts. per 
cu. yd., where wagons are loaded from cars and where slat bottom 
wagons are used. For subsequent illustration, we shall assume 
4 cts. per cu. yd. for lost team time, wages of team being $3.50 
per 10-hr. day. 

As 1% cu. yds., or 1.9 tons, is a common load of broken stone 
hauled over earth loads, and as a common speed is 2% miles per hr.. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 269 

or 220 ft. per min., the cost of hauling is 28 cts. per load per mile, 
or 19 cts. per cu. yd. per mile, measured one way from the point 
of loading to the point of dumping (wagon returning empty), team 
wages IieJng $;:.r.O per 10-hr. day. To this must be added the fixed 
cost of lost team time, above given at 1 to 7 cts. per cu. yd. 

If the earth roads are level and in good condition, a load of 2 
cu. yds. may be hauled. 

If the haul is over a good macadam road, 3 cu. yds., or 3.7 tons 
may be hauled, but it often happens that specifications foolishly pro- 
hibit any hauling over macadam before the rolling has been com- 
pleted, in which case the contractor must usually begin construc- 
tion at a point far from his stone supply and build the road back 
toward the stone supply, thus hauling over earth the entire distance, 
and doubling the cost of hauling. 

In estimating the average length of haul on roadwork, bear in 
mind that the haul is never constant, and that at times the work 
will be too great for 5 teams, for example, but not enough to keep 
6 teams fully busy. After estimating the cost by the above rules, 
for the actual average haul, I consider it fair to add about 1.5% to 
cover the added cost due to variable haul, and the added cost of 
team time due to delays at the crusher. 

For discussion of the general subject of hauling, including trac- 
tion engine hauling, see the last section of this book. 

Cost of Spreading Stone By Hand. — When the stone is dumped 
in comparatively small piles on the subgrade, one man will spread 25 
cu. yds. of the coarse broken stone in 10 hrs., at a cost of 6 cts. per 
cu. yd. when wages are ?1.50. This is my own record (12 years ago) 
for several thousand yards of stone delivered in slat-bottom wagons. 
Subsequently I developed the method of machine spi-eading, described 
hereafter, which greatly reduced the cost. 

The following records confirm my own, all being recorded in re- 
cent issues (1907 to 1909) of Engineering-Contracting. 

Mr. Curtis Hill states that each man averaged 28 cu. yds. per 
day, in Missouri. 

Mr. A. N. Johnson states that spreading 44,000 cu. yds. cost 8 cts. 
per cu. yd. He gives the wages on about half the jobs, indicating 
an average of about $2.00 a day for the whole work, which would 
mean that 25 cu. yds. were spread per man per day. 

Mr. W. W. Crosby gives records for negro labor in Maryland, 
showing an average of 22 cu. yds. per man per day ; wages were 
Jl.OO for 10 hrs. 

The foregoing show what may be accomplished with energetic 
workmen, but there are numerous instances where the cost of spread- 
ing has been three times as high. For example, Mr. John McNeal 
states that the average cost was 2^^ cts. per sq. yd. for spreading 
stone by city day labor on 14,000 sq. yds., in Easton, Pa., the mac- 
adam being 6 ins. thick after rolling. This is equivalent to 1 5 cts, 
per cu. yd. of consolidated macadam, or 24 cts. per cu. yd. of loose 
stone; and, as wages were $2.00 per 10-hr., day, each man spread 
only a little more than 8 cu. yds. of loose stone per day. 



270 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



However, a high cost of spreading is not of itself evidence ot 
inefficiency. It frequently happens that engineers foolishly require 
all stone to be dumped upon platforms alongside the road, whence 
it is shoveled onto the road. In such cases, a man will not shovel 
and spread more than about 12 cu. yds. per day. 

According to the common method of building a macadam road, the 
coarse stone is dumped in piles upon the subgrade, and spread with 
shovels and rakes. The screenings, however, are dumped in piles on 
the earth shoulders, and not on the subgrade. Then they are 
shoveled onto the coarser stone after it has been spread and well 
packed by rolling. This shoveling and spreading of the screenings 
costs much more per cubic yard of screenings than it costs to spread 
the coarse stone. A man will spread about 10 cu. yds. of screen- 
ings per 10-hr. day, making the cost 15 cts. per cu. yd. when wages 
are ?1.5 0. Screenings cannot be spread with a leveler. 

Cost of Spreading Stone With a Leveler or Grader. — Twelve years 
ago I hit upon the idea of using a grader for spreading broken 
stone. The "grader," or "leveler," as it has been recently called, 
was of the type shown in Fig. 1, excepting that the rooters or teeth 




Fig. 1. Leveler for Spreading Stone. 




Fig. 2. Lereler for Spreading Stone. 



were removed, as they are useful only in loosening hard earth on a 
subgrade that is being leveled. Pig. 2 shows another "leveler." 

A "leveler" is a light machine having a steel blade about 5 ft. long, 
mounted in a frame, and capable of being raised or lowered. One 
team pulls the machine, and a man operates it, thus making the cost 
of operation $5.00 per 10-hr. day when team and driver are $3.50 and 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 271 

operator $1.50. At these wages it costs only 1 ct. per cu. yd. to 
spread the coarse broken stone, for 50 cu. yds. can readily be spread 
per hour from small piles dumped on the subgrade. However, the 
spreading thus done by the "leveler" is not as true to surface as is 
necessary before rolling, so the layer of stone must be gone over 
by a man using a potato-hook for a rake. This final hand leveling 
adds another 1 ct. per cu. yd., making the total cost 2 cts. per cu. yd. 
for spreading the coarse stone. The screenings cannot be spread 
satisfactorily with the machine, but they constitute only a small 
percentage of the macadam. 

I have known contractors who have attempted to improve on this 
method by using a large "road machine," but never with as satis- 
factory results. The four to six horses on a road machine add un- 
necessarily to the cost for this light work of spreading stone. More-, 
over, a road machine is not turned around so easily and quickly, and 
the turning around is apt to tear up the subgrade. 

Due to the speed at which a leveler works, it is unnecessary to 
have a team constantly hitched to it. I prefer to unhitch a team 
from the sprinkler wagon at intervals during the day, for a few 
minutes at a time, and hitch it to the leveler. 

For the best results at the lowest cost, dump the broken stone on 
the subgrade in as small piles as possible. Never dump the stone 
on the earth shoulders at the side of the road. 

There are now several firms who make these "levelers," among 
them being: C. N. Carpenter Supply Co., Canton, Ohio; The Baker 
Mfg. Co., 725 Fisher Bldg., Chicago ; The Ohio Road Mchy. Co., 
Oberlin, Ohio. 

Cost of Rolling. — Based upon my own records of cost of main- 
taining and operating steam rollers (10-ton), which now extend over 
a period of 13 years, the following is the cost per day actually 
worked : 

Per day. 

Engineman $3.50 

0.35 ton (700 lbs.) coal at $4 delivered 1.40 

Oil, etc 0.25 

800 gals. (3% tons) water pumped and hauled 1 mile 1.00 

Interest, 6% of $2,500 h- 100 days 1.50 

Current repairs, and renewals, 5% of $2,500 -h 100 days 1.25 

Depreciation (life 25 yrs. ; sinking fund, 3% compound), 

2.75% of $2,500^ 100 days 0.70 

Total $9.60 

It will be noted that I have assumed only 100 days per annum 
actually worked by a I'oller. In the northern half of America the 
road building season is not long enough to permit working much 
more than this ; but it will sometimes happen that work is started 
early enough to enable at least 120 days to be worked, after de- 
ducting time lost on account of rains, etc. 

Further data on depreciation and repairs of rollers will be found 
in subsequent pages. 

Having established an approximate cost of $10 per day worked, 



272 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

for operating and maintaining a roller, the next step is to determine 
the fair average yardage of macadam compacted per day. A roller 
can be counted upon to compact all the stone crushed by a 9xl6-in. 
jaw crusher, where the crusher is working on hard quarry stone and 
averaging about 65 cu. yds. of loose broken stone and screenings 
per 10 hr. day. These 65 cu. yds. of loose stone will make 40 cu. 
yds. of compacted macadam, or 240 sq. yds. of macadam 6 ins. 
thick. Hence the cost of rolling is about 15 cts. per cu. yd. of loose 
stone (including screenings), or 25 cts. per cu. yd. of compacted 
macadam, or 4% cts. per sq. j'-d. of compacted macadam 6 ins. thick. 
This cost includes the ordinary steam rolling given to the subgrade 
before spreading the broken stone. 

If the subgrade is very compact, or if new macadam is being laid 
on old macadam, a roller is capable of consolidating 50% more 
than the above given amount. On the ordinary soil, even after 
rolling it with a corrugated roller or a steam roller, the broken 
stone does not come to rest quickly under rolling, but waves under 
the roller for a long time. If the subgrade has been tamped with a 
rolling tamper, however, the average soil is so compacted that the 
broken stone is not driven into it, and the amount of steam rolling 
of the macadam is very greatly reduced. 

One of my records shows that in 72 working days of 8 hrs. each, 
a 10-ton roller compacted 4,000 cu. yds. (24,000 sq. yds.) of 6-in. 
macadam, the subgrade being a compact gravelly soil. This is 
equivalent to 55 cu. yds. of compact macadam, or 330 sq. yds., per 
8 hr. day, or nearly 7 cu. yds. or 42 sq. yds. per hr. This is a rapid 
rate, but is still far below the rate that I secured in resurfacing 
an old macadam that had been thoroughly broken up with picks, 
namely, 300 sq. yds. per hr., details of which are given on page 288. 

In rolling '6-in. macadam at Hudson, N. Y., Mr. H. K. Bishop 
found that 60 cu. yds. of compacted macadam, or 360 sq. yds., was 
the average 8-hr. day's work of a 10-ton roller, which is equivalent 
to 45 sq. yds. per hr. 

Mr. P. G. Cudworth states that in resurfacing an old macadam, 
3.9 ins. of loose trap rock and 2.1 ins. of screenings were spread 
and rolled, the 10-ton roller averaging 472 sq. yds. per 10 hr. day. 

Mr. W. C. Foster states that, in resurfacing an old macadam, a 
12-ton roller averaged 314 sq. yds. of 6-in. macadam per 10 hr. day. 

The three following records are taken from recent issues of 
Engineering-Contracting. 

Mr. Curtis Hill states that in building a new 7-in. macadam road 
in Missouri, 65 cu. yds. of loose stone (the full output of the 
crusher) were rolled per day. 

Mr. John McNeal states that in building new 6-in. macadam 
streets at Easton, Pa., a 12 -ton roller averaged 200 sq. yds. per 
day, although on one street the average was 270 sq. yds. per day. 
The work was done by day labor, which accounts for the low aver- 
age. 

Mr. W. W. Crosby states that in building a new 6-in. macadam 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 273 

road in Maryland, 300 sq. yds. were rolled per day of 10 hrs., less 
than 0.2 ton of coal being used by the roller. 

If macadam is to be of thickness greater than 6 ins. (measured 
after rolling), it is usually built in two layers. It is evident that 
the top layer will require less rolling than the lower layer. 

Cost of Sprinkling. — The amount of water used per cubic yard of 
macadam is exceedingly variable, depending largely upon the near- 
ness of the water supply and the whim of the inspector. If the haul 
for the water is short, it is usually economy to use an abundance of 
water, for water washes the screenings into the voids of the coarse 
stone ("puddles"), and reduces the amount of rolling necessary to 
jar the screenings into the voids. I have used as low as 30 gals. 
per cu. yd. of compacted 6-in. macadam, which is equivalent to 5 
gals, per sq. yd. ; and I have used as high as 120 gals, per cu. yd., 
or 20 gals per sq. yd. of 6-in. macadam. It is usually safe to esti- 
mate on not more than 10 gals, per sq. yd. of 6-in. macadam, or 60 
gals, per cu. yd. of compacted macadam. 

The following records are taken from recent issues of Engineering- 
Contracting. 

Mr. A. L. "Valentine states that in building a 6-in. macadam road 
near Seattle, 9.3 gals, were used per sq. yd. Mr. W. W. Crosby states 
that 20 gals, per sq. yd. were used on a 6-in. macadam road in 
Maryland. 

Mr. John McNeal states that, in one case, 16.8 gals, were used 
per sq. yd. of 6-in. macadam, and that, in another case, 16 gals, 
were used per sq. yd. of 10-in. macadam street. 

In road building it is usually necessary to pump the water by 
hand, or with a small gasolene pump, from a creek, river or well. 
In 10 hrs. one man, with a hand pump, will raise 7,500 gals, of 
water to a height of 16 ft. into a tank from which it can be drawn 
off into the sprinkling wagon. Hence by working 3 hrs. a day, a 
man can furnish* 2,400 gals, of water for 240 sq. yds. of 6-in. mac- 
adam. If wages are 15 cts. per hr., the cost of pumping to a height 
of 16 ft. is 1-50 ct. per gallon, or 1-5 ct. (one-fifth cent) per sq. 
yd. of 6-in. pavement where 10 gals, are used per sq. yd., or a trifle 
more than 1 ct. per cu. yd. of macadam. 

On ordinary roads, unless there is a very steep pull from the creek 
or river bed, a sprinkling wagon holding 450 gals, (or 1.9 tons) of 
water can readily be hauled by a team. The team time required to 
load the sprinkler from a tank and discharge its contents on the 
road, is ordinarily about 20 mins., costing 12 cts. for the 450 gals, 
when team is $3.50 per 10-hr. day. With a traveling speed of 2% 
miles per hr., the cost of hauling is 28 cts. per tank (450 gals.) per 
mile of haul from water supply to point of delivery. 

Hence, to a fixed cost of 12 cts. per tank (for team item loading 
and discharging the water), add 28 cts. per tank per mile of haul. 

With a haul of 1 mile the cost is, therefore, 40 cts. per tank of 
450 gals., or less than 1-10 ct. (one-tenth cent) per gallon. If 10 
gals, are used per sq. yd. of 6-in. inacadam, the cost of hauling 



274 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

water the first mile is, therefore, 1 ct. per sq. yd., or 6 ots. per cu. 
yd. of compacted macadam ; and each subsequent mile costs 4 cts. 
per cu. yd. of macadam. 

It generally happens, however, that when the haul is a mile, or 
less, a sprinkling wagon is kept going continuously, regardless of 
the amount of water used. In that case, if wages of team and 
driver are $3.50 per 10-hr. day, and interest, depreciation and re- 
pairs of the sprinkling wagon are $0.50 per day, the daily cost of 
?4.00 must be divided by the amount of macadam compacted by 
the roller, or 40 cu. yds., making a cost of 10 cts. per cu. yd., or 1.7 
cts. per sq. yd. of 6-in. macadam, regardless of how short the haul 
is. 

In California, where the hauls for water are apt to be long, it is 
not unusual to see tank wagons holding 900 gals, or more, hauled 
by six horses. See page 322. 

Summary of Cost of Macadam. — Based upon the foregoing rates 
of wages, etc., the following summary, Table I, is given : 

Table I. — Cost of Macadam. 

Per 
Per ton 

Per sq. yd. (2,000 
Item. cu. yd. (6-in.). lbs.) 

1 1.3 cu. yds. (1.62 tons) coarse stone f. 

o. b. cars at $0.75 $0,975 $0,163 $0,488 

2 0.3 cu. yas. (0.38 tons) screenings, f. o. 

b. cars at $0.76 0.225 0.037 0.112 

3 2 tons (1.6 cu. yds.) freight at $0.50 1.000 0.167 0.500 

4 1.6 cu. yds. loaded into wagons at $0.08.. 0.108 0.018 0.054 

5 1.6 cu. yds. lost team time loading at $0.04 0.064 0.011 0.032 

6 1.6 cu. yds. hauled (1 mile) at $0.20 0.320 0.053 0.160 

7 1.3 cu. yds. spread by hand at $0.06 0.078 0.013 0.039 

8 0.3 cu. yds. spread by hand at $0.15 0.045 0.008 0.022 

9 Rolling, $10-h40 cu. yds. macadam 0.250 0.042 0.125 

10 Sprinkling, $4 -=- 40 cu. yds. macadam 0.100 0.017 0.050 

11 Foreman, Vg of $4.00 -^ 40 cu. yds. ma- 

cadam 0.050 0.008 0.025 

12 Night watchman ($1.50), water boy 

($0.75), and Yn of timekeeper (1/2 of 

$2.50); $3.50 -^ 4G cu. yds 0.088 0.015 0.044 

13 General supervision, office expense, in- 

surance, etc., at 8% of items 4 to 12 

inclusive 0.112 0.017 0.056 

Grand total $3,415 $0,569 $1,707 

The cost per cu. yd. relates to a cubic yard of macadam packed in 
place, and not per cu. yd. of loose stone. 

The cost per sq. yd. is for macadam 6 ins. thick after rolling, and 
is, therefore, exactly one-sixth of the cost per cu. yd. 

The cost per ton is for a ton of 2,000 lbs. of stone having a speci- 
fic gravity of 2.7, weighing 4,546 lbs. per cu. yd. solid (or 2,500 lbs. 
per cu. yd. loose broken stone having 45% voids) and assuming that 
the completed macadam weighs 4,000 lbs. (2 tons) per cu. yd. of 
completed macadam, which is equivalent to a macadam having only 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 275 

a little more than 10% voids after rolling and binding. Codrington 
states, in the Encyclopedia Brittanioa, that a piece of old macadam 
contained only 5% voids, as determined by careful weighing. 

In considering each item, refer to the previous discussion. 

If the stone is quarried near the road, item 3 (freight) will not 
exist; and item 4 (loading wagons) will be reduced to 1 ct. per cu. 
yd. of macadam; also item 5 (lost team time) will be reduced. 

If the haul is 2 miles, item 6 will be exactly doubled ; on the other 
hand, if the hauling can be done over a macadam road, this cost 
per mile can be cut in two, and it can be still further reduced if a 
traction engine is used. 

If the coarse stone is spread with a "leveler," as it always should 
be, item 7 (spreading) will be exactly one-third as much as given; 
but item 8 will not be affected. 

If the subgrade is naturally hard, or has been compacted with a 
rolling tamper having projected teeth or tampers, item 9 (rolling) 
may be reduced 30% or more. 

If the haul of water for sprinkling is less than a mile, or if the 
sprinkler is not kept constantly busy, item 10 can be materially 
reduced. 

Item 11 (foreman) is given on the basis of half the foreman's 
time being charged to the macadam, the other half being charged 
to grading ; and the same being true of the timekeeper's time in 
item 12. 

Item 13 (general supervision, etc.) is rated at 8% of all costs, 
except the cost of broken stone delivered on cars, for it is here as- 
sumed that the stone is purchased. 

If wages of laborers and teams are greater than $1.50 and $3.50 
per 10-hr. day, the above costs should be increased in direct ratio 
the increased wage. 

Estimating the Cost of Macadam, New York State.* — For esti- 
mating a fair bidding price on the macadam used in New York 
State road construction, Mr. Henry A. Van Alstyne, has prepared 
the following data : 

The actual cost of the crushed stone in bins is estimated at 85 
cts. per cu. yd., measured loose. The cost of hauling this stone from 
the bins to the road is estimated at 35 cts. per cu. yd. (loose meas- 
use) per mile of haul. The cost of spreading, rolling and sprinkling 
the brolien stone is estimated at 30 cts. per cu. yd. of loose measure. 

It is estimated that it takes 1% cu. yd. of stone to make 1 cu. 
yd. of stone compacted under the roller ; and that it takes % cu. 
yd. of screenings to bind this stone. Hence in estimating the cost 
of a cubic yard of loose broken stone we have : 

Per cu. yd. 

Crushed stone in bins $0.85 

Hauling, 1% miles at $0.35 0.60 

Spreading, rolling, etc 0.30 

Total (loose measure) $1.75 

* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 1, 1906. 



276 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Based upon this method we have the following table of the cost 
of broken stone or screenings placed in the road : 

,^ , ., Cost per cu. yd. 

Haul, miles. (loose). 

1% ?1.75 

2% 2.05 

2% 2.20 

L, 2.30 

3% 2.40 

3% 2.50 

3% 2.60 

!i/ 2.70 

4% 2.80 

4% 2.90 

4% 3.00 

5 • 3.10 

Then the cost of a cubic yard of solid macadam is estimated as 
follows, assuming a haul of 1 % miles : 

Per cu. yd. 

macadam. 

1.33 cu. yds. broken stone at $1.75 $2.33 

0.5 cu. yds. screenings at $1.75 0.88 

Total S3. 21 

Add 20 % for profit 0.64 

Contract price $3.85 

This is practically $3.90, and it is so entered in the following 
table : 

Contract Price for Macadam with Screenings Binder. 

Price per sq. yd. 
per inch of 

Haul, Price per thickness, 

miles. cu. yd. Cts. 

1% $3.90 10.8 

2 4.10 11.4 
2% 4.30 12.0 
2ya 4.50 12.5 
2% 4.70 13.1 

3 4.90 13.6 
3% 5.10 14.1 
3% 5.25 14.6 
3% 5.45 * . 15.1 

4 5.65 15.7 
4% 5.85 16.2 
45/2 6.05 . 16.8 
4% 6.25 17.3 

5 6.45 17.9 

The above is based upon the use of stone screenings for the bind- 
er, as required for the middle and top course of macadam, which 
are usually 3 ins. thick (2 ins. middle course and 1 in. top course). 
But for the bottom course, which is usually 3 ins. thick, the specifi- 
cations permit the use of sand as a binder instead of screenings. 
This sand is estimated at $1 per cu. yd., loose measure, including 
loading, hauling, spreading, profit, etc., or 83 cts. per cu. yd. without 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 277 

the 20% profit. Hence, for a haul of 1% miles, we have the fol- 
lowing for the bottom course : 

Per cu. yd. 

macadam. 

1.33 cu. yds. broken stone at $1-75 ?2.33 

0.5 cu. yds. sand filler at $0.83 0.42 

Total $2.75 

Add 20% profit 0.55 

Contract price $3.30 

Based upon this method of calculation we have the following as 
the cost of the bottom course for different lengths of haul : 
Contract Price for Macadam With Sand Binder. 

Price per sq. yd. 
per inch of 
Haul, Price per thickness. 

Miles. cu. yd. Cts. 

1% $3.35 9.3 

2 3.50 9.7 
2^ 3.65 10.1 
2y2 3.80 10.5 
2% 3.95 10.9 

3 4.10 11.4 
314 4.20 11.6 
3^ 4.35 12.0 
3% 4.50 12.5 

4 4.65 12.9 
4^ 4.80 13.3 
43^ 4.95 - 13.8 
4% 5.05 14.0 

5 5.20 14.4 

The foregoing data are based upon the assumption that loose 
broken stone costs 85 cts. per cu. yd. in the crusher bins. If the 
stone is delivered on cars the cost often is higher, and to this cost 
must also be added 15 cts. per cu. yd. of loose stone for shoveling 
the stone from the cars into wagons. 

The rates of wages paid by contractors in New York State road- 
work are usually $1.50 per 8-hour day for common laborers, and $4 
to $4.50 per day for team and driver. 

Prices Allowed for Extra Work on New York State Roads.* — A 

good many of our readers will be interested in two features of the 
latest specifications for macadam and gravel roads built by the 
State of New York. One feature is the method adopted to prevent 
unbalancing of bids, and the other feature is the specifying of unit 
prices which the contractor must accept for extra work. 

The State Engineer's estimate of the quantities of every kind of 
work specified is given in detail, but the contractor is required to 
bid a lump sum for the road complete. This, of course, prevents 
unbalancing of bids. Then, to avoid disputes or law suits in case 
any or all of the quantities are increased or diminished the follow- 
ing clause is inserted in the contract : 

"And in consideration of the acceptance of the foregoing pro- 
posal we hereby agree to accept the following named unit prices 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 1, 1906. 



278 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

(Table II) for any increase or deduction which may be made by 
the State Engineer for changes made under the provisions of the 
specifications for said improvement." 

It should be added that for ordinary conditions the State Engineer 
estimates a minimum price of macadam with a sand binder (bot- 
tom course) at $3.25 per cu. yd. ; and for the other courses (mid- 
dle and top), $3.90 per cu. yd. including binder. 

Very complete specifications for this road work have been pre- 
pared by Henry A. Van Alstyne, State Engineer, Albany, N. Y. 
Engineers engaged in road construction will find much valuable in- 
formation embodied in these specifications. 

Macadam Road Prices in IVlassachusetts.* — Some interesting data 
in the construction of macadam roads in Massachusetts are given 
in a recent bulletin prepared by Austin B. Fletcher, secretary Massa- 
chusetts Highway Commission, and issued by the U. S. Office of Pub- 
lic Roads. According to this the average costs (by contract) to the 
state of Massachusetts of broken stone in place on state highways 
constructed in 1906 were as follows: For a road made of imported 
stone (trap rock), 6 in. deep at center and 4 in. deep at sides, the 
cost per ton in place was $1,956 ; the cost per square yard in place 
was $0.6245 and the cost per mile was $5,496. One ton of stone 
made 3.13 sq. yds. of macadam. For a road made of imported stone 
(trap rock) 4 ins. deep throughout, the cost per ton in place was 
$2,025 ; the cost per square yard in place was $0.5393 and the cost 
per mile was $4,746. One ton of stone made 3.76 sq. yds. of mac- 
adam. For a road made of local stone 6 ins. deep at center and 4 
ins. deep at sides, the cost per ton in place was $1,396 ; the cost per 
square yard in place was $0.4201 and the cost per mile was $3,696. 
One ton of stone made 3.32 sq. yds. of macadam. For a road made 
of local stone 4 ins. deep throughout, the cost per ton in place was 
$1,583 ; the cost per square yard in place was $0.3931 and the cost 
per mile was $3,459. One ton of broken stone made 4.03 sq. yds. of 
macadam. The above costs per mile are equated on the basis of a 
road 15 ft. wide. The average contract prices for the several con- 
struction items exclusive of macadam were as follows : 

Excavation per cu. yd $0,435 

Borrow per cu. yd 0.562 

Ledge excavation per cu. yd 1.78 

Cement concrete masonry, cu. yd 8.85 

Shaping road for broken stone per sq. yd 0.028 

Vitrified 18-in. clay pipe, in place, per lin. ft 1.57 

Vitrified 12-in. clay pipe, in place, per lln. ft 0.766 

Vitrified 10-in. clay pipe, in place, per lin. ft 0.643 

Vitrified 8-in. clay pipe, in place, per lin. ft 0.570 

Iron water pipe, 12 in., in place, per lin. ft 2.20 

Iron water pipe, 18 in., in place, per lin. ft 3.75 

Stone filling for V drains, in place, per cu. yd... 0.827 

Guard rail, in place, per lin. ft 0.277 

Catch basins, in place (including catch basin 

frames and grates), each 35.74 

Setting stone bounds 1.85 

The price for cement concrete masonry does not include the ce- 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 16, 1907. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 279 



Table II. — Prices Foe Road Work. 

The following are unit prices for the items named, in place, com- 
plete : 
Excavation of earth, or embankment rolled in place, per cu. yd.? 0.40 

Excavation of rock, per cu. yd 1.26 

Second-class Portland cement concrete, in place complete 

(1: 21/2 : 5), per cu. yd 8.00 

Third-class Portland cement concrete, or third-class masonry, 

in Portland cement mortar, in place complete (1 : 3 : 6 ) , per 

cu. yd 6.00 

Third-class masonry laid dry, in place complete (rubble), per 

cu. yd 3.50 

Pointing old masonry, per sq. yd 0.20 

Rip-rap, in place complete, per cu. yd 1.50 

Telford base, in place complete (6-in. to 8-in. thick), per sq. 

yd 0.75 

Stone paving, in place complete (8-in. thick), per sq. yd.... 0.75 

Cobble gutters, in place complete, per sq. yd 0.50 

6-in. stone flagging, in place complete (for covering box cul- 
verts), per sq. ft 0.30 

Expanded metal, 6-in. mesh (or 3 — 16-in.) gauge, in place 

complete, per sq. ft 0.10 

Guard rail, in place complete (posts 7-ft. long, 8 e to e), per 

lin. ft 0.20 

Rustic guard rail, in place complete, per lin. ft. .^ 0.15 

Bridge rail, in place complete, per lin. ft '..... 0.50 

1%-in. pipe rail, in place complete (for masonry bridges), per 

lin. ft 1.00 

12-in. cast iron pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 2.50 

18-in. cast iron pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 3.50 

6-in. vitrified pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 0.30 

12-in. vitrified pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 0.60 

18-in. vitrified pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 1.10 

24-in. vitrified pipe, laid in place complete, per lin ft 2.00 

30-in. vitrified pipe, laid in place complete, per lin. ft 3.75 

Relaying old pipe found in road, per lin. ft 0.15 

Steel beams, channels and structural shapes, spikes and nails 

and cast iron, per lb 0.05 

Oak timber and plank, in place complete, per 1,000 ft. B. M. . . 40.00 
Hemlock timber and plank, in place complete, per 1,000 ft. 

B. M 30.00 

Yellow pine timber and plank, in place complete, per 1,000 ft. 

B. M 40.00 

Guide boards, each 6.00 

Road signs, each 4.00 

Prices for the Following Items to Be Inserted by Bidder. 

Broken stone macadam of the kind prescribed in these specifi- 
cations, for bottom course, including filler, and rolled in 
place complete, per cu. yd 

Broken stone macadam of the kind prescribed in these specifi- 
cations, for middle course, including binder, and rolled in 
place complete, per cu. yd 

Broken stone macadam of the kind prescribed in these specifi- 
cations, for top course, including binder, and. rolled in 
place complete, per cu. yd 

%-in. broken stone of the kind prescribed in these specifica- 
tions, in piles, loose measurement, per cu. yd 

Gravel or shale, rolled in place, per cu. yd 



280 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ment or the steel reinforcement, which may be estimated at about 
?3 additional. The average wages per 9-hour day for part of 1906 
and for an 8-hour day for the remainder of the year were as fol- 
lows: 

Ordinary labor $1.75 to $2.00 

Crusher and roller engineers 3.00 to 3.50 

Foreman 3.00 to 5.00 

1-horse wagon and driver 3.00 to 4.00 

2-horse wagon and driver 4.50 to 5.50 

Contract Prices for Road Work in IVI ass achu setts.* — The following 
averages of contract prices on state road work during 1907 have 
been taken from the 15 th annual report of the Massachusetts High- 
way Commission. The prices are the averages for 64 contracts : 

Excavation, all kinds, per cu. yd 50.52 

Borrow, per cu. yd 0.64 

Ledge rock excavation, per cu. yd 1.95 

Concrete masonry, per cu. yd 9.84 

Shaping, per sq. yd 0.03 

Broken stone, local, per ton, in place 1.64 

Broken stone, traprock, per ton, in place 2.20 

Pipe culverts, per lin. ft. : 

12-in. vitrified clay, in place 0.80 

18-in. vitrified clay, in place 1.66 

12-in iron, in place 2.34 

18-in. iron, in place 3.57 

Fencing, per lin. ft 0.30 

Ledge excavation covers only such ledge rock as requires blast- 
ing for its removal, and boulders of % cu. yd. or more in volume. 
Concrete masonry is composed of 1 part Portland cement, 2 parts 
sand and 5 parts broken stone or gravel. For the pipe culverts noth- 
ing but selected fine material, free from large stone, shall be placed 
under and about the pipe, and all material under and about the pipe 
shall be tamped in place by a thin tamping bar. Fencing consists of 
chestnut or cedar posts not less than 6 ins. in diameter spaced 8 ft. 
apart and set 3 ft. in the ground and 3% ft. above. The top rail is 
4 ins. square and the side rail of 2x6-in. spruce. 

"Wages in Massachusetts in 1907, per 8-hour day, were about as 
follows: Common labor, $1.75 to $2.25; team with driver, $4.50 to 
$5. 

Per Cent of Engineering for Road Construction.f — During 1905 and 
1906 there were built in New Castle County, Delaware, 7.48 miles of 
macadam road and 2.9 miles of gravel road. The per cent of engi- 
neering expenses on these roads varied from 2 per cent to 3.7 per 
cent, the average being 2.2 per cent. 

In Madison County, Tennessee, 24% miles of macadam roads were 
built at a cost of $115,681.71. The cost of engineering, superintend- 
ence and surveys was $7,016.35, or about 6 per cent of the total 
amount expended. 

In Pennsylvania the average cost of inspection on roads built 
for the State Highway Department has been 3 per cent of the cost 

^Engineering-Contracting , Aug. 26, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 23, 1908, and Apr. 28, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 281 

of the road and the average of engineering expenses has been 2 
per cent, or a total of 5%. 

In New Jersey, during 1908, a total of 146 miles macadam and 
gravel roads were built. Engineering and inspection averaged about 
5.7%, of which 3.2% was for engineering and 2.5% for supervisor's 
salary, the supervisor being appointed by each county to oversee 
and direct the work. 

Cost of Macadam Roads, New Jersey. — The following is a very 
brief summary of a table of quantities and bidding prices for 47 
different macadam, gravel and Telford roads, which was given 
in Engineering-Contracting, April 28, 1909. There were 146 miles of 
these New Jersey state roads built in 1908, the following being 
about the average cost of a macadam road 6 ins. thick (after 
rolling) and 14 ft. wide: 

Per mile. 

8,210 sq. yds. macadam at 65 cts $5, .337 

4,100 cu. yds. earth excav. at 34 cts 1,394 

Engineering (3.2%) 214 

Supervisor's salary (2.5%) 167 

Total $7,112 

About as many roads were built 8 ins. thick as 6 ins., at an added 
cost of about 20 cts. per sq. yd. for the 8-in. roads. 

Cost of a Limestone Macadam Road, Buffalo, N. Y. — The follov/ing 
data apply to a limestone macadam road 6 ins. thick and 12 ft. wide, 
built by contract near Buffalo, N. Y., in 1898. The earth was a 
tough clay and ditches nearly 3 ft. deep were dug along both sides 
of the road. The cost of digging the ditches was nearly half th» 
total. cost of grading. The following was the cost of one mile of 
grading, including ditching and surfacing, in comparatively level 
country, the amount of excavation being about 4,600 cu. yds. (the 
graded road was 22 ft. wide between ditches) : 

Labor at $1.50 per 10-hr. day $ 670 

Teams at $3.50 per 10-hr. day 226 

Foreman at $2.50 per 10-hr. day 97 

Waterboy at $1.00 per 10-hr. day 17 

Total per mile $1,010 

This is equivalent to about 22 cts. per cu. yd. 

There were stretches of this road where ditches already existed, 
and the only grading required was to plow up the old surface, shape 
the trench to receive the macadam, and make the earth shoulders 

5 ft. wide on each side of the macadam. Such stretches of grading 
cost $320 a mile. 

The macadam was 6 ins. thick after rolling and 12 ft. wide. It 
was laid in two courses: (1) a foundation course of 1% to 2 Mi -in. 
limestone, 4 ins. thick after rolling; and (2) a top course of % to 
1^-in. limestone, 2 ins. thick after rolling. Both courses 
were bound with limestone screenings. As an average of 3^4 
miles of road, It was found that loose stone spread to a depth of 

6 ins. was rolled down with a 10-ton roller to an apparent thickness 
of 4 ins., but without doubt about 1 in. of stone was pushed into 
the subgrade and lost so far as the final measurement was con- 



282 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cerned. It therefore took 1% cu. yds. of loose (1% to 2% -in.) stone 
(measured in cars or wagons) to malte 1 cu. yd. of rolled founda- 
tion course. For the top course it tools a thickness of 2.8 ins. of 
loose (% to 114-in.) stone to give the required 2-in. thick- 
ness after rolling. This indicates also a further pushing of the 
foundation stone into the clay below, for all measurements of thick- 
ness were made with a level, and not by digging holes through 
the finished macadam. The average of these two courses was 1.46 
cu. yds. of loose stone (not including screenings) to make 1 cu. yd. 
of rolled stone, but it took a trifle over % cu. yd. of limestone 
screenings (from size of dust up to 14 -in.) to bind each cubic yard 
of rolled macadam. We have, therefore : 

Loose stone 1.46 cu. yds. 

Screenings 0.34 cu. yd. 

Total 1.80 cu. yds. 

This means that it required 1.8 cu. yds. of screenings and loose 
stone (measured in wagons) to make 1 cu. yd. of rolled macadam. 
The cost of each cubic yard of macadam was as follows : 

Stone and screenings, f. o. b., 1.8 cu. yds., at $0.70 $1.26 

Freight, 25 cts. ton, 1.8 cu. yds., at $0.28 0.50 

Unloading cars into wagons, 1;8 cu. yds., at $0.11 0.20 

Hauling % mile, 1.8 cu. yds., at $0.28 0.50 

Spreading, 1.8 cu. yds., at $0.08 0.14 

Sprinkling 0.19 

Rolling, including rolling subgrade 0.24 

Total per cu. yd. of macadam $3.03 

Laborers received $1.50, and teams (with drivers) $3.50 per 
10-hr. day. 

Cost of a Sandstone and Trap Macadam, Rochester, N. Y.-^Near 

Rochester, N. T., a macadam road 16 ft. wide and 6 ins. thick was 
built by contract, on a sandy soil. The bottom 4 ins. of the ma- 
cadam were of sandstone bound with limestone screenings. The top 
2 ins. were of trap rock bound with limestone screenings. The sand- 
stone was fieldstone obtained mostly from old stone fences near 
the road. Wages of common laborers were 15 cts. an hour; teams, 
35 cts. 

The cost of sandstone crushed and delivered on the road was as 
follows per cubic yard measured in the wagons : 

Cu. yd. 

Paid farmers for fences $0.10 

Loading, hauling % mile, and crushing 0.80 

Hauling 1 mile and spreading ' 0.35 

Total $1.25 

The limestone screenings, used as a binder, were imported on 
canal boats, and delivered on the road cost as follows per cubic 
yard measured in the wagons : 

Cu. yd. 

Screenings delivered on boats $1.50 

Unloading into wagons with derrick 0.25 

Hauling 2 miles 0.30 

Spreading on road 0.15 

Total $2.25 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 283 

The cost of the trap rock was the same as for the 'imestone 
screenings. The cost of the 4-in. sandstone base was as follows: 

Cu. yd. 

1.4 cu. yds. sandstone, at $1.25 $1.75 

% cu. yd. limestone screenings, at $2.25 0.75 

Rolling and sprinkling 0.08 

Total (measured in place) $2.58 

The cost of the 2 -in. trap wearing coat was as follows: 

1.4 cu. yds. trap, at $2.25 $3.15 

% cu. yd. screenings, at $2.25 0.75 

Rolling and sprinkling 0.52 

Total (measured in place) $4.42 

The 10-ton roller pushed much of the stone into the sandy sub- 
grade, which accounts in part for the fact that it took 1.4 cu. yds. 
of loose stone to make 1 cu. yd. of rolled macadam. No very accu- 
rate record was kept of the amount of screenings used, but the 
amount stated is not far from correct. It will be noted that rolling 
the 4-in. lower course cost only 8 cts. per cu. yd. as compared with 
52 cts. per cu. yd. for the 2-in. top course. This is due to the fact 
that the lower course was hastily rolled. Strictly speaking these 
two courses should not be treated separately in discussing the cost 
of rolling. The cost of rolling and sprinkling the two courses Was 
24 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of Experimental Macadam Roads, Illinois.* — Mr. A. N. John- 
son gives the following regarding 12 experimental macadam roads 
(13.76 miles) built in Illinois in 1907 and 1908. The work was 
done by day labor. Bach road was made 12 ft. wide, and two 
layers of loose broken stone were laid to an aggregate depth of 
about 10 ins., which would be equivalent to a little more than 6 ins. 
of compacted macadam. Limestone, weighing about 2,500 lbs. per 
cu. yd., was used, costing about $1.25 per cu. yd. on cars at the 
destination. The cost of 44,000 cu. yds. of loose broken stone was 
as follows per cubic yard (loose measure) : 

Per cu. yd. Per 
Labor. (loose). cent. 

Unloading stone from car $0.10 10.1 

Hauling stone 0.32 34.0 

Spreading stone 0.08 8.5 

Rolling and sprinkling 0.11 11.5 

Total labor on stone $0.61 64.1 

Excavation of earth 0.12 12.4 

Shaping roadbed 0.08 8.3 

Trimming shoulders 0.05 5.3 

Supt., watchman and incidentals 0.09 9.9 

Total labor $0.95 100.0 

Stone, f. o. b. cars, say 1.25 

Grand total $2.20 

It is not stated whether interest and depreciation of steam 
roller are included, but apparently not. Average rates of wages are 
not given for these 44,000 cu. yds., but wages on 8 different jobs in 



^Engineering-Contracting , Nov. 18, 1908. 



284 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

1908 (involving 25,000 cu. yds. of stone) are given, and average 
$2.10 per day; team (with driver) averaged ?4.20. 

Tlie 11^ -in. size stone was used for tlie bottom layer, and the 
3-in. stone, bonded with screenings, was used for the top layer, re- 
versing the usual practice. 

Irregular shipments of stone and bad weather caused delays that 
added considerably to the cost. 

If the above given costs per cu. yd. of stone (loose measure) 
be multiplied by 0.3, the approximate cost per sq. yd. will be 
obtained. 

The shaping of roadbed averaged 2.4 cts. per sq. yd. of ma- 
cadam, although on one job it cost only 1.8 cts. although the wages 
were $2.50 a day. 

The trimming of shoulders cost 1.5 cts. per sq. yd. of macadam. 

The total cost per mile of macadam road, 12 ft. wide, 10 Ins. 
thick before compacting (about 5 ins. afterward), was about $5,900, 
the haul of stone averaging 1 to 1% miles. 

Data on Depreciation and Repairs of Steam Road Rollers.* — 
Steam road rollers were first built in England about 1865, and it is 
to England that we naturally look for the most complete records of 
the cost of repairs and the life of these machines. 

The English author, Thomas Aitken, has kept careful records for 
a period of more than 20 years, and his data are especially valu- 
able not only to English but to American road builders. 

Aitken gives the following table of first cost of English rollers : 

15-ton roller, single cylinder $2,300 

12-ton roller, single cylinder 2,000 

10-ton roller, single cylinder 1,875 

Aitken puts the life of a roller at not less than 25 years. He 
estimates 8,000 tons of stone consolidated by a 15-ton roller each 
year. 

Aitken gives the following cost of repairs on a 15-ton roller, which 
he regards as typical : 

"Up to the fourteenth year the repairs were comparatively 
trifling, with the exception of a pair of new driving wheels and re- 
pairing the fire-box and tubes, etc. These latter, and including 
sundry repairs, amounted, on an average, to $55 per annum. It was 
then found necessary to have a new fire-box and general overhaul 
of all the working parts. This cost $850, and the engine should, it 
Is anticipated, be capable, with ordinary repairs, to run for a period 
equal to a life of 25 years at least." 

Aitken puts the total cost of renewals and repairs of a $2,300 
roller at $105 a year during a life of 25 years, which is nearly 5 per 
cent of the first cost each year. To this must be added a percent- 
age to cover depreciation, that is to provide a sinking fund suffi- 
cient to buy a new roller at the end of 25 years. If such a sinking 
fund draws 3 per cent compound interest, it requires that about 2.75 



*Engineering-Contracting, April 7, 1909. 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS. WALKS. 285 

per cent of the first cost of the roller be set aside annually to 
amount to the full first cost of the roller in 25 years. This 2.75 
per cent depreciation fund allowance if added to the 5 per cent for 
repairs and renewals, gives a total of nearly 8 per cent per annum. 

Aitken says that this is equivalent to 83 cts. per working day. 
Since 8 per cent of $2,300 is $184, if we divide the $184 by $0.83, 
we find that Aitken apparently figures on 221 working days in the 
year, which is almost double the number of days commonly worked 
by a roller in the northern part of the United States. (See Engi- 
neering-Contracting, May 23, 1906, July 3, 1907 (p. 7), June 10, 
1908 (p. 358), for data as to the number of days worked in Massa- 
chusetts, and the cost of roller repairs.) Aitkin says that his esti- 
mate relates to a roller used in macadam repair work, "practically 
in steam all the year, except when under repairs or stopped by 
frost during winter months." 

There is a seeming discrepancy in his figures, for he rates a 15- 
ton roller as capable of compacting at least 64 tons of macadam 
per day of 9 hours, if not interfered with by traffic. Elsewhere he 
estimates the "useful effect of one roller at 8,000 tons of macadam 
per annum," from which it would appear that less than 150 full 
days would be worked, or that delays due to traffic would cause a 
serious loss of time. 

The writer's experience is that 75 tons of macadam can be com- 
pacted per 10-hour day, and that a contractor can usually count on 
about 100 to 110 days' actual work, which gives a total of some 
8,000 tons (including screenings) compacted each season by a 
10-ton roller. 

Regarding the repairing of the driving wheels, Aitken says: 

"The renewal of the driving and front wheels, especially the 
former, is an expensive item, and what was considered at one time 
impracticable can now be carried out, that is, plating the worn-out 
rims. This results in considerable saving, and the wear of the metal 
forming the rims is considerably less than in the original wheels. 
It should be stated, however, that the wheels for renewal of rims 
should not be worn too thin, as, in such cases, the renewal is not 
so satisfactorj'-. The process is to fit steel plates on the old rims 
and rivet the two together, and, apart from a few of these becom- 
ing loose, which can be remedied by counter-sunk bolts, the arrange- 
ment is in every way successful. The gripe or 'bite' of these steel- 
plated wheels is as good as that of the original cast-iron ones, and 
the wear is much more uniform." 

Aitken goes on to state that the wear of these steel-plated rims 
is 0.02 in. for every 1,000 tons of macadam consolidated, and that 
the cost of repairing the driving wheels by this method is $200 as 
against $250 for a complete set of new wheels, and that "experi- 
ence shows that the life of those renewed with steel plates is 
nearly doubled." 

There seems to be enough merit in this method of repairing the 
driving wheels to warrant the manufacturer's making them with 
removable steel plate rims in the first place. If the plates were of 



286 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

manganese steel the life would probably be three to four times 
as long as when made of ordinary steel. 

Aitken states the cast-iron driving wheels of a 15-ton roller lasted 
7 years, during which time they consolidated 60,000 tons of 
macadam. 

Cost of Road Roller Repairs in Massachusetts During 1908.* — The 

Massachusetts Highway Commission had under its control 18 steam 
road rollers. The rollers were used 1,126 1^ days on town work, in 
32 different towns. They were also used 557% days on state high- 
way repair work, on 65 different roads; 290 days by towns contract- 
ing for the building of state roads, including the small town roads ; 
162 days by private contractors on state highway contracts, and 
one roller was used eight days at the State Farm at Bridgewater. 
The total number of days' work during the year was 2,144 — an 
average of 119 days for each roller. The total cost of such main- 
tenance for the year was $2,046. Of this amount $1,000 was paid 
for practically rebuilding one of the rollers which had been in active 
use since 1896 ; and $1,046 was expended for the ordinary repairs. 
Including the expense of supervision and inspection of the rollers, 
the average cost of such ordinary repairs during 1908 was 90.8 cts. 
per day for each roller in use. A comparison of the above figures 
with those of the years 1906 and 1907 is given below: 

1906. 1907. 1908. 

Number of rollers 16 16 18 

Total days worked 1,7191/2 1,808 2,144 

Av. days per roller 1071/2 113 119 

Av. cost ordinary repairs per roller day. $0.98% $0.99% $0.90 4/5 

In Engineering-Contracting, May 23, 1906, it is stated the Massa- 
chusetts Highway Commission had 16 rollers during 1905, that they 
averaged 90.3 days worked per roller, and that the cost of ordinary 
repairs was $1.12 per roller per day worked. 

Cost of Scarifying Macadam By Hand. — Mr. Thomas Aitken is 
authority for the following English data: 

When a macadam surface is to be picked, or scarified, by hand, 
soak the crust with water to soften it, unless it is the intention to 
screen the old materials. The depth to which the macadam is loos- 
ened by picks is usually about 2% ins. One man will loosen at the 
following rate per day : 

Sq. yds. 

Soft macadam 33 

Hard macadam 20 

Very hard (steam rolled) macadam 12 to 15 

Cost of Scarifying With a Machine.;— A scarifier is a heavy har- 
row for ripping up old macadam preparatory to resurfacing it. See 
Fig. 3. 

A scarifier is pulled by a steam roller, and it usually requires two 
men to operate the scarifier. According to Thomas Aitken, a scari- 
fier with 3 teeth, spaced 6 ins. apart, will break up old macadam 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 5, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



287 



to a depth of 4 ins. at the rate of 3,000 sq. yds. per 10-hr. day, If 
not interrupted by traffic. He gives one record of 650 cu. yds. per 
hr., scarified to a depth of 3 ins., using a 15-ton roller to pull it. 
But, allowing for interruptions from traffic that ordinarily occur on 
a country road, he gives 1,500 to 2,000 sq. yds. per 10-hr. day. 

He states that each set of teeth will scarify only 150 sq. yds. 
before requiring sharpening, and that it costs 15 to 30 cts. to 
sharpen the set of 3 teeth, at which rate it costs 0.1 to 0.2 ct. per sq. 
yd. for sharpening the teeth. This would give a cost of $3 to $6 
per day for sharpening teeth where 3,000 sq. yds. are scarified daily. 

The following paragi-aph gives some American data. 

Cost of Scarifying Macadam, Rhode Island.* — In breaking up the 
crust of an old macadam road preparatory to mixing it with tar or 
asphaltic oil, a scarifier drawn by a steam roller is cheaper than the 
use of "picks" in the rear wheels of the roller. 




Fig. 3. Scarifier. 



This is well illustrated by the following costs of scarifying which 
have been furnished to us by Mr. Arthur H. Blanchard, assistant 
engineer of the State Board of Public Roads, Providence, R. I. 

An old macadam road at Tiverton, R. I., was scarified to a depth 
of 3 or 4 ins. at a cost of 0.7 ct. per sq. yd. The steam roller and 
scarifier were rented. The price paid for the steam roller, including 
fuel and wages of engineman, was ?10 per day of 10 hours, which 
is a reasonable price. The price paid for the use of the scarifier 
was $5 a day, which is reasonable when due allowance is made for 
the cost of sharpening its teeth. Two laborers, at ?2.50 each per 



*Engineering-Contractmg, Oct. 28, 1908. 



288 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

10-hour day, operated the scarifier. Therefore the daily cost was 

as follows : 

Per day. 

Roller, including engineman §10.00 

Scarifier 5.00 

2 laborers, at $2.50 5.00 

Total $20.00 

The average 10-hr. day's work was 2,738 sq. yds. scarified, hence 
the cost per square yard was: 

Cts., per sq. yd. 

Roller, including engineman $0.36 

Scarifier 0.18 

Laborers 0.18 

Total $0.72 

It may be well to add that the practice of using "picks" in the 
rear wheels of a steam roller is not to be commended, for the re- 
sulting shocks to the whole machine, and particularly to the boiler, 
are injurious. Boiler tubes quickly become loosened and leak 
badly under this severe service, if the picks are used in the roller 
for a considerable length of time. 

Cost of Resurfacing Old Limestone Macadam — The data were 
taken from my time books and can be relied upon as being well 
within the probable cost of similar work done by contract under 
a good foreman. It will be noted that the cost of operating the 
roller is estimated at $10 per day. This includes interest and de- 
preciation, as well as fuel and engineman's wages. 

The road was worn unevenly, but as it still had sufficient metal 
left, very little new metal was added. 

The roller used was a 12-ton Buffalo Pitts, provided with steel 
picks on the rear wheels. It required 80 hours of rolling with the 
picks in to break up the crust of a surface 19,400 sq. yds. in area, 
2,400 sq. yds. being loosened per 10-hr. day. The crust was ex- 
ceedingly hard and at times the picks rode upon the surface with- 
out sinking in, so that a lighter roller would probably have been far 
less efficient. In fact a 10-ton roller had been used a few years 
previous for the same purpose at more than double the expense per 
sq. yd., I am told. The picks simply open up cracks in the crust to a 
depth of about 4 ins. and it is necessary to follow the roller with a 
gang of laborers using hand picks to complete the loosening process. 
The labor of loosening and spreading anew the metal was 1,880 man- 
hours, or a trifle more than 10 sq. yds. per man-hour. About 60% 
of this time was spent in picking and 40% in respreading with 
shovels and potato hooks. 

After the material had been respread, a short section was 
drenched with a sprinkling cart, water being put on in such abun- 
dance that when the roller came upon the metal, the screenings 
which had settled to the bottom in the spreading process were 
floated up into the interstices. The roller and sprinkling cart were 
engaged only 63 liours in this process, 3,000 sq. yds. being rolled per 
10-hr. day; an exceptionally fast rate. The rapidity of rolling was 



ROADS, PAl'EMENTS, JVALKS. 289 

due to four factors: 1. The great abundance of water used, the 
water haul being very short. 2. The unyielding foundation (Tel- 
ford) beneath. 3. The abundance of screenings and fine dust, the 
road not having been swept for some time. 4. The great weight of 
the roller, which was run at a high rate of speed. I am not pre- 
pared to say that longer rolling would not have secured a harder 
surface, but I doubt very much whether it would. The metal, I 
should add, was hard limestone. Summing up we find the cost 
of resurfacing this road per sq. yd. to have been as follows : 

Cts., per sq. yd. 

Picking with roller, at ?1 per hour 0.40 

Picking by hand labor at 20 cts. per hour 1.20 

Respreading by hand labor, at 20 cts. per hour. ... 0.80 

Rolling with roller, at $1 per hour 0.33 

Sprinkling with cart, at 40 cts. per hour 0.13 

Foreman, 143 hours, at 30 cts., for 19,400 sq. yds.. 0.44 

Total 3.30 

At this rate a macadam road 16 ft. wide can be resurfaced for 
little more than $300 a mile. The frequency with which such re- 
surfacing is necessary will, of course, depend upon several factors, 
chief of which are the amount of traffic and the quality of road 
metal. I should say that five years would not be far from the 
average for a country road built of hard limestone. Unless the 
road has had an excess of metal used in its construction, new 
metal should be added at the time of resurfacing to replace that 
worn out. 

I am unable to see how any system of continuous repair, with its 
puttering work here and there, can be as economical as work done 
in the manner above described. I would not be understood, however, 
as favoring an entire neglect of the road between repair periods. At 
times of heavy rains and snows, ditches and culverts need atten- 
tion and there should be someone whose duty it is to look after such 
matters. What I do question is the economy of having a man con- 
tinuously at work putting in patches upon the road. 

Low as the above costs are, much lower costs are attainable, using 
a scarifier, as previously described, or using a harrow, as described 
In the next paragraph. 

Cost of Repairing Sandstone Macadam, Albion, N. Y — Using the 
method that I am about to describe, Mr. P. J. Stock succeeded in 
picking, resurfacing and rolling a stretch of sandstone macadam 
18 ft. wide by 1,000 ft. long in two 10-hr. days; one day in spiking 
up the old surface with the picks in the steam roller and one day 
In rerolling. As the surface was loosened to a depth of about 4 Ins., 
it will be seen that over 200 cu. yds., or 1,800 sq. yds., of macadam 
were compacted by the 15 -ton roller in 10 hrs. The point to which 
I wish to call attention is not so much the extraordinary rapidity 
of tlie rolling as the very ingenious method devised by Mr. Stock for 
completing tlie loosening of the macadam after cracking it up with 
the roller spikes. For this purpose Mr. Stock built a heavy harrow, 



290 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



similar to those used on farms. Fig. 4, showing its detail design. 
By turning the harrow upside down it rides on the runners sliown in 
the figure, and is thus transported when not in use. A heavy team 
of horses is used to drag the sharp-pointed harrow over the ma- 
cadam after it has been loosened as much as possible with the 
spikes of the steam roller. The spikes in the harrow not only com- 




Dnm 



Plan of Hatrow. 
j=r-Runners-—^ 




Side Eleva+ion. 
Fig. 4. Harrow for Scarifying. 



plete the breaking-up of tlie crust as well as could be done by men 
using picks, but in addition the spikes spread the loosened stone, 
filling up all low places. 

The total cost of resurfacing was: 

Cts., per sq. yd. 

Roller and engineer at $1 per hour picking 0.5 

Roller and engineer at $1 per hour re-rolling 0.5 

Sprinkling, with cart, 40 cts. an hour (1 day).... 0.2 
Harrowing, team and driver 30 cts. an hr. (2 days) 0.3 

Total 1-5 

At this rate a macadam road 16 ft. wide and a mile long can be 
resurfaced for less than $140. The cost of resurfacing has. there- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS.. 291 

fore, been only ?30 per mile per annum, since resurfacing lias been 
necessary only once every 5 yrs. 

It will be noted that the cost of picking (with roller) and harrow- 
ing was 0.8 ct. per sq. yd. 

In addition to the labor item there were some 75 cu. yds. of 
stone furnished, which it was estimated would bring the road up to 
its original crown. The stone cost about $60, delivered, and was 
spread by two men in two days at a cost of ?6. By using a "leveler" 
the item of spreading could have been reduced to ?1.50. 

For new materials we have, therefore, a trifle over ?60 per mile 
per annum, making a total of about $90 per mile per annum for 
labor and material for resurfacing a Medina sandstone road. Of 
course, the loss of material by wear was not accurately measured, 
but it was less rather than more than the amount put on for 
repairs. At this rate, the annual vertical wear was about 0.2-in. 
over the whole surface. 

This was a main traveled street, where farmers' teams enter the 
village. 

Cost of Resurfacing Macadam and Data on Compression of 
Broken Stone. — Mr. F. G. Cudworth gives the following data. An 
old macadam road was resurfaced with trap rock to the depth of 3 
ins. after rolling with a 10-ton steam roller. It required 3.9 ins. of 
loose trap and 2.1 ins. of screenings to make the 3 ins. of compacted 
macadam, according to Mr. Cudworth, but there must have been an 
error in his estimate of the final thickness of the resurfacing (an4 
it is a very easy matter to err in measuring rolled macadam). 
Possibly he did not measure the thickness of loose screenings left 
on the macadam, for 2.1 ins. of screenings is more than sufficient 
to fill the voids in 3 ins. of compacted stone. The steam roller aver- 
aged 472 sq. yds. or 40 cu. yds. of macadam per 10 hrs., at a cost 
of 2 % cts. per sq. yd. for rolling and sprinkling. The cost of rolling 
and sprinkling was distributed as follows, and it should be noted 
that it does not include any allowance for rent of roller. On the 
other hand it is rare that a fireman is employed in addition to the 
engineman, and it is not always that the full wages of a night 
watchman are charged to the roller : 

Engineman ? 3.00 

Fireman 1.50 

Coal and oil 4.00 

Sprinkler 3.00 

Watchman 1.50 

Total per day $13.00 

The total cost of resurfacing was as follows, not including cost 
of stone : 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Scraping and sweeping 2.00 

Picking up old surface 1.50 

Spreading stone 2.00 

Rolling and sprinkling 2.77 

Total per sq. yd 8.27 

As will be seen by comparison with data previously given, this 



292 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cost of 8.27 cts. per sq. yd. is inordinately high, and shows both lack 
of good management and of knowledge of how to do such work 
economically. 

Mr. W. C. Foster gives the following data : It was found that 
7.38 ins. of loose trap rock on an old macadam pavement were 
rolled down to a thickness of 6 ins. under a 12-ton roller, a ratio 
of 1% cu. yds. of loose stone to 1 cu. yd. rolled. It was found in 
another case that 5.67 ins. of loose trap were rolled down to 4 ins., 
a ratio 1.42 to 1. The stone in both cases was trap, 1% to 2%-in. 
size. It was found that 1 cu. yd. of blue limestone screenings, suf- 
ficient to cover the rolled trap to a depth of 1.7 ins. over 21 sq. yds., 
was sufficient to bind 21 sq. yds. of 4-in. or 6-in. macadam. The 
loose stone and the screenings were measured in cars. I do not 
think that 5.67 ins. of loose trap can possibly be rolled down to 
4 ins., furthermore I am sure that it takes more screenings to 
bind a 6-in. macadam than a 4-in. macadam. Mr. Foster says that 
in this work a 12 -ton roller averaged 314 sq. yds., or 52 cu. yds., of 
6-in. macadam per 10-hr. day. 

Cost of Repairing IVIacadam in Ireland. —In Engineering-Contract- 
ing, Sept. 2, 1908, there is an excellent article on the methods of 
scarifying and rolling macadam roads in Ireland, also some costs, by 
Mr. E. A. Hackett. A brief abstract of the costs is as follows: 

Common laborers, per day $0.52 

Foremen, per week 6.00 

One horse cart and driver, per day 1.25 

Engineman on roller, per day 1.25 

Flagman and timekeeper, per day 0.87 

Coal costs ?5.50 per long ton at the railway station, and a 15 -ton 
roller consumes one-third ton per day. 

Mr. Hackett states that in Tipperary county there are 1,500 
miles of macadam roads, of which 300 miles are main roads. The 
population is 90,000, and the area of the county is 1,000 sq. miles. 
The traffic is not severe, practically all in one horse carts carrying 
loads of 1 to iy2 tons on a pair of wheels. 

From his data it can be deduced that the cost of repairing a 
macadam road 16 ft. wide is about ?260 per mile per annum, there 
being 0.12 cu. yd. of broken stone used per sq. yd. of road for each 
resurfacing every five years, which is equivalent to 1,120 cu. yds. of 
stone per mile every five years, or 224 cu. yds. per mile per annum. 
Since the steam roller averaged about 50 cu. yds. of -loose stone 
compacted per day, it is a simple matter to estimate the cost of 
such repairs under American conditions as to wages. 

All the stone was quarried and broken by hand, and the following 
was the cost per cu. yd. loose measure, wages being as above given: 

Per cu. yd. 

Surface damage to quarries $0.04 

Quarrying and breaking 0.46 

Hauling 0.15 

Spreading, watering and sweeping 0.12 

Recarting stones, removing scarified materials. ... 0.10 

Rolling 0.17 

Contingencies and profit. 0.10 

Total $1.14 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 293 

It is noteworthy that, in spite of the fact that wages were about 
one-third what they are in America, the unit cost of this work is 
almost as great as it is in America. 

Mr. Hackett is strongly in favor of this intermittent system of 
repairs, instead of the old continuous or "patching system." He is 
also in favor of a 15-ton roller, and states that it will do 50% more 
work than a 10-ton roller, due to its wider tires. 

Cost of Maintaining IVIacadam Roads, Massachusetts. — The an- 
nual reports of the Massachusetts Highway Commission show that 
the cost of "ordinary repairs" of macadam roads, whose age ranges 
from 1 to 15 years, averages about $100 per mile per year, excluding 
the cost of resurfacing. A small per cent of the macadam roads are 
now being resurfaced annually, this work being classed as ex- 
traordinary repairs. From data thus far obtained it is estimated 
that the maximum cost of all repairs — ordinary and extraordinary — 
will not exceed ?200 per mile, unless the destruction occasioned by 
automobiles shall materially increase the cost of maintenance. The 
•tandard Massachusetts road is macadamized 15 ft. wide. 

Cost of Repairing Macadam in Massachusetts Phe repairing on 

550 miles of macadam roads averaged less than $100 per mile for 
the year 1901, although the first of these roads was 10 years old. 
But this does not include any general resurfacing. 

In the report for 1902 data on the cost of repairing three heavily 
traveled roads leading into cities are given. 



Age, 
Road. yrs. 

Leicester G 

West Fitchburg.. 7 
Beverly 6 

None of these roads had been repaired since the day it was built. 
The Leicester road leads into Worcester, and is much more heavily 
traveled than ordinary country roads. 

During 1905 the commission caused to be repaired 580.7 miles of 
roads, the average cost being $96.07 per mile. 

A total of 13% miles of road was resurfaced with broken stone; 
the cost of doing this is shown in the table below. 

In Table III it is assumed that a cubic yard of stone weighs 1% 
tons, and that the loose broken stone shrinks 33 per cent under the 
compacting force of the roller. 

The high rate of wear shown in Auburn and Hadley is due to 
Btrengthening the road, when resurfacing, by an increased depth of 
broken stone ; the high rate of wear in Quincy and Chelsea Is due 
to heavy traffic; in Sturbridge, to a poor grade of stone used in 
the original construction. In the case of Marion and Rochester, 
the original road was macadamized by those towns in 1896. In 
Hadley, $932 was used for side drains and in strengthening the road. 



Length. 


Width. 


Per sq. 

yd. per 

year, cts. 


Tons 
stone per Cost 
sq. yd. per ton 
per yr. in place. 


3,150 
2,200 
2,150 


24 
15 
18 


5.17 
5.15 
5.20 


.03 $1.70 
.023 2.23 
.03 1.80 



294 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table III. — Costs of Resurfacing 14 Macadam Roads During 1905. 



>? y. ^ S'S^ ^o «- 



Town or City. "^ - ^ "!«§ d^ "a 

Auburn* '95-6-7 10,168 15 .03 5.62 $1.49 

Chicopeef '97-8-9 3,550 15 .02 4.40 2.04 

Chelseat '01 3,053 24 .11 18.32 1.60 

Beverlyt '95 3,025 18 .01 3.22 2.09 

Great Barringtont '94-6 9,368 15 .01 2.47 2.24 

Hadleyt '94 2,788 15 .04 9.29 1.78 

Marion* '93 782 15 .01 2.98 1.75 

North Adamst... '94-6 9,000 15 .01 2.90 2.09 

Pittsfleldt '94-8 6,842 15 .01 2.31 2.14 

Sturbridge* '97 3,094 15 .03 4.85 1.50 

Quincyt '99 2,606 30 .03 7.09 2.20 

Rochester* '03 3,345 15 .02 4.17 1.75 

rownsendt '96-7-8 3,700 15 .01 3.31 1.91 

Westportt .....'.. '94 3,015 18 .02 5.19 2.35 

•Local stone used. 

tTrap rock used. 

Cost of Calcium Chloride as a Dust Preventative.* — During the 
summer of 1907, the U. S. Office of Public Roads undertook a series 
of tests to determine the value of calcium chloride as a dust pre- 
ventative. These tests were made on the portion of the macadam 
driveway in the Agricultural Department Grounds, in Washington, 
D. C. 

The roadway on which the test was made is built of trap rock, 
held in position by a soft limestone binder. The screenings of this 
binder pulverized rapidly under traffic, forming a light dust which 
passing vehicles continually raised into the air. It was then car- 
tied away by the wind. In this way the road was becoming 
stripped of its binding material. 

In preparation for the treatment all dust, and dirt were scraped 
from the surface of the roadway. A solution was prepared by 
mixing 300 lbs. of commercial calcium chloride (granular, contain- 
ing 75 per cent calcium chloride and 25 per cent moisture) with 
300 gals, of water in an ordinary street sprinkler, care being taken 
to agitate the liquid thoroughly before applying it to insure a 
nniform solution. It was then applied from one sprinkling head, and 
the sprinkler passed slowly back and forth over the road to facilitate 
the complete absorption of the solution. Each application con- 
iSisted of 600 gals, over an area of 1,582 sq. yds., or 0.38 per sq. yd. 

The first application was made July 13, 1907, followed by a similar 
3ne July 15, to increase the efficacy of the treatment. The effect 
of the first two treatments was marked. No auxiliary sprinkling 
yas necessary for some time, the light rains falling at intervals 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 1, 190(?. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 295 

supplying aJl the moisture required. The untreated portions of the 
driveway lying parallel to 12th and 14th streets, were sprinkled daily 
and vehicles raised a perceptible dust, although the traffic over these 
wings was much less heavy than that on the treated portions. 

During this time the appearance of the roadway varied per- 
ceptibly in color according to the moisture in the road surface, 
ranging from a light gray when dry to a peculiar grayish brown 
when moist. The brown shades were deepest over the portions trav- 
ersed by the wheels of vehicles. The texture of the road surface 
was completely changed after the application of the calcium chloride. 
Before treatment, raveling was excessive in spots and the whole 
surface seemed loosely knit together. After the application on 
July 15 this condition changed and the road surface became smooth, 
compact and resilient. 

The third treatment was given Aug. 3, as certain points exposed to 
the most severe wear were showing signs of raveling. The phe- 
nomena following this treatment were not unlike those attending the 
first set of applications and repeated themselves as later applications 
were made, though no further treatments were given until the con- 
dition of the roadway seemed to demand it. Such auxiliary sprink- 
ling as was necessary consisted in the application of about 0.2 gal. 
of water per square yard at a time. 

The accompanying table shows the cost of applications. The 
calcium was donated by a manufacturing chemical company of 
Baltimore, Md., and is charged at the rate of $16 per ton, f. o. b. 
cars at Baltimore. A freight charge of 13 cts. per hundredweight 
Is added to place the material on the ground. This makes the total 
cost of the calcium chloride $18.60 per ton. 

Total. Per sq. yd. 

600 lbs. calcium chloride $5,586 $0.00352 

3 men, IVa hours 0.675 .00042 

1 horse sprinkling wagon, 1% hours 0.525 .00033 

Total (1,582 sq. yds.) $6,786 $0.00427 

Total cost of five applications was $33.90, or $0.0235 per square 
yard. Labor was paid 15 cts. per hour and 35 cts. per hour was 
paid for the sprinkling wagon. 

The specific gravity of these solutions ranged from 1.053 to l.OSO. 
Some variation was unavoidable, as the calcium chloride in some of 
the barrels had absorbed a large amount of moisture from the 
atmosphere. In such cases the actual percentage of the chemical to 
300 lbs. was less than where little or no moisture had been 
absorbed. 

At the time of the last application several hundred pounds of the 
salt remained unused. This was divided as nearly as possible into 
two parts, to be applied to the two wings of the driveway lying 
parallel to 12th and 14th streets. The east wing received a treat- 
ment of 0.28 gal. per sq. yd. of a solution the specific gravity of 
which was 1.145 and the west wing a similar application of a solu- 
tion having a specific gravity of 1.121. No further sprinkling was 



296 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Xound necessary for the remainder of the season upon these branches 
of the main driveway. 

Co«t of Tarring Macadam, Michigan.* — Mr. Charles R. Wright- 
man gives the following relative to 16,620 sq. yds. of work done In 
South Haven, Mich. 

The local gas company furnished the tar. The plant consisted of 
a roofer's tar kettle which held about 150 gals, of tar; six gal- 
vanized sprinkling cans, each of which held 14 quarts ; the 
sprinklers were removed and a flat spout with %-in. opening 6 ins. 
long, put in place of the sprinklers ; one dozen fiber stable brooms. 

The kettle was set up about midway in the first block of Center 
street, which was a new macadam street, 50 ft. wide, from which 
travel had been excluded, and which had been allowed ten days 
to dry. 

Two barrels of tar were placed In the kettle and brought to the 
boiling point, then it was drawn into the sprinklers, . Fig. 5, two 
of which were carried by each of three men and poured with a 




Fig. 5. Tar Spreader and Curb Protector. 

Bweeping motion from side to side, each man covering about one- 
third of the width of the street, thus carrying a straight face of tar 
up the street. Working on the tarred surface and closely following 
the sprinklers, was a man with a fiber broom who smoothed out the 
thick spots and rubbed the tar in wherever dust or depression pre- 
vented a good contact. Immediately following, came two men, who 
with scoops, uniformly covered the tar with limestone screenings or 
"crushed stone sand" to the depth of from % in. to % in., which 
was then immediately rolled with a 10-ton steam roller (weight not 
essential), and the street then thrown open to traffic. 

The results of this work are that the street Is free from stone 
dust and is dry in an incredibly short time after rains, and I have 



'Engineering-Contracting, May 8, 1907. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 297 

noticed that snow melts and runs off much faster than it does on 
brick streets and that a few hours of thaw clears the street so there 
la nothing to freeze when night and a lower temperature comes on. 
We now treat the macadam before throwing it open to traffic, as we 
found on Dyckman avenue, which had been in use about three 
months, that the mud and dirt interfered seriously and we did not 
get as good adhesions on this street. In this case the surface was 
first swept clean with steel brooms and all spots of scale or drop- 
pings, scraped off with a scraper made by straightening the shank 
of a garden hoe until the blade was in line with the handle. While 
It was a decided improvement to this street, the results were not 
as satisfactory as on the new surfaces, and, if possible, I would 
break up and remetal a street before applying tar. 

In heating, we found it best to put tar into the kettle with buckets 
about as fast as it was drawn off into the spreading cans, thus doing 
away with the necessity of spreaders waiting for "hot stuff." The 
kettle should be on wheels so that it could be moved without 
drawing off the tar and extinguishing the fires, as was necessary 
with the kettle which we used. 

On about 1,000 sq. yds. of the work, torpedo sand was used for 
surfacing in place of limestone screenings. The results were favor- 
able but not as satisfactory as when screenings were used, it being 
found that it was very hard to get the sand dry enough properly 
to take up the free tar ; but I believe if good, sharp torpedo sand, 
free from moisture, could be obtained, the results would be satis- 
factory. 

The unrefined tar which was used on this work is a very active 
irritant and will draw a blister in short order. In order to obviate 
this, men handling tar should keep their hands and faces well 
smeared with fresh lard. On the above work, we used about 
15 lbs. 

In order to keep from smearing the curb stone with tar, I had 
made two sheet iron guards, Fig. 5, taking a piece of heavy gal- 
vanized iron, 16 ins. wide and 8 ft. long, bent in the middle to a 
right angle and provided with a strap handle on top. This was laid 
on the curb with one leg of the angle perpendicular and against 
the face of the curb, the other lying on and projecting over the top. 
The spreaders moved it along each time a can full of tar was 
spread. This eliminated the unsightly splotches. 

Some judgment has to be exercised on the work of spreading tar. 
Apply more where the surface is open or not "puttied," and less 
where surface is hard and close. Good intelligent men should be 
employed as spreaders as much of the economy in tar is dependent 
on them. Too much screenings Is preferable to too little, and, after 
rolling, the surplus may be swept up and used again. 

A close watch must be kept on the kettle as unrefined tar is 
highly inflammable, and, after it starts to boil, will climb over the 
top of the kettle very quickly. In case of fire, sand should be 
thrown into the kettle until the fire is smothered. 



298 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The gang was as follows per day of 10 hrs. : 

Per day. 

1 kettleman (acts as foreman) $ 2.25 

2 barrel men, at $2.25 4.50 

3 men sprinkling tar, at $2.25 6.75 

1 man brooming tar, at $1.75 1.75 

2 men spreading screenings, at $1.75 3.50 

1 team hauling tar and screenings 3.50 

Total .$22.25 

The team hauled tar, wood and screenings and moved kettle from 
place to place. At times it became necessary to put on an extra 
team to keep the work supplied with screenings, but ordinarily one 
team took care of the whole work. 

This gang averaged about 1,500 sq. yds. (700 gals, tar) per day, 
and the cost was as follows : 

Labor: Per sq. yd. 

Kettleman $0.0015 

Barrelmen 0.0030 

Men sprinkling tar 0.0045 

Man brooming tar 0.0012 

Men spreading screenings 0.0023 

Team 0.0023 

Total labor $0.0148 

Materials : 

0.466 gals, tar, at 3 cts $0.0140 

0.0175 cu. yd. screenings, at 90 cts 0.0158 

Total materials $0.0298 

Grand total $0.0446 

In addition to the above, the city roller was used a total of 
15 hrs., and, if we assume $1 per hr. for the roller, the cost of 
rolling was less than 0.1 ct. per sq. yd., which, added to the above 
4.5 cts., gives a total of 4.6 cts. 

With a portable kettle, a saving of 20 per cent on labor would 
have been effected, by doing away with the time lost by all hands 
in moving the kettle. 

Being so well pleased with tar on macadam, Mayor C. E. Abell 
authorized an experiment on clay. Accordingly, Chambers street, 
which is a porous yellow clay street, having a width of 40 ft. be- 
tween wood curbs, was shaped up with a road grader, making a 
crown of about 20 ins. and rolled with the 10-ton steam roller. Tar 
and screenings were applied in the same manner as on the macadam 
streets, and the results have been surprising. This street, which has 
been practically impassable every spring and fall, is now perfectly 
dry and smooth, and a passerby would suppose it was macadamized. 
In two or three places where light, uncompacted dust was on the 
surface, the tar and stone covering has been broken, but otherwise 
it is in perfect condition, shedding the water nicely, and bids fair 
to be a good hard road for some time. The cost of the tar and stone 
was practically the same as on macadam, but in doing this work, we 
have learned that the preparation is the essential point. The /oad 
should be shaped and carefully smoothed by rolling and wetting 
until no loose or dry powdered clay remains ; and, just the reverse 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 299 

from macadam which must be perfectly dry, the clay should be 
slightly moist, as the hot tar on dry, powdered clay rolls up into 
minute balls and does not spread out as it should in a film or sheet. 
In every instance, the tar should be as near tlie boiling point as 
possible, when applied to the street. 

Cost of Tarring iVIacadam, Massachusetts.* — The following data 
relate to some experimental road treatments made last year by 
the Metropolitan Park Commission on roadways at Revere Beach 
Parkway, Massachusetts. The experiments were made with a spe- 
cially prepared coal tar known as Tarvia, and a total length of 
3% miles of roadway was treated with this material, the work being 
done by day labor under the supervision of the Engineering Depart- 
ment of the commission. The work was begun Aug. 25, 1906, and 
was completed Sept. 29, a total of 67,434 sq. yds. of roadway having 
been treated at a cost of ?4,494. 

The force employed consisted of one foreman and seven laborers. 
A street sweeper, a sand sprinkler, a double team and one steam 
roller were used in the work. 

The Tarvia was delivered in tank wagons, and the cost of hauling 
same was paid by the commission. The same men were used for 
the various operations of cleaning the road, spreading the Tarvia 
and covering with screenings. The detailed costs of the work are 
given by Mr. .John R. Rablin as follows: 

Materials: Per sq. yd. 

Tarvia, 0.4 gals $0.0262 

Stone screenings, 0.015 tons 0.0184 

Total materials ?0.0446 

Labor: 

Preparing roadway $0.0086 

Applying Tarvia 0.0057 

Applying screenings 0.0062 

Rolling 0.0047 

Total $0.0252 

Grand total $0.0698 

Thus a new smooth surface was formed over the bare stone, which 
seems to be holding well ; the dust nuisance was abated, and in 
time of wet weather the roadways were entirely free from mud. 
Regarding the permanency of the results obtained Mr. Rablin writes 
us that the work which was done last fall has proved very satis- 
factory, and the commission is now treating other roads. In a sub- 
sequent issue if Engineering-Contracting (Dec. 18, 1907), Mr. Rablin 
states that about half of the above yardage was treated again with 
Tarvia, due to the fact that it had begun to show signs of wear. 

In 1907, about 90,000 additional sq. yds. of roadway were treated 
with Tarvia, the average cost being as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Tarvia, 0.45 gal $0.0316 

Stone screenings, 0.016 tons 0.0219 

Labor 0.0196 

Total $0.0731 

* Engineering-Contracting, June 12, 1907. 



300 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The organization and wages were as follows: 

Per day. 

1 foreman $ 2.75 

1 double team (2 horses and driver) r. 5.00 

1 single team (1 horse and driver) 3.50 

7 laborers cleaning road, at $2 14.00 

5 laborers spreading tar, at $2 10.00 

3 laborers spreading screenings, at $2 6.00 

Total $41.25 

1 steam roller, assumed, at 10.00 

Total ?51.25 

I have assumed the ?10 daily rate for the steam roller (includ- 
ing coal, engineman, etc.), for Mr. Rablin does not state its rate. 

Since the average cost of labor was 1.96 cts. per sq. yd., we infer 
that about 2,600 sq. yds. were treated per day, for $51.25 -h $0.0196 
= 2610. If this inference is correct, we have the following item- 
ized cost of the labor : 

Per sq. yd. 

Foreman $0.0011 

Teams, sweeping, sprinkling sand, etc 0.0033 

Laborers cleaning road 0.0053 

Laborers spreading tar 0.0038 

Laborers spreading screenings 0.0023 

Rolling 0.0038 

Total • $0.0196 

It will be noted that the above contains no item for cost of heating 
the tar nor for hauling it. 

Cost of Tarring IVIacadam, Jackson, Tenn.*— Mr. Logan Wlaller 
Page, Director, Office of Public Roads, gives the following data of 
work done under Mr. Samuel Lancaster's direction. 

The macadam streets in the business center of Jackson were 
built originally of the hard silicious rock known as novaculite. 
About May, 1905, after fifteen years of wear repair of these streets 
became necessary. 

The old surface was first swept clean with a horse sweeper. This 
was done because tar will not penetrate a road surface which is 
covered with dust and loose materials. 

Next, the surface was loosened by means of spikes placed in the 
wheels of a 10-ton steam roller, the street reshaped, and new 
material added where needed. 

The road was then sprinkled, rolled, bonded and finished to form 
a hard, compact, even surface, and allowed to dry thoroughly before 
either tar or oil was applied, for these substances cannot penetrate 
a moist road surface. The best results are obtained when the work 
is done in hot, dry weather, and accordingly the tar was first 
applied in August. 

Other sections of streets and roads were built of new material 
entirely and according to well-known principles of macadam con- 
struction, but no tar or oil was put on them until after they had 

*Engineering-Contracting, July 4, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



301 



been subjected to traffic. Sections of country roads which had been 
built for periods of from one to two years were also treated with 
tar and oil. 

The tar used was a by-product from the manufacture of coke 
and was practically free from moisture. It was received at tne 
railway station in standard steel tanks of about 8,000 gals, capac- 
ity. A portable boiler was connected with the steam coils of these 
tank cars to heat the tar and keep it hot, thus saving time in 
bringing it to the temperature desired for spreading on the road. 
It was then taken from the tank cars and poured into a cylindrical 
tank wagon of 500 gals, capacity by means of a hand-lever pump. 
This portable tank had a small fire box under one end with a flue 
running directly beneath the tank to a smokestack at the other end. 
A fire was kept in the flre-box and the tar brought to a temperature 
which generally reached 210° F., but when placed on the road it 
was reduced to a temperature of from 160° to 190° F. The hottest 
tar produced the best results. 

A horizontal pipe with an adjustable, longitudinal slot, attached 
to the rear of the wagon and extending down close to the surface 
of the road, was first used to spread the tar, but this became 
clogged and did not give an even flow. It was therefore abandoned, 
and in place of it a piece of four-ply 1%-in. rubber hose was at- 
tached to the wagon. This hose had a nozzle of 1-in. pipe, slightly 
flattened at the end to produce a broad stream, and was provided 
with a valve for controlling the flow. The tar was spread with this 
hose over a radius of about 15 ft. of road surface. 

Laborers, with street cleaners' brooms of bamboo fiber, followed 
the tank and swept the surplus tar ahead. They spread it as evenly 
and quickly as possible, and in a layer only thick enough to cover 
the surface. One side of the street was finished at a time, and bar- 
ricades placed to keep off the traffic until the tar had had time to 
soak into the surface. The time allowed for this process was 
varied from a few hours to several days. From the results ob- 
tained it can be stated that, under a hot sun, with the road surface 
thoroughly compact, clean, and dry, and with the tar heated almost 
to the boiling point and applied as described above, the road will 
absorb practically all of it in eight or ten hours. 

A light coat of clean sand, screenings, or the clean particles swept 
from the surface of the road, may then be spread as evenly as 
possible and rolled in with a steam roller. These different top 
layers were applied to various sections, and in one case the road 
was left to dry without spreading anything except the hot tar. In 
another instance sand was applied to the tar within two hours, 
which resulted in the absorption of the tar by the sand and lessened 
its penetration of the road surface. It was necessary to remove this 
sand-tar mixture, which peeled up under traffic. A sufficient amount 
of tar, however, had penetrated the surface of the road to make it 
waterproof, and after more than seven months of service this section 
of street is in good condition. 

In spreading the coat of material for drying the surface of the 



302 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

road and absorbing the surplus tar, only enough should be used to 
cover it lightly, as, after rolling, this surplus material will be washed 
or blown away, or it may be removed with street sweepers and the 
surface left smooth and clean. 

After more than seven months, including the winter season of 
1905-6, the tarred streets and roads are still in excellent condition. 
They are hard, smooth and resemble asphalt, except that they show 
a more gritty surface. The tar forms a part of the surface proper 
and is in perfect bond with the macadam. Sections cut from the 
streets show that the tar has penetrated from 1 to 2 inches, and the 
fine black lines seen in the interstices between the individual stones 
show that the mechanical bond has been reinforced by the pene- 
tration of the tar. The tar is a matrix into which the stones of the 
surface are set, forming a conglomerate or concrete. A second 
coating applied a year after the first would require much less tar 
than the first, as the interstices of the rock would then be filled 
with tar. 

On five different sections, having a total of 13,235 sq. yds., the 
average cost of the labor was about as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

Labor, sweeping, at 51.25 per 10-hr. day $0.0014 

Filling tank, heating tar, and hauling to the 

road 0.0012 

Labor, applying tar 0.0030 

Labor, applying sand or screenings 0.0030 

Total labor $0.0086 

The total labor was, therefore, less than 1 ct. per sq. yd. Negro 
labor was used, at $1.25 for 10 hrs., and teams were paid $3 per 
day. The average quantity of tar was 0.45 gal. per sq. yd. The 
labor cost of heating, hauling and applying the tar was 0.42 ct. 
per sq. yd., as above given, or practically 1 ct. per gal. of tar, ex- 
clusive of the labor of sweeping and of applying sand ; but,, includ- 
ing those two items of labor, the labor cost was practically 2 cts. 
per gal. of tar. 

Cost of Oiling Macadam, Jackson, Tenn.* — Mr. Logan Waller 
Page gives the following. (For comparative data on tarring ma- 
cadam at the same place and time, see page 300.) 

Seven tank cars of oil, given by some Texas and Louisiana com- 
panies, were used at Jackson. It varied in quality from a light, 
crude oil to a heavy, viscous residue from the refineries. Over 7 
miles of country road and several city streets were treated. 

At first, some of the lighter crude oils were applied with the 
same tank wagon that was used for the tar. Hose and brooms 
were used to spread the oil, and practically the same process was 
followed as with the tar. The oil soaked into the macadam very 
quickly and left no coating on top. It caused the light covering 
of sand which was applied to pack down and gave the road a dark 
color. 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 4, 1906. 



KUADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 303 

It was soon noticed that the preliminary sweeping was unneces- 
sary, as the roads were practically free from dust, and oil and 
would penetrate the surface. The removal of detritus was a loss to 
the road, which had to be replaced by sand to prevent excessive 
wear on the stone. It was later found that it was much cheaper to 
use an ordinary street sprinkler than the tank wagon, and in this 
case spreading the oil with brooms was unnecessary. 

The crude oil was used cold, and the cost of applying it with the 
different methods used is given below. 

On a city street 8,266 sq. yds. were treated at the rate of 0.48 
of a gal. of oil per sq. yd. with the use of the tank wagon and 
hose. The cost of labor per square yard was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Sweeping street $0.0011 

Filling tank and hauling 0.0008 

Oihng street 0.0024 

Spreading sand 0.0014 

Total $0.0057 

On a country road 2,000 gals, were spread, covering 5,206 sq. 

yds., at a rate of 0.38 of a gal. per sq. yd. The average haul was 

1 mile. Only the manure was removed before oiling. The cost of 

labor averaged $0.0033 per sq. yd. 

It took 9 men 30 mins. to spread 500 gals., or one tank load, and 

the 18-ft. road was covered at the rate of 1,860 ft. per hour. It 

took 28 mins. to fill the tank with oil. 

With an ordinary street sprinkler, one man and team spread one 

load of 600 gals, of oil in 15 mins. The sprinkler thus spread 

600 gals, in one-half the time that it took 9 men, with the tank 

wagon, to spread 500 gals. 

The heavy residual oils were so thick when cold that they woiild 
not run through a 2-in. fire hose attached to the rear of the tank 
wagon, and it was necessary to pump the oil upon the road. The 
pump with which the tank was charged was used for this operation. 
Only one tank wagon (500 gals.) of the heavy oil was applied cold. 
It formed a thick, sticky mass on the top of the road that rolled 
about under pressure and seemed to have an unlimited capacity for 
absorbing the sand which was spread upon it. The street had to 
be cleared of the greater part of this mass of oil and sand within 
a short time. 

After this experience the oil was heated in the tank car by 
steam, and better results followed. It still ran slowly through the 
hose and nozzle, and it was found cheaper to take off the hose and 
allow the oil to flow from the outlet of the tank wagon directly 
upon the road, where the men swept it over the surface with 
brooms. An air pump was tried, to increase the flow of the tank 
wagon by pressure, but the tank was not tight enough to prevent 
the escape of air, and this experiment was unsuccessful. 

Twenty-four hours after the application of the residual oil it was 
covered with sand or limestone screenings, and in four days it was 



304 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

firm enough to bear traffic without showing any wheel tracks. It 
shed the water well in a violent rain storm. 

The following was the labor cost per square yard of putting 
residual oil on city streets with the use of the tank wagon. Ap- 
proximately 0.71 gal. of oil was used per square yard: 

Per sq. yd. 

Sweeping street $0.0010 

Heating, loading and hauling 0.0017 

Oiling street 0.0029 

Spreading sand 0.0022 

Total $0.0078 

Excellent results can be secured by the use of this heavy residual 
oil if it can be applied to the surface of the road at a tempera- 
ture approaching the boiling point. 

The medium grade of oil, which was tried next, is classed by the 
refiners as "steamer oil." It was heavy enough to leave a slight 
coating on the surface, which made a very compact covering with 
the dust of the road. Only the heavy matter was removed from the 
surface of the road before applying the oil. It was heated by 
steam in the car, but was not hot when it reached the road. It 
was not safe to build a fire in the tank wagon, and the best road 
surface was obtained where the oil was at the highest temperature. 
Some method of heating the oil safely on the road would greatly 
improve the result. This could be accomplished with a steam trac- 
tion engine having steam coils connected with the tank, the engine 
hauling and heating the tank while spreading the oil. Most of 
this oil was applied with the street sprinkler, and it sprayed readily 
when hot. 

In applying the greater part of the oil on the country roads the 
following men and equipment were used: 

Per day. 

1 foreman ? 2.00 

6 laborers, at $1.25 , 7.50 

1 tank wagon 3.00 

1 street sprinkler 3.00 

2 firemen, at $1.50 3.00 

1 ton coal 4.00 

Total $22.50 

This force spread 3 tank wagons and 3 sprinkler tank loads, or 
3,300 gals, per day, making the cost 0.7 ct. per gal. The 6 laborers 
(negroes) pumped the oil at the car and worked on the road. It 
will be noted that it required about 0.6 lb. coal to heat 1 gal. of oil. 
No sweeping was done on the country roads except to remove 
manure and to spread the oil where it was inclined to puddle. No 
sand or other material was applied to the road after oiling. 

More than seven months have now elapsed since the work was 
done. The light crude oil has produced little if any permanent re- 
sults. The roads where it was applied are but slightly changed, 
and some dust arises on them from traffic. The only apparent re- 
sult is a slightly darker color on the "shoulders" of the road, and 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 305 

but little difference can be noticed between this and other sections 
of the road which were not treated. This oil was too volatile for 
the purpose, and where it has to be shipped for any distance does 
not justify the expense of using it. 

The medium "steamer oil" from Texas has given good results. 
There is a thin surface coat of dust packed down that protects the 
stone from the grind and pounding of traffic. This effect is very 
noticeable in driving over it. The harsh grinding noise of the 
wheels, which is pronounced on the novaculite surface, disappears 
at once, and there is decided relief in driving upon it. It is prac- 
tically noiseless. Tills coating is perhaps one-eighth of an inch 
thick, and is not a concrete, but compacted dust, which is made 
to cohere by the oil with which it is saturated. This road does not 
wash or "pick up," and the wear on the rock is much decreased. 

Cost of Oiled Earth Street, Arkansas.* — Mr. Frank H. Wright 
gives the following : 

The street in question (Helena, Ark.) was about 700 ft. long and 
was oiled for a width of 40 ft. The soil was a soluble yellow clay, 
and in heavy rainstorms there had always been much washing of 
the grutters and in the wagon tracks on the crown. 

Preparatory to oiling, the street was thoroughly plowed twice 
for a width of 40 ft., the amount used for traffic, a small-pointed 
Avery plow with a steel beam being used. After plowing, a disc 
harrow was thoroughly applied, after which a toothed harrow was 
used imtil the street was like ashes. One team with a driver 
was used in this preliminary work, but a shaker was used with the 
plow. The plowing and harrowing consumed about two days. 

The oil was brought to the street by a team carrying three 52-gal. 
barrels. To get the oil from the tank car a small lever pump was 
bolted to the floor timber of the car at the side of the tank, and a 
connection made to the inside of the tank by a siphon made of 2-in. 
wrought iron pipe and fittings. The driver with one man to pump 
was able to leave the street, go to the car and fill the three barrels 
and return exactly in 30 mins. 

In applying the oil, a strip about 15 ft. wide was taken on each 
side of the street, the street not being closed to traffic, and three 
men, each equipped with a 2-gal. sprinkling can, with the spray 
removed, poured the oil on the pulverized surface. Each man worked 
in his own section, about 20 ft. long, the driver filling the sprinklers 
by pumping from the barrels with a tin oil pump. 

A load of coarse sand was dropped about every 50 ft. on the 
oiled strip, and, during the absence of the wagon in refilling the bar- 
rels, this sand was spread by the men in the same manner that sand 
is applied over a newly grouted brick pavement. 

After one side had been oiled and sanded, a strip on the other 
side was treated in a like manner, and the center strip was again 
plowed and harrowed, having become compacted by traffic. After 
the center strip had been treated the whole strip was gone over 



*Engineering-Contracting , Nov. 21, 1906. 



306 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

with a toothed harrow, and was then oiled and sanded a second 
time, but was not harrowed again. 

The worlc was done in the first week of July and until recently 
there had been comparatively little dust and no mud, nor had there 
been any more washing where formerly it was excessive after a hard 
rain. There have been several hard rains this summer, one coming 
soon after the street was treated. 

In applying the oil it took the three men exactly one hour to 
dispose of the three 52-gal. barrels of oil over a surface of 15 ft. x 
100 ft., or 1,500 sq. ft. One man scattered with a shovel one wagon- 
load of sand (about 24 cu. ft.) over an area of 50 ft. x 60 ft., or 
3,000 sq. ft, in 15 mins. 

The gang was as follows: 

Per day. 

1 foreman, at $1.50 $ 1.50 

2 teams, at $3.00 6.00 

3 laborers, at $1.25 3.75 

Total $11.25 

It took this gang 3% days to oil 3,110 sq. yds., the cost being as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Laborers, at $1.25 per day $0.0054 

Teams, at $3.00 per day 0.0068 

Foreman, at $1.50 per day 0.0017 

Total labor $0.0130 

0.8 gals, oil, at 3 cts 0.0241 

0.011 loads (24 cu. ft.) sand at 75 cts 0.0084 

Grand total $0.0463 

Since a team and driver and one man to pump the oil could pump 
and deliver 6 bbls., or 312 gals, per hr., this item of cost was 0.14 
ct. per gal. Since it took 3 men 2 hrs. to spread the 6 bbls., or 312 
gals., the cost of spreading the oil was 0.24 ct. per gal., making a 
total of 0.38 ct. per gal., even with this crude way of spreading the 
oil with 2-gal. sprinkling cans. 

Cost of Oiling iVlacadam, New York State.* — Mr. Arnold G. Chap- 
man gives the following description of oiling certain New York 
state roads in 1906. 

An ordinary 600-gal. steel tank on wheels was equipped with 
an "oil distributor" or sprinkler of the kind that has been devel- 
oped in California for distributing heavy oils. The characteristic 
features of this type of- sprinkler are that the oil is distributed 
directly downward upon the road surface and that the width of 
the application may be regulated from 18 ins. to 6 ft., as can also 
the amount of oil applied, by the manipulation of levers by the op- 
erator, who sits in the rear of the tank. Prom his position the 
operator can adapt the flow of oil both as to quantity and width, 
as the condition of the road may demand. 

To unload the oil from the 6,000-gal. U. T. L. cars, in which it 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 307 

was received, a diaphragm pump was used, fastened to the dome 
of the car. By means of an iron chute the oil was conveyed from 
the pump to the sprinkler tank. This method was rather cumber- 
some and unhandy and entailed the loss of too much time in setting 
up the pump and in unloading the oil, but it was the best and 
cheapest available at that time. However, it can be greatly im- 
proved upon when the oiling is undertaken on more than an ex- 
perimental basis. 

The oil used was that known as the Raglan oil, obtained through 
the Standard Oil Co., from their wells at Salt Lick, Ky., at a cost 
of 4.78 cts. per gal., f. o. b. at the various places where used. This 
is a crude oil, being black and heavy, due to the presence of asphalt, 
of which the producers claim a 30% to 35% base. When cold, the 
flow of oil is slow and sluggish, but when warm it flows with a 
reasonable degree of rapidity. 

On the several sections of road treated the methods of applica- 
tion varied, some being sanded, others swept, and some treated, as 
left by the trafflc. While the oil was being applied, traffic was not 
suspended, but the people chose the sides of the road not oiled, for 
a few days until the oil had been taken up by the surface and did 
not have a tendency to adhere to the vehicle tires and to be thrown 
upon the garments of the people riding or on vehicles. From ob- 
servation during the experiments it was noted that the best results 
were obtained when the surface of the road was warm and dry 
and the day was also clear and warm. 

About 18,700 gals, were applied to 8 different macadam and 
gravel roads, having an aggregate of 131/2 miles, having an aggre- 
gate width of 10 ft, making an average of about 1,400 gals, per 
mile, or nearly 0.24 gals, per sq. yd. The average haul was 1% 
miles. 

Ordinarily the gang was one team (with driver) and one laborer 
to pump oil and to operate the levers of the oil distributor when 
sprinkling. The average labor cost per gallon was as follows, team 
receiving $4 per S-hr. day, and laborer, $1.75 : 

Per gal. 

0.006 hr. team, at $0.50 $0 0030 

0.007 hr. laborer, at $0.22 0.0015 

Total $0.0045 

To this cost of approximately % ct. per gal. should be added the 
cost of supervision, and of plant charges. 

The average cost per sq. yd. was as follows (excluding super- 
vision) : 

Per sq. yd. 

0.24 gal. oil, at 4.7S cts $0.0115 

Labor, 0.24 gals, spread, at 0.45 ct 0.0011 

Total $0.0126 

At 1% cts. per sq. yd., a mile of road 10 ft. wide was oiled for 
$75, not including supervision nor plant charges. 

One stretch of gravel road 2.8 miles long and 8 ft. wide was oiled 



308 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

with 3,400 gals, in 2 days at the following cost, although the oil 
was hauled an average of 2 % miles : 

0.0048 hrs. team, at ?0.50 $0.0024 

0.0048 hrs. pumpman, at ?0.22 0.0010 

Total $0.0034 

The cost per sq. yd. was : 

Per sq. yd. 

0.26 gal. oil, at 4.78 cts $0.0124 

Labor, 0.26 gal. spread, at 0.34 ct 0.0009 

Total $0.0133 

The item of supervision (including traveling expense) is given in 
none of the above summaries of cost, for it was exceedingly high 
(about 0.6 ct. per gal., or twice what the actual spreading cost), 
due to the fact that a state engineer accompanied the gang and 
traveled from road to road at an expense that would not ordi- 
narily be called for except in cases of experimental work like this. 
Cost of Oiling IVlacadam, Kansas City, iVio.* — Mr. W. H. Dunn 
gives the following relative to oiling 375,4 00 sq. yds. of park roads 
(macadam) in 1907. During the year most of the roads were 
given two treatments of residuum oil from the Kansas field. The 
price of the oil was 77 cts. per bbl. of 42 gals., or 1.84 cts. per gal. 
The first treatment with oil, during May, June and July, cost as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

0.32 gal. oil, at 1.84 cts $0.0059 

Labor and screenings 0.0089 

Total $0.0148 

This is a trifle less than lYo cts. per sq. yd. 

The second oiling was done in August, September and November, 
covering 260,000 sq. yds. in addition to the 375,400 that had been 
oiled in the early summer, and the cost was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

0.25 gal. oil, at 1.74 cts $0.0044 

Supplies, repairs and screenings 0.0008 

Labor 0.0030 

Total $0.0082 

The limestone screenings formed a considerable part of the cost 
of the first oiling, but a very small part of the cost of the second 
oiling. It will be noted that the two oilings cost about 2^4 cts. per 
sq. yd. for keeping down the dust during the year. No sprinkling 
with water was necessary after a road had once been oiled. Dur- 
ing the previous year, the cost of sprinkling 585,000 sq. yds. (in- 
cluding asphalt and creosoted blocks) with water had been 2.4 cts. 
per sq. yd. 

The methods of unloading the oil, preparing roadway, spreading, 
were as follows : 

Two steel receiving tanks, of 8,000 gals, capacity, were erected at 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 22, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 309 

a total cost of $741.99, connected with a 4-in. pipe-line from re- 
ceiving tank to the side track, permitting of unloading tank cars by- 
gravity, the receiving tanks being also established at such an ele- 
vation as to permit loading the sprinkling carts by gravity from the 
receiving tanks. Two portable boilers were purchased at $67.50 
each, for the purpose of heating the oil in tanks and in sprinkling 
carts. When the macadam was absolutely dry and hard, the entire 
surface of the roadway was swept clean of dirt and screenings. 
The sweepings were left along the edge of the gutter for protection 
to the cement work, then the oil was applied from the sprinkling- 
carts. To the regular sprinkling-carts was attached a tin trough, 
perforated with %-in. holes, to obtain an even distribution of the oil. 
The entire surface of the roadway was then flooded with oil and 
thoroughly broomed in, after which the sweepings from the gutter, 
with sufficient limestone screenings to form a slight dressing, were 
cast over the oil and thoroughly rolled with a steam roller. 

The organization of the gang used in applying the oil was simply 
teams for ordinary city sprinkling wagons, usually from three to 
four teams, depending on the length of haul from the distributing 
plant, and from eight to ten ordinary laborers about equally divided 
between sweeping the screenings to the gutters ahead of the oiling 
and spreading the oil with brooms and casting the sweepings back 
over the oil after it was spread. 

Cost of Tar Macadam, Massachusetts.* — Mr. Arthur H. Blanch- 
ard gives data upon which the following is based, relative to experi- 
mental work done by the Massachusetts Highway Commission In 
1908. 

Three methods of construction were used, which may be termed 
(1) the mixing method, (2) the grouting or penetration method, 
and (3) the Gladwell system. 

By the Mixing Method. — With the exception of the addition of 
tar, the method of construction used was similar to that employed 
in the building of an ordinary macadam road. 

After the subgrade had been thoroughly rolled, the No. 1 broken 
stone (varying in size from 1% to 2i/^ ins. in their longest dimen- 
sions) was spread to a depth of 6 ins. and rolled to 4 ins. 

[Note. — ^While the statement is made that a 6-in. layer was rolled 
to 4 Ins., no such compression as this is possible.] 

Tar, which had been heated in an ordinary tar kettle to the 
boiling point, was then sprinkled on the rolled surface by means 
of dippers. 

The No. 2 stone (varying in size from % to 1% ins. in their 
longest dimensions) was next deposited on dumping boards and 
thoroughly mixed with hot tar with the aid of rakes and shovels. 
This mixtur'e was applied on the No. 1 course to a depth of 3 ins. 
and rolled to 2 ins. 

A thin coat of dust, which would pass through %-in. mesh was 
then spread on the surface and then rolled into the No. 2 course 



*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



310 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to fill up the voids and to provide a smooth surface. The work 
was carried on only when the broken stone was dry. 

The stone was granite and hornblende schist. The work was 
done in May. 

Tar from the Providence Gas Works, and having a specific grav- 
ity of 1.25, was used, and its cost delivered on the road was: 

Per bbl. 

52 gals, tar $2.75 

Freight, 26 miles 0.62 

Haul, averaging 2,000 ft 0.13 

Barrel 0.75 

Total $4.25 

Deducting rebate of $0.75 per bbl. and adding 
return freight of $0.19, net deduction 0.55 

52 gals., at 7.4 cts $3.70 

About the same number of square yards of 6-in. tar-macadam 
road was built per 10 hr. day as is built of ordinary macadam, 
namely, 233 sq. yds., using a 10-ton steam roller and the ordinary 
macadam gang with the following extra men : 

Per day. 

2 tar men, at $1.75 $3.50 

3 laborers mixing and placing, at $1.50 4.50 

Total extra labor, 233 sq. yds., at 3.5 cts $8.00 

Therefore, the added cost of this 6-in. tar macadam over ordi- 
nary 6-in. macadam was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Extra labor (as above given) $0,035 

Fuel for melting tar and interest and depreci- 
ation of tools 0.005 

1% gals, tar, at 7.4 cts., delivered 0.093 

Total $0,133 

Deduct saving of water cart for sprinkling ($4 

per day) 0.013 

Net increased cost due to use of tar $0,120 

On another stretch of road built the previous year, 1.15 gals, of 
tar were used per sq. yd., but the cost per gallon was greater due 
to the fact that the barrels were not returned. The tar in that 
case was hauled 6% miles at a cost of 50 cts. per bbl. of tar for 
hauling. 

The difference in cost of the tar-macadam without . the tar on 
the No. 1 course and with that tar (about 1/5 gal. per square yard) 
spread on the No. 1 course, was not appreciable. It is believed that 
the painting of the No. 1 course with tar is not necessary. In 
common with all methods of construction, with the single excep- 
tion of the Gladwell system, it is necessary, in order to secure a, 
maximum penetration of the broken stone by the tar, and adequate 
incorporation of the tar in the macadam, to allow the No. 2 course 
to remain without rolling and sanding for from 1 to 3 days, depend- 
ing on the climatic conditions. It was found to be inadvisable to 
roll the tarred surface during the warm part of the day, as there 
was a tendency for the No. 2 course to shift if the tar was soft. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 311 

Tarvia-macadam constructed by the mixing method appeared to 
be a fac-slmile of the tar-macadam made with tar distilled for 3 
hours on the road. It is believed that it is primarily a question of 
economics whether it is preferable to take gas-house coal-tar direct 
from the work and distill it on the road, or purchase distilled coal- 
tar, in the form of Tarvia, for example. It should be borne in 
mind, also, that tar distilled at permanent works will give a more 
uniform product. 

By the Grouting Method. — The macadam was constructed by 
spreading 6 ins. of clean, dry No. 1 rock on the rolled subgrade and 
rolling the same to 4 ins. On the No. 1 course was then spread 
2yn to 3 ins. of clean, dry No. 2 rock, which was lightly rolled. The 
tar, which had been heated in the regular tar kettles, was next 
poured on the surface of the No. 2 course and allowed to pene- 
trate. The depth of penetration varied from 1 to 2i/^ ins., de- 
pending on the size of the stone comprising the upper course and 
the amount of rolling the surface had received. Trap rock chip 
screenings were then spread to a depth of % to % in. and thor- 
oughly rolled. 

In the construction of the tar-macadam by the grouting or pene- 
tration method, the tar was spread over the surface by dippers. 
This method was very unsatisfactory, an unequal application being^ 
the result. In order to procure an efficient road, more tar was 
applied in patching, the original application of 1.25 gallons being- 
thus increased to 1.87 gallons. If this method is to be used, pour- 
ing pots with fan-shaped spouts, or a fan-nozzle connected with a 
hose from a tank-wagon, should be used, or preferably a spreading" 
machine similar to the Laissailly or Aitken. Even with a machine 
of the most approved type, and with the stone heated either be- 
fore or after deposition, it is doubtful if the tar-macadam surface- 
thus constructed would be as uniformly bound together as when 
laid by the mixing method. The average rate of progress tarring- 
this section was 389 sq. yds. per day, with two tar men and one 
common laborer. The cost was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

1.87 gals, tar delivered, at 7.4 cts $0,138 

Labor (2 tar men and 1 laborer) 0.013 

Fuel and plant interest, etc 0.005 

Total $0,156 

Deduct saving water sprinkling 0.013 

Total extra cost ?0.143 

This 14.3 cts. per sq. yd. is to be added to the cost of ordinary 6- 
in. macadam. 

The grouting method is particularly applicable to the resurfac- 
ing of old macadam, which can first be loosened to a depth of 3 or 
4 ins., with a scarifier (at a cost of 0.7 ct. per sq. yd.) and then 
grouted with about 1}^ gals, per sq. yd. and rolled. 

By the Gladwell System. — In the construction of tar-macadam 
by the Gladwell system, the bituminous mastic, consisting of tar 
and stone chips varying in size from % to % in. in tlieir longest 



312 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

dimensions, was mixed in a regular mortar box. This mixture was 
spread to a depth of % in. on the No. 1 course of stone, and the 
No. 2 course of broken stone was then laid upon it. A coating of 
tar was spread on the surface, and, after screenings had been 
applied, the section was thoroughly rolled with a steam roller. The 
upward penetration of the tar was not measurable, and the sur- 
face coat did not penetrate more than 1% in. In order to procure 
satisfactory results, it will be necessary to have the No. 1 course 
so thoroughly compacted as to hold a semi-fluid mixture ; the stone 
composing the No. 2 course should be larger than that generally 
used, and should be well heated, and, finally, it will be necessary to 
use a light asphalt roller in order to draw the fluid mixture gradu- 
ally to the surface, and not attempt to crush the No. 2 course into 
the binder. Under no circumstances is it believed that the method 
will prove as efficacious or economical as either the mixing or pene- 
tration methods of construction. The rate of progress of this class 
of work was slow, and would average 156 sq. yds. per day. The 
labor item was high, two tar men and four common laborers being 
required, making the labor cost $0.06 per square yard. The tar, 
1 gallon per square yard in the mastic and 1.25 gallons on the sur- 
face, cost $0,167 per square yard. Summarizing we have the fol- 
lowing cost : 

Per sq. yd. 

2.25 gals, tar, at 7.4 cts $0,167 

Labor (2 tar men and 4 laborers) 0.061 

Fuel and plant interest, etc 0.005 

Total $0,233 

Deduct saving water sprinkling 0.013 

Total extra cost $0,220 

This 22 cts. per sq. yd. must be added to the cost of ordinary 
6-in. macadam. 

Cost of Tar Macadam, Duluth, Minn. — Mr. E. K. Coe gives the 
following: Duluth began laying tar macadam in 1902, and it in- 
creased so rapidly in popularity that 90% of the total pavement 
laid in 1906 was tar macadam (71,500 sq. yds.). The pavement is 8 
ins. thick, consisting of a tar grouted macadam base 6 ins. thick, 
covered with 2 ins. of tar macadam th.at has been mixed in a ma- 
chine. This 6-in. base is composed of crushed rock % to 2%-in. 
in size, and is rolled with a steam roller. Then hot tar is spread 
over the base, 1 gal. per sq. yd., by means of large sprinkling 
cans, the spout of the can being flared and measuring %x8 ins. 
This tar is drawn from a tank wagon, and is spread immediately 
in advance of the spreading of the 2-in. wearing coat of tar mac- 
adam (or tar concrete). This wearing coat is mixed in a port- 
able mixing plant owned by the city. The plant has a capacity 
of 1,000 sq. yds. of 2-in. wearing coat per day ; its shipping weight 
is 18 tons and it is easily hauled to any part of the city by a 
steam roller. The plant was built by the Toledo Construction & 
Supply Co. of Detroit, and cost the city $10,300. It is rented to 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 313 

the contractors at $20 a day, straight time, the city furnishing 
tlie engineman. As many as 1,300 sq. yds. of 2-in. wearing coat 
have been mixed by this plant in a day. 

The stone for the wearing coat is first heated in this plant to 175° 
to 200° F., which is the same temperature that the tar receives. 

The stone is graded in size to reduce the voids to about 7%. 
"When the voids are filled, however, and the stone coated with tar, 
the particles of stone are separated, so that 11% by bulk of tar 
is necessary. The following is one of the successful batches: 

344 lbs. stone passing 1%-in. screen and caught on 1-in. 

152 lbs. stone passing 1-in. screen and caught on %-in. 

175 lbs. stone passing %-in. screen and caught on %-in. 

275 lbs. stone passing %-in. screen and includ. fine dust. 

54 lbs. tar. 



1,020 lbs. total. 

Usually 6 or 7 batches of SOO lbs. make a wagonload, bottom 
dump wagons being used. 

Plant foremen are tempted to use an excess of tar, to make a 
batch appear mixed before it really is, and thus make a bigger 
day's run. 

Tar from the Duluth tar plant is used ; it is a by-product of the 
coke ovens and is very uniform. 

The liquid tar for the base is hauled in steel tank wagons, which 
are provided with small furnaces to keep the tar melted. 

The mixed material for the 2-in. wearing coat is dumped from 
the dump wagons onto a sectional platform, shoveled to place, raked 
out smooth, and immediately rolled with a 15-ton roller. This 
course is 2 ins. thick after rolling. When rolled smooth and com- 
pact, a flush coat of tar (5 lbs. per sq. yd.) is spread, to seal all 
surface voids. Formerly a "squeegee" (like a rubber window 
cleaner) was used for this flush coat spreading, but it was found 
preferable to use a special cart mounted on two small wheels and 
with a box 18 ins. square x 12 ins. deep. Behind the cart is a 
piece of heavy rubber belting set on edge, 8 ins. wide and 3 ft. long, 
bent to an arc of 60°. Some 7 gals, of fluid tar are poured into the 
box, in the bottom of which is a 1-in. hole, with a tapering iron 
plug which is operated by a lever from the drawbar, so that the 
man who draws the cart can manipulate the plug and deliver a 
small amount of tar directly in front of the rubber belt, or 
"squeegee." 

Finally the surface is covered with a thin layer of hot rock, 
beech nut size, and rolled. 

The following are the materials required per sq. yd. of 2-in. wear- 
ing coat and 6-in. base: 0.3 cu. yd. crushed rock and screenings 
and 3 to 3% gals, tar, including waste. 

The average contract price in 1906 was $1.23 per sq. yd., which 
includes everything but grading, and includes a 5-yr. guarantee. 



314 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The gang required to mix and lay the 2-in. wearing coat is as 
follows : 

Plant Force: 

1 foreman. 

1 engineman. 

1 fireman. 

1 mixer man. 

1 weigh man. 

1 feeder. 

3 to 6 shovelers (according to location of pile of stone). 

2 teams hauling tar. 
1 watchman. 

Street Force: 
1 foreman. 

3 men spreading tar binder on base. 
8 shovelers. 

3 rakers. 

1 engineman on steam roller. 

1 tar heater. 

1 man on squeegee cart. 

2 men spreading surface screenings. 
1 watchman. 

1 water boy. 

3 to 6 teams according to length of haul. 

Cost of Asphalt Macadam, Redlands, Calif. — Mr. C. C. Brown gives 
the following: During 1906, the city of Redlands, Calif., built 6 
miles (100,000 sq. yds.) of asphalt macadam at a cost of 60 cts. 
per sq. yd., by contract. The city owns a crushing plant, and sells 
the rock to the contractor at $1 per ton, f. o. b. cars. It is hauled 
5 miles by rail. It requires li^ cu. yds. of crushed rock (meas- 
ured in the cars after the 5-mile haul) to make 1 cu. yd. of the 
finished pavement, including the sand and the asphalt. 

The crushed granite is spread in two layers, the bottom layer 
composed of stones 1% to 3 ins. in size, the top layer, % to 1% 
ins. It is then filled with granite screenings. Each course is rolled, 
water being freely used while the screenings are being rolled in. 
As soon as the water dries out, heavy asphaltlc oil (75% asphalt) 
at a temperature of 150° F., is sprinkled over the macadam, about 
2 gals, per sq. yd., or even more. Excavations of the macadam 
show that the oil has penetrated % to % the way down. The 
street is then thrown open, and several weeks of traffic iron it out 
into a smooth pavement. If any ruts appear broken stone ( % to 
1 in.) is placed on the macadam and covered with the asphaltic oil. 

The asphaltic oil, or liquid asphalt, is applied from a tank wagon 
hauled by 4 horses. The tank is equipped with a "Glover oiler" 
(now known as a petrolithic oiler, made by the Petrolithic Pave- 
ment Co. of Los Angeles, Calif.). The "oiler," or "distributor," is 
a cylinder having a series of openings, "the flow being nicely con- 
trolled by a set of levers manipulated by a man on the wagon, 
who regulates the flow according to the speed of the team." 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 315 

Four tanks, of 800 gals, each, or 3,200 gals., are distributed per day 
of 8 lirs., when the haul is two miles each way. The heating is 
done at the unloading tank by steam, which is also used to facili- 
tate unloading the tank car. 

The oil costs $1 per 40-gal. barrel, including the freight, which 
is 33 cts. per bbl. 

Cost of Petrolithic Macadam — Mr. J. C. Black, in an article in 
the California Journal of Technology, Oct. 8, 1908 (reprinted in 
Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 11, 1908), gave the following: I 
have inserted an illustration of the rolling tamper and the gang 
plow, and have assumed wages and prices. 

Petrolithic pavement originated in southern California some eight 
years ago, and since that time has given such great satisfaction that 
it is now to be found in many parts of the United States, and is 
even securing a foothold in foreign countries. 

Petrolithic pavement consists of a compacted mass of earth, 
crushed rock or gravel and asphaltic oil, although, since the lighter 
oils in which asphaltum is dissolved do not remain permanently in 
the pavement, but disappear (mainly by evaporation) within a 
few months after its completion, we may properly call it a mixture 
of earth, rock and asphalt. The rock is intended to act as a 
wearing coat, and hence is kept mainly near the surface. How- 
ever, it is not the composition, but the manner in which it is 
treated, that constitutes the most important and characteristic fea- 
ture of a petrolithic pavement, for this Is the only method in 
which the entire material of the street is tamped into a compact 
mass of uniform density. 

After the road has been brought approximately to grade and is 
properly crowned, the surface is broken to a depth of 6 to 9 ins., 
by plowing or otherwise, and then pulverized by farm cultivators 
and harrows or other machinery. The application of water, often 
in quantities amounting to several gallons to the square yard of 
surface covered, usually greatly expedites the pulverization. 

After the ground is reduced to a sufficiently fine condition, oil is 
applied at the rate of three-fourths of one gallon to each square 
yard of surface and is cultivated in. Another application of oil 
equal to the first is then made and cultivated, after which the 
ground is plowed 6 ins. deep, a gang plow. Fig. 6, generally being 
most satisfactory for this work. The plowing should be such as 
will thoroughly turn the furrow, and It will generally bring to the 
surface a small amount of soil which has been untouched by the 
oil. A slight amount of cultivating or harrowing serves to work 
out the ridges left by the plow, and the third application of oil, 
amounting to one gallon to the yard, is then made and culti- 
vated in. 

After this it is advisable to put on the road grader, and it is the 
writer's experience that a liberal use of it Is effort well spent. 
It will be observed that up to the present stage all the work on the 
road has been done along longitudinal lines — applying the oil and 
plowing must of necessity be so carried on, and while cultivating 



316 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



and harrowing may be done zig-zag fashion, it is generally more 
satisfactory to work in a straight line. While this work results in 
a fairly uniform mixture of soil and oil, there Is a certain tendency 
toward the formation of streaks, and it is in the correction of this 
that the great benefit of the road grader as a mixing device 




Pig. 6. Petrolithic Gang Plow. 

becomes apparent. The soil is in a very loose and finely divided 
condition, so that with the grader blade set at an angle, a deep cut 
may be made, and by thus shifting the material from side to side 
a number of times, the streaks may be entirely removed. 

The road is now brought back to grade, and a petrolithic rolling 
tamper, Fig. 7, is set to work. This tamper consists of a roller 




Fig. 7. Petrolithic Rolling Tamper. 



about 3 ft. in diameter, the surface of which is studded with iron 
teeth or feet 9 ins. long and terminating in a slightly rounded sur- 
face of about 4 sq. ins. area. The total weight of the machine is 
between 4,800 lbs. and 5,000 lbs., and as there are 10 or 11 ft. in a 
row, the weight on each is approximately 450 lbs., or over 100 lbs. 
to the square inch of surface. The device is patented, and is for 
sale by the Petrolithic Pavement Co. of Los Angeles. It is drawn 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 317 

by four horses, from four to six being required, according to con- 
ditions. As it passes over the loose material of the street, the feet 
sinlc to a depth of 6 or 8 ins., and being flat ended each one leaves 
a small, compact mass of earth and oil at the place it struck. 
In order to secure uniform results and prevent the too rapid tamp- 
ing, a cultivator must be used in connection with the tamper. The 
cultivator should be adjusted at first to work to approximately the 
same depth as the tamper, but after two or three trips over the 
ground, should be raised a notch. After this it should be raised 
from time to time, but never more than a single notch at a setting, 
and care should always be taken to avoid too great haste and con- 
sequent imperfect tamping. It will be observed that this process 
builds the pavement "from the bottom up," so to speak, thereby 
producing a dense mass for the full thickness. 

When the road has been tamped so that 2 or 3 ins. of loose ma- 
terial remain on the surface, the tamper should be taken off and 
the surface smoothed with a road grader or drag. After this, a 2 
or 3-in. layer of li/4-in. gravel or crushed rock should be spread 
upon the road and cultivated so as to mix it with the earth. The 
rock may be spread by hand, in which case dumping should begin 
at the end of the road where the wagons arrive, so that they may 
travel over it instead of over the loose earth, or it may be dumped 
in a single line down the center of the road, and then spread with 
the grader. In point of cost, one method offers little advantage 
over the others. The hand spreading usually gives more uniform 
results. 

After the rock is spread and cultivated, the last coat of oil, 
amounting to one gallon" to the square yard, is applied, and the 
ground again cultivated. It should then be plowed as deeply as 
possible without disturbing the tamping already done. A few 
trips of the cultivator will smooth out the surface, and the tamper 
may again be set to work. When only a small amount of loose 
material (say an inch) remains, the cultivator may be taken off 
altogether, and the surface given a light treatment with a grader 
or drag before the tamper finishes its work. 

A smooth roller will improve the appearance of the newly com- 
pleted road, but will add little to its efficiency or durability. 

The use of water from time to time during the work is a neces- 
sity, but because of varying conditions of weather and variety of 
soils, fixed rules for its use are impossible. In general it will be 
found that sandy soils must be kept wet from start to finish of 
work, while clay or adobe requires comparatively little water, and 
that mainly during the tamping process. If too much water is 
used on soil of this nature, the almost inevitable result will be 
clogging of machinery and consequent delays. For applying water, 
the oil wagons will be found entirely satisfactory. 

It is needless to remark that the details of building a petrolithic 
pavement may be varied considerably, and that good results can be 
obtained in several ways. In fact, as in many other lines, there are 
no two pieces of work which can be conducted in exactly the same 



318 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

manner. Some of those who have been most successful with this 
form of construction prefer to put the rock on the road before any 
tamping has been done. This is cultivated, and after the final coat 
of oil has been applied is plowed under. It might be thought that 
this would result in the rock being distributed through so great 
a thickness of soil that its value as a wearing surface would be 
lost, but the fact is that even when plowed under as much as 6 ins. 
the cultivation rapidly brings it to the top. If it is attempted to 
mix it with too small a quantity of soil, a large amount of rock will 
remain loose on tne surface, and must be removed entirely from the 
street. 

Most of the older petrolithic roads of southern California were 
built without the use of any rock or gravel, and the satisfaction 
they have given proves that where the price of rock is high and 
the keeping down of expenses imperative an excellent pavement 
may be built of nothing but the natural material of the street mixed 
with oil. 

As to the character of soil in which petrolithic pavement may 
successfully be built, almost anything will do, provided it is free 
from a large amount of alkali or other ingredient which will cause 
decomposition of the oil. In sand the adhesive qualities of the oil 
will hold the particles together and make possible a good road, 
where otherwise some expensive paving material would be neces- 
sary. No soil gives better results than adobe (clay), although 
it is hard to work, and consequently may slightly increase the cost. 
Between the extremes of sand and adobe equal satisfaction will be 
found. 

The greater the amount of asphalt in the oil, the better, and the 
specifications of the city of Los Angeles require a minimum of 70 
per cent. Natural oils having this amount of asphalt are difficult 
to obtain, but the Sunset District produces some which run from 
75 to 80 per cent or even more. These are used exclusively for road 
oils, and can generally be had at a reasonable price, say 50 cts. per 
bbl. of 42 gals. Refinery products or residuums are frequently 
used, and these prove satisfactory when the quality of the asphalt 
contained in them is unimpaired. The objection to their use arises 
from the fact that an overheated or burned asphalt lacks the ad- 
hesive qualities necessary in a good road oil. A special and ex- 
pensive test is necessary to determine whether overheating has 
taken place, and as it should be applied to every carload, besides 
causing delay, it will form quite an item of expense. Care should 
be taken to get an oil comparatively free from water and sedi- 
ment, many specifications requiring the rejection of all oil con- 
taining more than 2 per cent of such foreign matter. 

It is commonly required that the oil be applied to the road at a 
temperature of not less than 150° F., and some oils, because of 
their viscosity, cannot be easily handled at a lower temperature. 
Although there are still some advocates of the use of cold oil, the 
general opinion is "the hotter the better." 

For heating the oil a portable boiler of some sort is generally 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 319 

used. The oil may be heated In the cars in which it is delivered, 
which are usually equipped with steam pipes for this purpose, or It 
may be run into a tank or pit in whicli a steam coil has been set. 
In soil of a clayey nature, a pit without lining may be used, as the 
oil will penetrate the ground only a few inches. An oil pump with 
the necessary valves and connections for unloading from car and 
loading into wagons, will complete the heating establishment. 

Oil tank wagons are built of various capacities, the common sizes 
holding from 800 to 1,000 gals. The distributors, of which thei-e ara 
several good designs, ai;e attached to the rear of the tank, and 
spread the oil for a width of 6 or 7 ft. Some are divided into 
three or four sections, so that a narrower strip may be covered if 
desired. The oil holds its heat well, and if conditions demand, the 
heating plant may be situated several miles from the work and still 
allow of the delivery of oil at the required temperature. 

Warm weather is desirable for carrying on the work, as when it 
is cold the oil tends to drag or form into chunks, with resulting 
irregularities and soft spots in the finished roadway. The road may 
be opened for traffic as soon as the tamping is finished. 

A complete outfit for building petrolithic pavement will be about 
as follows, though, of course, the magnitude of the work will de- 
termine the number of pieces of machinery necessary. It is often 
possible to rent a portion of the plant, and some cities have their 
own outfits, which they are prepared to rent to contractors, gener- 
ally at so much a block : 

1 portable steam boiler, with fittings. 

1 oil pump and connections. 

1 pit or tank of not less than 10,000 gals, capacity, and fitted 
with steam heating coils. 

1 oil wagon and distributor. 

1 road grader. 

1 road drag (home made). 

3 dump wagons, for rock. 

1 rooter plow. 

1 gang plow. 
3 cultivators. 

2 rolling tampers. 

The operating gang is as follows: 

1 foreman. 

1 grader man and oil wagon operator. 

1 fireman. 

7 teamsters. 

3 laborers. 

35 horses or mules. 

The accompanying figures give an average of the amount of 
labor and material per sq. yd. on several streets, all of which were 
in clay or adobe soil. In sandy soil more tamping and more water 
are required, but the preliminary work is much easier. The amount 
of work necessary varies widely, and depends entirely on local con- 
ditions, but by substituting rates of wages and costs of materials 



320 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in this table an approximation to the cost of doing the work may 
be obtained. Proper allowance must, of course, be made for inter- 
est and depreciation or for rental of plant. 

Plowing and Pulverizing : Per sq. yd. 

0.004 hr. rooter plow, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 $0.0032 

0.004 hi-, cultivator, 4 horses and driver, at $0.60 0.0016 

0.002 hr. tamper, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0016 

Oiling: 

O.OOIS hr. fireman, heating- oil, at $0.20 0.0036 

0.007 hr. oil wagon, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0056 

0.004 hr. oil wagon operator, at $0.20 0008 

0.0015 hr. hand labor, at $0.20 .• 0.0003 

Mixing Oil and Soil: 

0.0015 hr. rooter plow, 6 horses and driver, $0.80 0.0012 

0.0027 hr. gang plow, 4 horses and driver, at $0.60 0.0016 

0.022 hr. cultivator, 4 horses and driver, at $0.60 0.0132 

0.007 hr. hand labor, at $0.20 0.0014 

Watering: 
0.005 hr. water wagon, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0040 

Handling and Hauling Crushed Rock: 

0.042 hr. labor, loading into wagons, at $0.20 0.0084 

0.056 hr. wagon hauling, 2 horses and driver, at $0.40 0.0224 

0.009 hr. labor, spreading rock, at $0.20 0.0018 

Grading: 

0.005 hr. road machine, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0040 

0.005 hr. man operating machine, at $0.20 0.0010 

0.001 hr. road drag, 4 horses and driver, at $0.60 0.0006 

Tamping: 

0.023 hr. rolling tamper, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0184 

0.011 hr. cultivator, 4 horses and driver, at $0.60 0.0066 

Smooth Rolling: 
0.003 hr. roller, 6 horses and driver, at $0.80 0.0024 

Miscellaneous: 

0.009 hr. labor removing large stones, etc., at $0.20 0.0018 

0.0015 hr. wagon, 2 horses and driver, at $0.40 0.0006 

Superintendence : 
0.019 hr. foreman, at $0.40 0.0076 

Total labor $0.1137 

][^ciiG7*iciJs * 

3.50 gals, asphaltic oil, at $0.02 $0.0700 

0.09 gals, oil for fuel (heating), at $0.02 0.0018 

5.50 gals, water for sprinkling, at $0.0002 0.0011 

0.083 cu. yds. crushed rock, at $1.00 0.0083 

Grand total, labor and materials $0.1949 

It will be noted that the three items of loosening the soil and re- 
compacting it with the rolling tamper total as follows : 

Per sq yd. 

Pulverizing the soil $0.0064 

Grading 0.0056 

Tamping (excluding cultivating) 0.0184 

Total $0.0304 

This cost of 3 cts per sq. yd. shows what it would cost to break up, 
shape with a road machine and tamp the subgrade of a road or 
street with a rolling tamper, preparatory to laying any sort of 
pavement. Practically the same price is charged by Massachusetts 
contractors for "shaping" the subgrade of macadam roads, using 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 321 

only the old-fashioned and inferior methods. Each rolling tamper 
compacted 400 sq. yds. per day of 9 hrs. 

It will be noticed that the labor item of oiling totals a trifle more 
than 1 ct. per sq. yd. (0.3 ct. per gal. of oil), excluding the cost of 
the fuel oil used in heating the other oil, the cost of which is given 
(under Materials) at 0.18 ct. per sq. yd., making a total of 1.18 cts. 
per sq. yd. Since 3% gals, of oil were used per sq. yd., this is 
equivalent to % ct. per gal. for heating, pumping, hauling and 
sprinkling the oil on the road. 

It will be noteu that the crushed rock was spread on to a thick- 
ness of 3 ins., measured loose, and that when expressed as a cost 
per cu. yd. of loose rock instead of per sq. yd., we have the 
following : 

Per cu. yd. 

Loading wagons $0,108 

Hauling 0.269 

Spreading 0.022 

Total ?0.399 

It will be noted that the superintendence cost 17 per cent of the 
total labor. 

It will be noticed that the price assumed for the asphaltic oil 
(2 cts. per gal.) is low — about one-quarter what it costs in most 
places outside of California. 

None of the foregoing costs include an allowance for interest, 
depreciation and repairs of plant, nor cost of installing and remov- 
ing plant. 

Cost of Petroiithic Road. — The method of construction was simi- 
lar to the work just described, except thai the broken stone was 
omitted, and the road was built of the natural soil mixed with 
asphaltic oil. It was tamped with a petroiithic rolling tamper. 
The wages actually paid were as follows per day of 9 hrs. : 

Laborer or driver $2.50 

Horse, without driver '1.00 

Foreman 3.00 

The cost was as follows, excluding installation of plant and in- 
terest, depreciation and repairs: 

Cts. per sq yd. 

Preliminary team work 0.26 

Plowing with rooter plow 0.32 

Pulverizing soil 0.34 

Sprinkling water 0.27 

Leveling with road machine 0.14 

Cultivating 0.27 

Mixing oil and soil with cultivator 1.06 

Sprinkling water 0.20 

Tamping with rolling tamper 1.50 

Final leveling 0.20 

Foreman 0.64 

Total labor 5.20 

Oil, 3 gals, at 2% cts. delivered on the road 7.50 

Grand total 12.70 

It will be noted that the labor items do not include heating and 



322 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

hauling the oil to the road, for this cost is included in the price of 
2y2 cts. per gal. paid for the oil. Outside of California it is at 
present impossible to get asphaltic oil at any such low price. 

The soil was a hard clay which required 5 gals, of water per sq. 
yd. (or about 30 gals, per cu. yd.) to soften the clods so that they 
could be broken up. 

Four horses and a driver operated each rolling tamper, and each 
tamper compacted 435 sq. yds. per day. 

The rooter plow was operated by 6 horses, 2 drivers and 1 man 
holding the plow. They broke 4,200 sq. yds. per day, and, esti- 
mating a depth of 6 ins., the plow loosened 700 cu. yds. daily. 

The water was hauled by 6 horses in a wagon holding 840 gals., 
the wheels of the wagon having tires 5 ins. wide. 

A portable oil heater and oil pump loaded the oil from tank cars 
into 1,000-gal. tank wagons, requiring 20 mins. to load a wagon. 

Cost of Telford Roads, New Jersey. — A telford road consists of 
a "bottoming," 6 to 12 ins. thick, made of rough stone blocks sup- 
porting a macadam surface 3 to 6 ins. thick. If the stone for the 
"bottoming" is limestone or sandstone that comes out in thin layers, 
readily shaped with a hammer into rectangular blocks, the "bot- 
toming" is laid like a rough stone block pavement. But if the 
stone is a granite or trap that breaks out in irregular chunks, or 
if cobblestones are used, no attempt is made to lay a rough block 
pavement ; and the "bottoming" then becomes a sort of macadam 
itself, consisting of large and small pieces. This last type of telford 
is the kind so largely used in the towns of northern New Jersey 
where trap rock is available. 

The typical New Jersey telford is made of a "bottoming" 6 ins. 
thick, consisting of chunks of trap rock broken with hammers after 
delivery on the road until no chunk is more than 6 ins. thick. The 
spalls are packed in between the larger stone, and earth is shoveled 
over the stone from the side of the road until few stones are 
visible. Then a 5,500-lb. horse-roller is run over the stone before 
the 3-in. macadam is placed upon it. The macadam is bound with 
earth, and finally a thin layer of screenings is placed over all — 
more for appearance sake than for usefulness. The cost of quarry- 
ing the trap rock for the "bottoming" and the cost of crushing 
the portion of it that is used for the macadam surface, will be 
found in the section on Rock Excavation. 

In building a telford pavement on a New Jersey village street, 
the pavement was made 16 ft. wide. The stones for the bottoming 
were dumped from wagons, and a gang of 6 men broke the larger 
ones and placed them all by hand carefully so as to secure a 
compact "bottoming" 6 ins. thick. This gang of 6 men averaged 4 
cu. yds. of bottoming laid per man per 10-hr. day, at a cost of 40 
cts. per cu. yd. for placing the "bottoming" after delivery. It took 
1.2 cu. yds. of loose stones measured in the wagon to make 1 cu. yd. 
of "bottoming." 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 323 

The macadam surface would have cost as much as any other 
macadam of equal thickness (3 Ins.) had it not been for the use 
of earth as a binder instead of screenings. It took 1.2 cu. yds. of 
broken stone to make 1 cu. yd. of rolled stone, for a horse roller 
was used, and it did not compact the stone as much as a steam 
roller would. The cost of this broken stone can be estimated by 
data already given. The cost of rolling the "bottoming" and the 
macadam surface were not kept separately ; but rolling both was 
as follows : 

The 2% -ton roller, drawn by a team, averaged 150 lin. ft. of 
roadway 16 ft. wide per day of 10 hrs., which is equivalent to 
90 sq. yds. per day, at a cost of 4 cts. per sq. yd. By far the 
greater part of the rolling was confined to the 3 -in. macadam. 
The team on the roller was taken off from time to time and hitched 
to a sprinkling cart. Water for sprinkling the macadam was ob- 
tained from a nearby hydrant. Summarizing the costs, we have 
the following: 

Per cu. yd. 
Cost of bottoming (6 ins. thick). in place. 

Quarrying and loading 1.2 cu. yds. at 40 cts $0.48 

Hauling 2 miles, 1.2 cu. yds. at 40 cts 0.48 

Placing 0.40 

Total per cu. yd. in place ?1.36 

Cost of macadam surface (3 ins. thick). 

Quarrying and crushing 1.2 cu. yds. at 55 cts $0.66 

Hauling 2 miles, 1.2 cu. yds. at 40 cts 0.48 

Spreading 1.2 cu. yds. at 12 cts 0.14 

Shoveling on earth for binder, 0.4 cu. yds. at 12 cts.. . 0.05 
Sprinkling and rolling, 4 cts. per sq. yd 0.48 

Total per cu. yd. in place $1.81 

The cost per square yard, exclusive of grading the roadway, 
was: 

Per sq. yd. 

1-6 cu. yd. bottoming, at $1.36 $0.23 

1-12 cu. yd. macadam, at $1.81 0.15 

Total $0.38 

Laborers were paid 15 cts. per hr., and teams 35 cts. per hr. The 
cost of foremen is not included. The cost of the quarrying is given 
on page 210. 

The foregoing relates to trap rock. If limestone or sandstone 
occurring in thin beds is quarried by wedging, and is roughly 
scabbled and laid like a paving, the cost of a telford "bottoming" 
is practically the same as for the slope-wall paving given in sec- 
tion on Masonry. The cost of the macadam surface may be esti- 
mated from data given on previous pages. 

Cost of Sand-Clay Roads.* — The mixing of sand and clay as a 

* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 28, 1906. 



324 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

form of road construction has received careful study by the Office 
of Public Roads, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and a bulletin 
by William L. Spoon, Road Expert, Office of Public Roads, has 
recently been issued descriptive of this method of construction. 
The matter of sand-clay roads is of considerable importance to the 
Atlantic and Gulf States, where throughout large areas sand and 
clay are practically the only materials available for road building. 
In the Southern States a number of sand- clay roads have been 
built, and they have proved well adapted for light traffic. 

The best sand-clay road is one in which the wearing surface is 
composed of grains of sand in contact in such a way that the voids 
between the grains are entirely filled with clay, which acts as a 
binder. Any excess of clay above the amount necessary to fill 
the voids in the sand is detrimental. All the experiments made 
by the Office of Public Roads indicate that the materials should 
not be mixed in a dry state, but should be thoroughly mixed and 
puddled with water. This is most easily brought about immediately 
after a heavy rain, the clay having been previously spread and the 
larger lumps broken up as completely as possible. The surface 
should then be covered with a few inches of sand and plowed and 
harrowed thoroughly by means of a turning plow and a cutaway 
or disc harrow. In cases where the plowing and harrowing are 
considered too expensive, the mixing may be left to traffic. This, 
however, leads to a muddy road surface for a long time, although 
finally it is possible, by a proper distribution of sand upon the 
clay, to bring about a fairly good result. 

Where a slaking clay is used, very much less puddling is re- 
quired, as there are practically no lumps to be broken up and the 
mixing can easily be done with the harrow after a rain. Slaking 
clays do not usually make as effective binders as the more plastic 
clays, and as a result the road surface becomes more dusty in dry 
weather. The best kind of clay for this kind of construction is one 
that slakes sufficiently easily to enable the lumps to be readily 
broken up, and that at the same time, without being too plastic, has 
sufficient binding power to cement the grains of sand and form a 
smooth, impervious surface on the road. 

No exact rules can be laid down for calculating in advance the 
best mixture of clay and sand. An easy method for making a 
rough estimate of the volume of the clay filler required for any 
unit quantity of a given sand is given by Mr. Spoon as follows : 
Two ordinary glass tumblers of as nearly as possible the same size 
are filled to the brim, one with the dry sand to be tested and the 
other with water. The water is then poured carefully from the one 
glass into the sand in the other until it reaches the point of over- 
flowing. The volume of water removed from the glass which was 
originally full of water can be taken as an approximate measure 
of the voids in the unit volume of sand contained in the tumbler. A 
simple calculation will reduce this to percentage volume. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 325 

In the construction of sand-clay roads two distinct conditions are 
likely to be met : The road may have a sandy subsoil, that must 
be overcome by the addition of clay ; or the subsoil may be of clay, 
and in this case sand must be added to it. 

Sand-Clay Construction in a Sandy Subsoil. — In the construction 
of a sand-clay road upon a sandy subsoil, after the drainage has 
been provided, the roadbed should be brought to crown. A sec- 
tion of the road nearest the source of the clay is crowned first, 
and on this section the first load of clay is dumped, each succeeding 
load being hauled over the preceding, care being taken, however, 
to spread each dumped load separately and evenly before it is 
driven over. After the clay has been spread it is covered with a 
layer of clean sand, and when the road has been opened to traffic 
additional sand should be added to keep the surface smooth and 
prevent the formation of mud. If a narrow, single track roadway 
is to be built, it has been found best to spread the clay to a width 
of about 12 ft. and to a depth of 6 to 8 ins. in the center, tapering 
the layer to a thin edge at the sides. After the clay layer is com- 
pleted and covered with sand, if the clay is plastic and lumpy, it 
will probably be necessary to plow and harrow it alternately until 
the lumps are thoroughly disintegrated, advantage being taken of 
rains to puddle the road surface with a harrow. 

More sand must be added if the surface shows a tendency to 
"ball" and cake, and if, on the other hand, the surface loosens 
in dry weather, it is due to an insufficient quantity of clay or 
because the clay lacks binding power. 

A roadway 12 ft. wide, with an average depth of 6 ins. of clay, 
will require 1 cu. yd. of clay to cover 4 1/2 ft. of road length ; or 
1,173 cu. yds. of clay will be required for one mile of 12-ft. road- 
way. Mr. Spoon states that the average load has been found to be 
about % to % cu. yd., when the haul is over sand, and 1 cu. yd. 
when the haul is over a dry clay road. 

Sand-Clay Construction on a Clay Subsoil. — As in the first case 
proper drainage must be provided ; the road should then be crowned 
as nearly as possible to the form desired in the finished road. The 
road surface should have a slope of at least % in. per foot. It is 
much more important to form first this foundation crown with a 
clay than with a sandy subsoil. 

After the foundation has been prepared, the surface should be 
plowed and harrowed to a depth of about 4 ins., until it is pulver- 
ized as completely as possible. It is then covered with 6 to 8 ins. 
of clean, angular sand, spread so that the layer is thickest at the 
center of the road. 

The first mixing by plow and harrow is done while the materials 
are still in a comparatively dry state. After the first mixing has 
been finished the road is finally puddled with a harrow after a rain. 
In case excess of clay works to the surface, more sand is applied. 

When the mixing and puddling has been completed the road is 



326 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

shaped while it is still soft enough to be properly finished with a 
scraper and at the same time stiff enough to pack well under the 
roller or action of trafflc. 

Cost of Sand-Clay Construction. — The cost of this form of con- 
struction varies with the conditions. The following data, ^iven by- 
Mr. Spoon, are based on the assumption that the clay can be pro- 
cured within a mile of the road that is to be improved, and that 
the cost of labor is about $1 per day and teams $3 per day. On 
those assumptions the cost of constructing a 12-ft. sand-clay road 
on a sand foundation, covered with clay to an average depth of 
6 ins., would be approximately as follows for a distance of one 
mile: 

Crowning and shaping road with road machine: Total. 

2 teams at $3, 1 day $ 6.00 

1 operator at $1.50, 1 day 1.50 

Loading and Hauling: 
Xioosening clay with pick and shoveling into wagons, 1,173.33 

cu. yds. at 15 cts 176.00 

Hauling, 1,173.33 cu. yds. at 23 cts 269.86 

Spreading Clay with Road Machine: 

■2 teams at $3, 3 days 18.00 

1 operator at $1.50, 3 days 4.50 

Shoveling Sand on Clay: 

Estimated at y^ ct. per sq. yd 35.20 

Harrowing: 

1 team at ?3, 2 days 6.00 

Shaping and Dressing with Road Machine: 

2 teams at $3, 2 days 12.00 

1 operator at ?1.50, 2 days 3.00 

Rolling: 
Estimated at % ct. per sq. yd 35.20 

Total $579.26 

On this basis the estimated cost per square yard of road surface 
"would be about 8 cts. The cost of building a sand-clay road on a 
clay foundation would not vary much from the figures given. In 
lact, the latter form of construction would probably be cheaper. 

According to the experience of the Office of Public Roads, the 
■cost of sand-clay construction in the South has been found to range 
from $200 to $1,200 per mile, in most cases running from $300 
to $800. 

A sand-clay road constructed under the direction of the Office 
at Gainesville, Fla., 1 mile in length, 14 ft. wide, and having a 
9-in. sand-clay surface, cost $881.25 per mile, or 10 cts. per sq. yd. 
Another sand-clay road built under the direction of the Office at 
Tallahassee, Pla., 16 ft. wide and surfaced with about 7 ins. of 
sand-clay mixture, cost $470 per mile, or about 5 cts. per square 
yard. In case changes of grade have to be made with consequent 
cuts and fills, the cost would be proportionately greater than the 
figures given above. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 

Cost of a Sand-Clay Road in Iowa.* — During the 190S session of 
the road school of the State Highway Commission, a mile of sand- 
clay road was built to test this form of construction for Iowa. 
The road selected lies partly within tlie incorporated limits of 
Waterloo, and was in such bad condition that there was practically 
no heavy traffic over it. As soon, however, as the road was com- 
pleted it took all traffic for farmers living northeast of Waterloo, 
with satisfactory results during the past year. Some of the actual 
cost figures on the work were as follows : 

Amount of clay handled 2,124 cu. yds. 

Total road covered 2,800 lin. ft. 

Total road improved 5,880 lin. ft. 

Width of sections 18 ft. 

Dept of clay in center 18-20 in. 

Amount of clay per lin. ft 75 cu. yds. 

Average cost per yd. in place including clearing,, weed 

cutting and finishing 41.6 cts. 

Average haul 4,420 ft. 

Average cost per mile at above figures $1,650 

This latter figure would include cost where the entire mile had to 
be covered with clay, but in the case of the road at Waterloo only 
about one-half the entire length improved had to be covered. One- 
quarter was improved by cutting down a clay hill, the clay being 
used in filling over the sand, and one-quarter being simply shaped 
with a road machine. The cost per mile under these conditions 
would be reduced to about $1,000. Labor was paid $2.25 per day 
and $5 per day was paid for teams and dump wagons. 

Cost of Cinder-Clay Road, lowa.f — Several miles of road have 
been constructed of soft coal cinders in and near Council Bluffs, la. 
This material was used owing to the lack ot stone suitable for 
macadam, the limestone in that neighborhood being nearly worth- 
less for that purpose, and suitable stone being far distant. The 
method of consti'ucting these roads as given in a letter to the 
editors from Mr. W. F. Baker, Supervisor of Pottawattamie County, 
Iowa, is as follows: "We use about 800 cu. yds. of cinders per mile 
and this leaves them about 5 ins. thick and 10 ft. wide upon the 
surface of the road. We then plow the roadbed to a depth of about 
5 ins. below the cinders and 10 ft. wide, thus thoroughly mixing 
the cinders with the dirt, — about one half of each. We then use a 
blade grader moving this mixture outward from the center to the 
depth plowed and 10 ft. wide, finding a smooth hard surface that is 
rolled thoroughly. We then move this mixture back with our 
grader, spreading it evenly over this hard surface about 2 ins. thick 
at a time, following each layer with a heavy roller, thus building 
up till it conforms to the roadbed upon each side, and sloping from 
the center outward about 1% ins. to the foot. Cinders cement 
equally well with hill clay, black soil, or gumbo, but not so well 
with sandy soil. We have had this system of road in use over 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 
^Engineering-Contracting, July 3, 1907. 



328 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

one year where there has been exceedingly heavy traffic with nar- 
row tires and we believe it is equal in durability to macadam, much 
easier and more cheaply repaired and costing not to exceed one- 
tenth as much in this locality. This roadbed is not only exceedingly 
hard but rough, so rubber tires do not pick it up, and when dis- 
placed with shoe corks, it cements again under pressure, while rain 
has no effect upon it. This form of road leaves a dirt road on each 
side for the travel in dry weather, which I considered very im.por- 
tant. As to the cost, if you were to pay 25 cts. per yard for the 
cinders, and then haul them from o.;e to two miles to your road, 
your road when completed would cost not to exceed $500 per mile." 

Cost of Burnt Clay Roads,* — In some sections of the country clay 
is the only available material from which roads can be constructed. 
This is so in large areas in the South, particularly in the valleys of 
the Mississippi and its tributaries, where sedimentary clays are 
found very generally. There is little or no sand in these areas and 
the clays are of a particularly plastic and sticky variety, making 
traffic in such localities almost impossible during the wet season. 
To meet this condition the Office of Public Roads, U. S. Department 
of Agriculture, has made experiments as to the burning of these 
clays so as to not only destroy the plastic qualities, but also as far 
as possible to form hard brick-like lumps which should be capable 
of sustaining traffic. Following these experiments an experimental 
road was constructed which is proving highly satisfactory. The 
construction of this type of road as well as the construction of 
sand-clay roads, is given in a bulletin by William L. Spoon, Road 
Expert, Office of Public Roads, which has been recently issued by 
the U. S. Department of Agriculture. In the preparation of the 
roadbed for burnt-clay roads, the road is graded to an even width 
between ditches, and is then plowed up as deeply as possible. 
Furrows are then dug across the road from ditch to ditch, extending 
through and beyond the width to be burned. If it is intended to 
burn 12 ft. of roadway, the transverse furrows should be 16 ft. 
long, so as to extend- 2 ft. on each side of the final width of the 
roadway. Across the ridges formed between these furrows, which 
should be about 4 ft. apart, the first course of cordwood is laid 
longitudinally, so as to form a series of flues in which the firing is 
started. From 15 to 20 of these flues are fired at one time. 

Good sound wood, as dry and well seasoned as possible, is used 
for fuel. But in addition dry brushwood, bark, old fence rails, ties, 
coal slack, may be used to advantage with the cordwood. The 
best and soundest cordwood is selected for the first course, and 
should be laid so that the pieces will touch, thus forming a floor. 
Another layer of wood is thrown irregularly across this floor, in 
crib formation, with spaces left between in which the lumps of clay 
are piled. This clay should be in coarse lumps, so as to allow a 
draft for easy combustion. 

After the lumps of clay have been heaped upon this floor another 



*Engmeering-Gontracting, Dec. 5, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 329 

course of wood is laid parallel to the first. The third layer is 
placed in exactly the same manner as the first, and each opening 
and crack filled with brush, chips, or any other combustible ma- 
terial. The top layer of clay is placed over all and the finer por- 
tions of the material heaped over the whole structure. This final 
layer should be taken from side ditches, and may be lumps of all 
sizes. It is spread evenly over the top in a layer of not less than 
6 to 8 ins. Finally the whole is tamped and rounded off so as to 
hold the heat as long as possible. If coal slack is available two top 
layers of wood may be left out and the slack thoroughly mixed with 
the clay. A careful arrangement of the cordwood cribbing to sep- 
arate the clay is important. 

In the practice of the Office of Public Roads, 15 or 20 flues are 
prepared ready for firing in one section. However, if a large force 
of laborers is available, a greater number of flues can be fired at 
one time. The best results are obtained by firing all the flues of a 
section simultaneously and maintaining the combustion as evenly 
as possible. 

After the firing is completed not only the portion of clay which 
forms the top of the kiln, but the ridges between the flues should 
be burned thoroughly, so as to form a covering of burnt clay 10 
to 12 ins. in depth, which, when rolled down and compacted, forms 
a road surface of from 6 to 8 ins. in thickness. If properly burned, 
the material should be entirely changed in character, and when it 
is wet it should have no tendency to form mud. When the material 
is sufficiently cooled the roadbed should be brought to a high crown 
before rolling, in order to allow for the compacting of the material. 
This can best be done with a road grader. After this the rolling 
should be begun and continued until the roadbed is smooth and 
hard. The finished crown should have a slope of at least % in. 
to the foot. 

The main advantages of burning a road over its entire length 
are that the cost of transporting clay is avoided and that the sub- 
grade of the road is burned as well as the material above. 

In giving the cost of burnt-clay construction Mr. Spoon states 
that it is, of course, impossible to give the cost of a burnt-clay road 
which will apply to the same work in all sections of the country. 
Although this form of construction in the South up to the present 
time has been successful, it cannot as yet be said to ha e passed 
the experimental stage. The items of cost of the experimental road 
300 ft. long, as constructed at Clarksdale, Miss., are as follows : 

3OV2 cords of wood, at $1.30 per cord $39.65 

20 loads of bark, chips, etc 6.00 

Labor at $1.25 per day and teams at $3 per day.... 38.30 

Total cost of 300 feet $83.95 

Total cost per mile at this rate $1,478.40 

Since the above road was built numerous sections of burnt-clay 
road have been constructed in that locality, and up to the present 
time only favorable reports regarding them have been received. 



330 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Maintaining Earth Roads by Dragging.* — In a recently 
Issued Farmers' Bulletin, Mr. D. Ward King gives some data on the 
cost of maintenance of earth roads by dragging. He states that 
the most elaborate form of split log drag will cost but a few dollars 
for material and labor, while one man and team can operate it suc- 
cessfully under all usual conditions. Mr. King gives the following 
figures as showing the cost of maintaining ordinary country roads 
per mile per year without a drag. They were obtained in Kansas 
by Prof. W. C. Hoad, of the University of Kansas, in 1906, and 
were taken from the official records of the counties : 

Crawford County $52 

Douglas County 38 

Franklin County 34 

Johnson County 48 

Neosho County 40 

Saline County 43 

The average cost is $42.50 per mile per year, and Mr. King states 
that it may safely be said that the cost of dragging would be 
trifling in comparison. In the Report of Highway Commissioner 
of Maine in 1906 it is stated that the least expense per mile for 
dragging was about $1.50 ; the greatest a little over $6 ; the aver- 
age expense per mile for 5% miles a little less than $3. One town- 
ship in Iowa experimented with the drag on 2 8 miles of highway 
for a year. The township paid for the making of the drags and 
hired men to use them. The total expense, including the original 
cost of the drags, for the year averaged $2.40 per mile. A neighbor- 
hood of farmers in Ray County, Mo., employed one of their number 
to drag a 5-mile stretch. He received compensation at the rate of 
$3 per day. When the end of the year came and a settlement 
was made, the cost for the year was found to be $1.66 per mile. 
The road is a tough clay. Prof. William Robertson, of the Minne- 
sota Agricultural Station, after a year's experience in dragging a 
main road made entirely of gumbo without any sand or gravel, and 
which during the past year has shown no defects either by rutting 
or development of soft places, fixes the cost of the work at not 
to exceed $5 per mile. 

Cost of IVlaklna a Corduroy Road.f — The old-fashioned corduroy 
road is still used frequently by contractors where it is necessary 
to cross a swampy piece of ground with a temporary roadway. 
Such a road is frequently made of split cedar sticks, about as 
large as fence posts, cut in 8-ft. lengths, and laid in a close row 
on the ground. Then earth is shoveled onto the sticks to even up 
the hollows. A good axman can cut down, saw, split and lay the 
cedar for a corduroy road at the rate of 40 to 50 lin. ft. (2% to 
3 rods) per day. Hence if he receives $2 a day, it costs 4 to 5 cts. 
per lin. ft. of road, or $200 to $250 per mile. The foregoing is 
based on some records of work done under the direction of the 
managing editor of Engineering-Contracting. 

*Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 6, 1907. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 331 

Cost of Gravel Roads, Indiana.* — Mr. Chas. C. Hufflne, county 
engineer of Clinton County, Ind., has given us the following data 
on the construction of gravel roads in that county : 

Per cu. yd. 

Cost of gravel at pit $0.10 

Stripping pit 0.05 

Hauling 0.30 

Dumping and spreading 0.03 

Shoveling 0.10 

Miscellaneous 0.05 

Total $0.63 

As about 1.800 cu. yds. of gravel are required per mile of road, 
the cost will be $1,134. In addition Mr. HufRne estimates the cost 
of grading the roadbed at $200 and the cost of bridges and culverts 
at $200, making the total cost per mile $1,534. The above estimate 
is for bank gravel. The majority of roads built in Clinton County, 
however, have been made from gravel taken from wet pits, making 
an additional expense of 25 cts. per cubic yard for dipping or 
10 cts. per cubic yard for pumping water, depending on the method 
by which the gravel is taken out. This would increase the cost 
of the road $450 or $180 per mile, respectively. The above are 
about the average cost of gravel roads in Clinton County for the 
past five years. The contract prices for these roads have varied 
from $1,750 to $2,100 per mile. The specifications for the con- 
struction of a gravel road in the above county require the road- 
bed to be graded to a width of 24 ft. and the gravel surfacing to 
be placed to a width of 9 ft. The gravel is required to be placed 
15 ins. deep at the middle and 9 ins. at the side. Common labor 
in Indiana is paid about 13% cts. per hour, and about 30 cts. per 
hour is paid for a two-horse team and driver. 

Cost of Gravel Street, Michigan. — Mr. A. W. Saunders gives tho 
following: The gravel was often very wet, puddled in fact; 87 cu. 
yds. of gravel made 90 lin. ft. of street 6 ins. thick on the center 
line and 4 ins. thick at the gutter, and 25 ft. wide. The gravel was 
unloaded from a lighter, 10 men doing the work. Six men in a 
10-hr. day loaded 124 cu. yds. on six teams, using eight wagons. 
Each round trip of team averaged 45 mlns. a total of 68 trips being 
made in a 10-hr. day. 

The cost per cubic yard measured loose was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Gravel $0,850 

Unloading, at $1.75 per day 150 

Hauling, at $4.50 per day 257 

Spreading, at $1.75 per day 087 

Superintendence and depreciation 021 

Total $1,365 

Cross Reference on Cost of Grading Roads. — The reader is re- 
ferred to the section on Earth Excavation and Embankment for 
the discussion of grading costs. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. IS. 1907. 



332 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Grading a Road, New York.— A stiff clay was ditched 
and graded for a New York state macadam road near Buffalo, at 
the following cost per cu. yd. : 

Per cu. yd. 

Plowing $0.05 

Loading into wagons 0.12y2 

Hauling 1,000 ft 0.05 Va 

Spreading 0.05 

Foreman, supt., timekeeper and water boy 0.05 

Total $0.33 

The work was done by contract, and wages were $1.50 for com- 
mon laborers, $4.50 for teams, per 8-hr. day. The clay was 
loosened with a rooter plow and was hauled in patent dump 
wagons. This cost is a safe figure for stiff material hauled not 
more than 1,000 ft. 

The cost of grading 2% miles of road under conditions essen- 
tially as above, except that the material was a gravelly soil, was 
28 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of Grading a Road, Maryland.— Mr. W. W. Crosby gives the 
following : 

Grading a road for a 6-in. macadam pavement 14 ft. wide, the 
whole roadbed being 24 ft. wide, cost 39.6 cts. per cu. yd., not in- 
cluding the cost of "shaping," which was % ct. per sq. yd., which 
is equivalent to adding 4.2 cts. per cu. yd. to the grading cost. The 
road averaged 1,700 cu. yds. per mile. Work was done by day 
labor, negro labor at 10 cts. per hr., and team at 40 cts. 

Cost of Grading Road With Road Machine, Michigan. — Mr, Frank 
F. Rogers gives the following data on work done at Port Huron, 
Mich. : A street was to be macadamized with a strip of macadam 
9 ft. wide and about 5 ins. thick after rolling. The earth was sand 
and sandy loam overlying clay. The side ditches had already been 
made, and the street was already well turnpiked (crowned), so that 
the grading consisted merely in preparing a bed for the macadam 
and in making earth shoulders to hold the stone. For this purpose 
a common road machine was used, first to cut off the high places 
and fill the hollows by setting the blade at right angles with the 
center line of the street. Then, to form the shoulders and cut 
the crown of the subgrade, the blade was set at a slight angle so as 
to crowd enough earth to one side of the 9-ft. strip, forming first 
one shoulder, then the other. Stakes were set 1 ft. outside the 
9-ft. strip to give line in operating the grader. The edges of the 
shoulders were afterward trimmed by hand with a shovel while the 
subgrade was being rolled with a steam roller. The grading cost 
$85 per mile in this soft sandy soil, where no ditching or turnpiking 
was done. 

On another stretch of road, in sand, it was necessary to break up, 
re-grade, and trim the ditches to line, as well as to make the 
shoulders for the 9-ft. macadam. This cost about $360 per mile. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 333 

Two teams, a driver for each team and another man to operate 
the grader were used. Each team and driver received $3.50 for 
10 hrs. and the other man received $1.50. 

Average Prices of Pavements in 100 Representative Cities, To- 
gether With the Wages of Labor and Prices of Paving Materials.* — 
In our issue of March 27,1907, we printed a number of tables show- 
ing the cliaracter and cost of paving work done In 1906, in a num- 
ber of representative American cities. In the present issue we 
present somewliat similar data on tlie paving work done in 1907 in 
100 cities of tlie United States. No attempt was made to get com- 
plete statistics of the United States ; the purpose, rather, was to 
select cities in various sections of the country on the assumption 
that their practice and activity would represent with approximate 
accuracy the practice and activity of these sections as a whole. 

Perhaps the most interesting of the tables is Table IV, showing 
the wages of labor and the prices of materials. It will be noted 
from this that the 8-hr. day does not prevail in all of the cities 
reporting. Practically all of the Eastern states have an 8-hr. day, 
while in the Middle West the 10-hr. day seems to be the more 
common. The rates of wages of labor vary, being lowest in the 
South and highest in the West. In the New England cities the 
wages of common labor averaged $2.00 per day, while in the 
Middle West the average was $1.75. The cost of the various paving 
materials taken in combination with the cost of labor are interest- 
ing in as much as they show in a measure the reason for the vari- 
ation in the cost of the pavement given in the other tables. 

Tables "V to X, giving the cost of the various kinds of pavement, 
should be of general interest, although it is evident that no per- 
fectly just comparison can be made without going far deeper into 
local conditions than the data sent us would permit. In these 
tables the average price per square yard includes grading, unless 
stated otherwise. 

Cost of Paving in 50 American Cities.f — Tables XI to XIII show 
the construction and cost of street paving in about 50 representa- 
tive American cities. These figures were collected by the Committee 
on Roads and Pavements of the Illinois Society of Engineers and 
Surveyors and were reported at the annual convention held last 
week. The records cover macadam, asphalt and brick and block 
pavements and give the materials used, thickness and cost. The 
costs given are, of course, costs to the cities and not costs to the 
contractors. No very accurate general conclusions can be drawn 
from these records, and in fact this was not the purpose of their 
collection ; they show individual records of city paving work and 
for this are deserving of careful study. Mr. A. N. Johnson, State 
Engineer, Illinois, was chairman of the committee, making the 
report from which the tables are taken. 



*Engineering-Contracting , April 1, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 3, 1909. 



334 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



%^^ 






^Tj^iccot^ .oiOOCi) 



:ooooo 



OS " 

" CI 

. o 



►J 

% 
% 

a 

S o 
f, i^ 

o 



5 $ _(MOt-a)rHCr, OOON 



o 



a> 'OOOO -O -lOOooO '10100 -01010 

C p K^ioo -lo "OaiooioO •tHcoth -ioc^km 



•^ •OO'^IOOOIO^IOO 
•GO 'THCi tHCOOSOCSI^OO 



PiflJ 

lo nj <B 
o g 



aj-<< 



Q 

o 

< 

g 
ca 






< 

EH 



r" LoOOOOC'inOo 



• LQOLoooooo *rL 'O •ooooirs—.oo 

•-^OOOOCXJCDOLO .^ -tr- ; CC «£> lO o i-^ § ■* in 
IcOCq COiHi-icqrH ;^ '.rA • tH tH r-l r-i (M* ^ tH c4 



_j (h oini OO O OO OO '^'^ ^ '^ 'OOirtOO • (— ,o Oo ^ '^o OO — 50< 



• O ■ 'COOOOOO 

gio • -C-IOOOIOO 

>-^ '. ; rH eo ■* ■* CO Ti5 

(14 



■OOOLO 'OOO 'OOoOOinOO 



— p Oc^L:5t>lflOl>•^>■t^-t>•c^t^^^^^-Olaooo^-t^lrtt^-t^t--(^ltoot>■t-ocq^-t> 



S ofij 






ShOOOOSOOOOOJOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSOO 



K^ Sh OUC=) 05 00 
53 TH rH 



feO^ 






(D 



o 
m 0) 



O 



) H o. O 



.c 



d 



fl ^Ss 



0) a 






■M Co W 



O S ft -r^ 
« .S f^ ti 3 3 

MpqcQWPQm 



cS 

'-'O6 
ft rt 

-add) c^ 
(iiAj:::s o 
OOOOU 



<« 



00500005 'OOJ 



"-5°^ 



.^ K n 
o o M 

o Co i) 
UQQ 



^05 

> ■ 
o , o 

Xj W m CO 

ID ol oj n! 



S c a> 



^^5--. 






m5 '==3,5,2 

a! ,r?S i; > o O O 



M? Cd 

;-! to •■" 
" 3 h . 
o o o 
o a: • 

go — 

CO t.LOT-< 

•a c o o 

COoo -1-1 u 

f>i2 6 i- 

3 ^ O 

<!* ^ 

_ (U-1 

m-S "^ 

" og a 

O M 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



335 



d L. <^ • • . • «* 

x; o3 s "= • • • • 



3 
.10 CM 



§ 


<; 


o 




2 









Pav 

Bri 

Per 

22. 


"Y 




CQ 




M 


"d t, >><="« 


H 


g 5 "^OlM 


U 


wo 



0000 • 
0000 ; 


00 
00 


rH CO N <M • 


00,-H 
.-IC<1 



o 
E-" 

3 



•oiftoomo -t-o 'OO -ooo ;omO "ooin -moo 
, iH t- o o t- 10 ;t-to ,osoo .coom .Oo^m ^i-nocq .t-0003 



J* 01 "O ;oo •tootOLoio 

02(V3 "^^ -rHt-ir-HrH 



'OlrtOOom 

.ot-c<iOot^ 



m 



o 

C 
o 

-d 






o 
> 

6. 
O 






ipH-a 



.ifloot-. 't^ift , CD ^ 10 1- eo Tj« .«ci«c)occo 

• T-H i-H yH ! tH C^ • t-t ^ tH tH tH t— ( • t-H rH i-H rH 



u 



t^ 00 ;oooooo^^oo 
g^ Qj 00 [ innj!5 o o 10 to o o o Ira 

<y > ^ 



■ "^■^.^-^co • 00 -^ i^ -^ U5 irt Tj^ -^ ift Tj- irj irt 






< 

a 
o 

P3 
< 

« 
o 



m 



Eh 



Q^ <^ , UJ (.^ (.^ UJ 

> CO -coc^c^icvi 



•00 "Oia 
• coc^i -coco 



• CM CM CO CO 



•000 
• ■^coco 



pH j:; o ooiooo t^c^t^ioo t-Oirsooo •oiflCMi>-o«ot^t-t^c-ot- 

Q g 5j CacOT-!e(ie<iTHi-ii-!rHC<i,-JCOT-icqCqcO ;cM'i-<'-5'-JcQrHr-!TH'»Hr-(eviiH 

u2j 



tJ) ra 

C s, t-" 000000000000000o0000000000000300000;0000000 
■r!l?3'Hi-l THi-lT-Cr-l'-l T-lrHlHrHi-t rt 



2 - S§ 

'^fc.Q P S; o 
"O 4j .2 !- o m 



.tl d 



(HP- 
.2 Eg 

C oO 

ctf 0) C d 



£0 
■ID 

.S|go 

Id d^o 



« S S 'I'"- 
S.S=o§ 



m 

iO ^ ^ 
aj (D 4) 



to'^ 



: rt 



tH CO 

d 



.a gram 

Sri -d-^ 

^ ^ ^ ^'t 

O 0) (U.y o 



.2 ri 2 OJ ,r 
" 3 (U g-^ 

0: i: .t; o o 



S 3 

u 

df, 

s 

4) . 
02 

-. ri 

dU 

;-< 

5m 

d 

!-." 



O 






336 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



a ■ 

■a 
o 

C 

o 



.H; 

6' 



|S2 






ajp4 3 





•ooo • • 
.ooo . • 






• o . • -ot- -in 


• eorneo • . 








B 




ooooooooo 
ooioomoooo 


:ooooo 

.o.oooo 


:ooo 

.0<M0 


•3c 




•■^rHOTjteq 
• iH esi N N eq 





; o o.— , irsoo joousJJjOOooooiflusoooTtioici 

• " ri^ ""* T^r-i ' ■ 'T-ii-ir-i Vh ' ' '«-!e<i "r-1 



&&< 



-^' 



C>? 



< 

a 

< ■ 

o 

Ah 



a 
o 

o 

■< 

« 
O 

m 

s 



^ 

« 

.s 



K 
EH 



■J? 0) "O ' 



iHrH • iH iH rH e^ >-< i-l 



jmog-ooooooiooinoooiomirj 
.oacq^-.3<c<3i--ooiMt-oe<ic<iOuot~r-iiM 



«■% 

. a 

ofe 
"=0 

Eh <v 

a -^ 

aT 

St, lOOOOlOOOOOOoOC-OO" OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO iS d 
rjojooomc-inusoooo'o lomrrmioooooooooinoooo -s-. 
Tj t> .......#•..,. CO . . lo . . ■ • , . ^q /i\ 






« s s 

coirsoo ;cou50oOutiOOioio -^irtoomoooirt 'ooooo 

CDt-HC^O , in CO O O 00 C<J O 00 «X) "X^ !^ CD LO O CO Ci CD o tj^ [cDirsoo-^iA 



• <M CO r-i iH rH 



> eqcocoeq 



• Ooo -oooo 

.Oioia .lOOlOlO 

• la t- N • N U5 CO ci 



•ooo 
'oino 



:ooooo 

,U30 OO IJ3 



:oooo 

.louao o 



• (McoTji •cocDeO'*(N -coeocoN 



, J-< coooioiflomoooooiooirtooif^omomoinooooo'irtio 

SC 2 iJ^oor^t^oc^i'^oousu^Nuic^oot-ot^m t-ot-iAusmusirit- 1- 
^o-S 

O c ra 



by ai 
•S>?3 



ClOOOOOOOSOOOOoOOOOOaOOOOOOOOSOOOOOOOOOooOOOOOoOOOJO 



Ph d 






■M 

0) 



a 



03 O 

G 

d CIj ig 

mcoM 



ce.2o 



O 

d 

•S^ O g 

" p c 

-a rt 

c c c> 

rt M cd cd 









. -bi]--m 

•w'S 2 o)^ 
0313 01 fa 3 
0) m^ o o 






-a 
<— < t/j 

«c o 3 
t, p. 

G3-M 
UlUiUl 



--IP -. 

pi 

coME-i 



Mb. 

^ d 

O t>IO=^ 

rd - to d 

o 2 " '^ 
EhEh>^ 



^ .d 



is 

o 

S o 

dT3 

N o 

, d 0)0 
O ><=> 

•?S 

O w 
• o 



dfo o 



£-1 y^ S-i L_j 

tn)d w . 

(O.ii.3 S 

dr^"--*^- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



337 



to to 00 

C < < 
1 o^*~^ 

p. 



O U5 «0 CD Irt 00 O 



COCOlOI>-c?5 
I I I r I 
^N** CO OO T-t 
^ > I t 



• CD CD CD t- CO 

* ( I I t I 
■ CCOOfO COCO 



I 00 r I 1 

*!-< I tHCOiH 



•Vf d) 



o ™ 






d 



-a . 



G U 



.i -4) 

J5 to rHCDcO 



J to i^ .to "^ ^ O • • '**' ^ tT* CO Tt> 






M 01 C ^ --I O "~~_, 05 
<U £53 C C "^ "-* 



aSN>-IIM,HNU50l-lol'-l(75 



. CO 10 T-H lO CC CD "^ CD «5 10 ^ -CDCO 






E « o a 



'bfl' 



'-Irt •H'-l .^^ O 



•c^co 



0) t, CO 
fto 



0)10 
i <u bus . ^tH 
2 C <B -eg 

-S« ■ 

^ t, C e& 'H'-' 

•< a 



00 00 

COTt^"^^^ 



in .oi«o -coi-iiOT-im 



loOinOio 



• .-I iH ic 10 in in o -la*^ •"'looo 



;m » * * * in 

_C00lCD[_00'''-^t-t-0005O 

^OaiOOcD*^'*^tr-i^o^^oin 



c*^« CO* * -» # * 10 

«OOOOOcolOCTOy,OCD"*',-|t-CO 
iHcDi-flOt-COCOOooOlM'^rHiHOO 



t. 000 ^ 
o . 5 • o c4 

Eu>i"c>'5 -tJ 
STii.in'OS 

O mM O ' 

• (T, c n 

•Hi-H Offl ft 

-S m o . CG>S 
<2?gddC:^ 



yiCOOlTHC^CD 
,S 00 O CK tH 10 
>• CO Tt< 00 C- ■* 



otMint^woo-^inOLnococD 
ocoas'^cooooo'^"^oi>t^ 

OOCSTHTjHO^COC^r^t-CiO-'S^'^ 



in OS 00 CO -^ as 00 !>• -^ in CO T-i eg CO 00 Tj< DO 

CO COCIO T— ICOt^ CO 



:C^ tHi-H 



cot-cqcDiHoinc^mfficnt-oinoo . "aj^Tf 

COOTHCO-iHotMOOOOCOt-OCOt- tH q/^ C ,« 

t> 00 th CO coo oso CO t^io Orinoco 

Cs'c^'TrHrH C^ 00 tHOCO^ tH OC<rt-- CO 
OOtH i-ItH "Ht- tHtH 






uj _, a; jm 



-MIS 



•?.!-; 



^b 
p, 









^<J S oo 



^ S 



® S P ° 






d !r;r\^^ 



03 



0.2 
ao 



•'O >< 



r-i c3 



C«+^SS^!"in 









««• 



Co ^ c; o >o 

a ct-'^ 

5aS'-^£co C' 






"^ o 



W (- -^ -^ K^ 



(33ai.S!-.Pai,2s 
fqpQWWmuOU 







' d d5'£ > o o o S ce o g cs c d 



r r/) d C ^ d 



338 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



m 
p. 



•Ifl • tfi com ^IX> 00 t~^t£>-^i£i unic 

* I * I I I I I 1 I (< I I I I 

•«i •eoc<3(McoeoiocoeocoN«icoco 



Irt ; L^ Lft t~ CD O •C>-CD 

I I I I I I . I r 

CO CO ^Tf- CO CO . N,«CO 



ji-HrHi-l IpjrH -THr-l 3 



m 

a 



a g " IJ ^; 

O « (D g-J^ (B 



:z;o 



.«o • lo in lo ^ CD ■*" to cc to e^j ic «c CO .mTCco •coincoeo-^ 






1 +JiD 

m > 0) o 



.OO .i-lTHO0f-H»H -O 't-Ht-H .(3^0 . 7-i r~i a C^l r-1 c^ 



f.:i 






I 






0) t^ CO 

no 

= !=►? 





!D . m-'-' 








.CDeo>>go» g 




CC^^CD 




C.5 -*> w 1^ 




^ 




•o^ 


•tH^ 














U5 


.CO -^^ «"»=^ 


' '. tM 


• .CO 


' ' .2 

"Day" 
n soil. 

brokei 
70 per 
exceed 
asphalt 







•lOio^^^l^iH 



•LOO .LOLOO 



O 



3^ 



rr,' M 

•r* .'Owc£)Omoout)'-^c»<^OL^ic.<s«Oi-oco 

(£ C3 aiioiOi-ir-ioooo'*cocaooocooOT-iccocDcoi« 

"M'3p5^^"j^5^^^e<i^c<;,^^cor-icg,-ic^ir-iM'-' 

> fc 1^ 
■< n 



com 



O CO CO CO "^c 



H t^ C^] CM lO O 



COTHT-IC<l^~*T-iCO^"^'MC<IC<lC^ 






OiO 05 OO lOO 
IrtO'^CO-^inO 

00 o CO t- CO cq o 






OOOCOOcOOOOOC^t 
*HOCOLOOOt^-COO'^T 
CsIrHCSNcoOt'^C^OT 
CO 1-4 O COCOOOcOC^Tt 

■e<ico coc<i tHC 



50mrHTHi-HC 
- cJcO CiCOcOl 

J ocio cnc 



-t~i>iot-co 

.<CO t-cocO,-H 
OOOcOtHtH 






ttr 



> . 03 






■^ 11 2 ts 9'°iS'S,c 3 3 c 









g '-'••- fc- > > O'J'^' "■' ^ _ , — - -- 

5.So|gg.S-gSSgS^g> 



0) S 



^ bB— O 

m p't, ft 
fl o ft3+J 
mmmmxn 









m-'5co<t-i-S — 
CB'O P> <XIS^ 

torn ^U)(U ? 
- 3 ,? rt t- >> 

a;X! ^« ^ 
o i; 1) c t^ ><! 

t> (U— O 0) _^ 

M gs M "^ 
-aio " 3<Mgco 

bj)2 -^ .« 

rt -• _• CO M O 

n,a E E o Q) o 
^ o 



; o 



, 0) >= M m ,^ 



oJiT b. ■ e 3 fl 



to d 

3 C ( 






ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



339 



t I CGCDCCCD 
O t" C 1 1 1 

fcn O Q CO CO CO »-t . OO -^ CO 
Q. p,.— I I 1 I .III 
'^ W i-H iH IH i-H .i-HHrH 



tOOOC- -O-* WtDCSCO«OM>05-,ir5 



. CO C 1 CO CO CO iH CO M CO .-, (M 
,11111 111,1 

.tHiHi-HtHiH iHiHl-l^tH 



, I I 
.COCO 



.1111 

.CO CO CO eo 



4) 

pqc 

•*-> 4-t ^ 



3 g(i,|iili(li| :CLiPh|1( :fi(Mp4CLiaH(iH!2;|;|i<&<^(iHPHli< :P^ :Mi4 ; :Ph 

rt 4) 

;2;0 



Eh 

z 

H 

CM 

< 
K 






Eh 









4) -a 

OfsH 

^^ 
^ ft 






• oouooomocD(M"<**ooooomoO'^ooirto^^t-a5Cii 
•t-a:iC<iOtHcor-t'^cooo:it-05a5C<ioit>.cO(McDioooio< 

lOa'rHcqOjic^NMC^'NC^rHTHrHTHCvilHTHNNrHr-icgCai-it 



y5ir3(rqCOCOIr^COOOC<JOOOl>'OCOCD<3VOC^CO-^-^t-^'^i-Ht^COOr*<t-T-4 

~0'*TH^rHi.^<3oaiOLOioooocDt-ocoaioOi-imoomT)<oo-^iHco 

j~ CD CO O tr- '-i'^ t-OC0mr-ltHOOOm0505t-t-00C<lt0t-50^5DC0OffQ C^05 
r-T CvTtj^CO CO rH"T-H ^LO O eg 00 lO rH GOiH -^OOO o t^CO lO -^ 00 CD IC C^ToT CP -^ 



. c3l-3 



3 C O c^ 



oo 






, 1-3 



C.2 






r_,l^ .-t—" 



G 






ftt:* 

cs w E 

Sd53 




a> o rf 

O c 0) 

r- O ^ 

'Co 

Ph 01 cij 
1) 

3 O • 

S ^CD 

o 

■fl'H'C 

■'-' c 

(§^' 



^COlO U0l>*Cgt-COCOrHrH COCD-^CO"^^rHmTfMCO COt-400O:i COOO ^^•' 



-5 d/3 b 



0) 






^ ' d o .D .; , 






. .^d.2JS . 
o®d^:]pg« 

2 S be- C> d 
Pis d d d d 01 



^ c 

ROS® 
» " o e 

ftO 

mm 



340 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



I I m in t- CO to to 

O SI G 11111 

U O S 05 CO Tj< CO M eo 

Qb P<.° I 1 I 1 1 I 

" -M rH iH tH IH iH rH 



6 

PQc 
(1)2 

!-. O 
O 

O 






Eh m 



■^■3 O) d aJ u 00 00 05 00 00 1_ 
fnfH ^" Cm 



^« p 



M 

o 



I I moo 
O >H C I 

t-o S,-i 



^ 



cd tH ^ "' 






<M ,IAC0 



575o5sP4 : :^; :PhPh 



.;^ 



« s 



,i!»5to . .to .-^to .".to . .to 
•« a) o 
^ C C 

I 1 " 

■S"S <l^ irf "^ yoototoootDCOootooooOcDeo''* 



:Ph a 



a 

'A 

►J 

w 



< 






O g TOW TO • 
^-Orh*^ TO 

Ph t,^."t!a 
a® m 






0[a 

_0>H 



rj lOtOOT-HC^OO t-CO 
.3 .(MOOOt-OJrHtOmtO 
?i 03WrH(M7HrH(MrHCOrH 

offl 



'-I Q 

S < 

O H 

o> g 

.ti ■'I 

fi PL| 

TO 

>-l r-, 

to 2 

rO W 

ri Eh 

° 3 



O 






.-•■*ioioot-cgcO(rot- " 

^ CO i-H -^ O tt- c~ iH rH «0 g 
>'00COO5LnC-CO'*lOt- 

"^ OtT-* oTcO tOc-ToTTH to '^ 

^ Cq-*rHrH r-I^H ,Q 

W . .'^. C 



•d 
Cm 

CD— I 
O d,-«-> 

moaCB 



•-S to 



e® 



.^d 



o w cd . 
■M 3 C O 

oaJgo) 
ri i~* ^ '~~* 



-2 iJ 

>) m 

p d 



o 

O 

M 

H 

a 



1 



M i* >> 

■2 3jS(SS° 



01 ^ 



!H 



' a5'52'^''5O00ioomu:>iflK5oirj"5 

d^S'-^ tH M M 



;h . 

Ph c* 

^^ 

<1 0) 

^ ft 



tUD » » » « 

e c<o in irj t- o o as lo 00 lo CO 00 lo 

•« ,;OT-HCOIM^Tt<T-(CqU5TH'*COC;i 

« 0> 

« mc^NMiMc^cofONcgcqcNeoco 

om 



WOiOOOC^rHt^'^Ot^t-COCO 

f^oooLooxtiooOTHtococom 

^ '■^o O-^OOC^lorHOt-OCncO 

. t- o'ln l^-"(^q''rHe^^r^ en r-Tco'i-n lo 

CT ■* rHT-Hcqi-H^^ O iH 

72 tH 



.so 



o . 
,o 0) 

<J o 



03 f>^ 

m 

01 c§'^ 



« 



o 



$2 
C.S . 

Oj —I 



s«0 






0) o 



i^ 






Q)" a 

re O 
P 02 O 

0W„5 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



341 



I I m 

o ^ c 

t- O o 

PUft-2 



com 

O 1 1 


■00 • 


• in 


• toio •-' 


to 


•lOt-t-CO 


.- . 


.M 


.COCO Tt* • 


CO 


.->~ 1 1 1 


iHr-lT-H 


. T-H . 


IrH 


.rHrHT-t . 


iH 


.C^II-ItHtH 









'-'|ii(i(P4 :iii : ; :P^ :(i<^(Ph"- :Cu :CLi(iHPHfL, 



133 <V 



o to.G 



,— ( k> „ m jj" "U 



iH^O'^lrt -CO • . .•<3< 



CNqmC0i-H«0^(M?CC^'M 



o 
o 

W 



o 
m 

b 

o 

O 

« 






3 



•£i3 2,S2 






oo .ino 
■^^m .COM* 



• CO .m«ooTt< 



■ m o ^ ^1 ■■^ T-i 



0"5 









* * * * 

•OCOO lOO 



(MCOCOMCQCOG^T-lrH ,COC<)COCO(M(M .COMC^ICOrJ^ 



r" ►^ l-i 






OOCOICIOCOU5"*CC>-^0-^ 






-OrHCQioOO 



OS t- T~-l o CC lO 
05 ■^ "^ iro »— I CD 
iH i-t Tj< CO tr- no 



•^ m 



^dd^-i^i^ 



i^ '^ 5 oT "0" to rf—" 



,_i ct_l p^ 

aim ^ p 5 



C.i^ M C w'^ to 

> ^2Sg» 

<n to": S'O 
o3 . f- S C 

a) a? 4J c +^ "- CO 



',2 c 



m ?i trt .in 

O I- '^ W ri'^-j 

* iAU t^- o 

K!*j a) ti '' 

C jrt 41 0,0) . 

•" -^ Q.<^ . 

_ o; ■? _ w to 

.S O-M tS 

"= ^ to _ e 

CO " C .1 

m 1-1 rH jj rt ^ 1^ 



'i aj 01 

CO_Q 



* r fe- 
rn ^^ 



> J: 0)1-1 ctf o 
o d a t. y 



. booi CI 

iS ai.H-" « o J^ OJ 

^ mc<i ^ (; o-°.t; 

.ti "^ H c w " 
10 c£ (0 o_Q 0) 

0) ai -m'Cj to 
o '„ ^i^oa c~ aj 
PC5o.Q|"3to.Q 



342 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

I ^ P.-« J^J, .1 1 Ir^.J I 1 I BOJJ.Q 



cS 



0) rt -^ OBijj 

S o£ l^iU 00 fig's _ 

TH a^G'^^ .«oiorf<<x, .io-*«DiO CJ ^"3 .g 

^ -y ID o • • .5 o fi g 

s . . .» Isiss 

SS-g^>fi|^'. „ ;l? S'^Cg 



"Ooo h 



M-IJO 



1 >^;a'oS=' « -S-SkS 

M aj'^'d-i.+j-* t- • ' h 

o ri o3 cd w <U'Ovff)S(n 

(H •rri i-fii b .......... W(B.-^o,rt 

z Ph l,^"h ft X3 5 5 

^ ^$l's^ :-^ : : : :3'^'" ^^-^^^l 

o owgdQ 

t-1 •Pi lo w +-> CO 

OtC C •COOi005,HOlOOOM<05 S .^W 

Cir c^ o (D 

n to 0«5lOOOCOi-(05000eD T P— ' 

O p o oi eo 35 o 00 eq ■* o eq CO 1-1 +3tR 

W" >4<weoooo50jcO(Nt_ocv3eou:i _(_:"to 

g :::::::::::: ^^?fi" 



-i! : . . : . o 



S-£ 



S e<l3C iM 

0) 



7 '0.3 o tti 

M . . I . : CD .^^.ti''" "2 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



343 



Table X. — Average Price of Macadam Laid in 1907 in 37 Cities. 



Total 
Price Thick- 
Per cu. yd. ness of 



Sq. Yds. 

Albany, N. T 1,661 

Bayonne, N. J 5,600 

Brockton, Mass 39,123 

Easton, Pa 22,104 

East Orange, N. J... 38,150i 

Elizabeth, N. J 4,410i 

Evanston, III 56,226 

Fond du L,ac, Wis... 6,000 

Holyoke, Mass 27,124 

Jersey City, N. J 8,046 

Keokuk, la 10,172 

La Crosse, Wis 33,529 

Medford, Mass 29,0002 

Milwaukee, Wis 87,215 

Minneapolis, Minn.... 20,592 

Nashville, Tenn 9,693 

New Bedford, Mass.. 29,793 

Newton, Mass 65,000* 

Oshkosh, Wis 14,026 

Portland, Me 22,275 

Providence 33,407 

Racine, Wis 7,845 

Richmond, Ind 33,000 

Rockford, 111 65,005^ 

Salt Lake City, Utah 64,000 
San Antonio, Te.x. . .280,000-' 

Savannah, Ga 6,397" 

Sedalia, Mo 12,555 

Sheboygan, Wis 4,568 

Somerville, Mass 5,800* 

South Bend, Ind 1,006 

Superior, Wis 50,506 

Stockton, Cal 83,000 

Toledo, 10,977 

Troy, N. Y 800 

Washington, D. C... 47,300 
Winona, Minn 8,002 

*Does not include grading. 

^Telford macadam, ^^.bout one-half of this was over a marshy 
soil and 4 ft. average fill, thus making the average price higher than 
usual ; the ordinary cost for 6-in. macadam including excavation 
and grading is about $1 per yd. ^jvjjigg gf 30-ft. roadway ; of this 
amount 7.43 miles was done by city at $1.65 per lin. ft. and 2.23 
miles by contract at $1.79 per lin. ft. *By day labor. ^Loose. 
"Done by City Engineer's department. "$0.65 to $1.00. 8$0.50 to 
$0.77. "Gravel laid on soil. "Per lin. ft. "$0.92 to $1.05. i2$0.10 
to $0.25. «9 ins. limestone, 3 ins. granite. "$0.60 to $0.80. i=By 
day labor. 



verage 


Guar- 


for Grading 


Pave- 


Price 


antee 


if Paid 


ment 


r Sq. Yd. 


Years. 


Separately. 


Inches. 


$1.30 


2 


.... 


8 


• . • 


, . 


$0.40 


9 


.60 


. 


.... 


5-6 


.435 


. 




6-10 


1.00* 


"1 


■'35 


12 


1.25 


1 




15 


1.05*11 


5 


".251= 


12 


.70* 


1 


.50 


12 


.53 






, , 


1.00 


5 


".40 


12 


.635* 


1 


.35 


10 


1.08 






12 


1.50 






_ 


.80 








.90 




.... 


8-12 


1.65» 




.... 


15 


.53 




.... 


12 


.40 




.... 


4 


.65 




.... 


10 


.82 







6 

85 


i".24* 








.50 






7 


.39 






8 


1.00*7 




".778 


9 


.50 




.... 


8 


.50 








.90 




.... 


i2 


.99 






1212 


.65 








.65* 




".if 


6 


1.25* 




.80 


12 


.52* 




.50 


7 


1.40*10 




.... 




1.90 




.... 




.80V>» . .15 


.... 


, , 


1.00 " 




.... 


12 



344 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



O 013- rj 



05 eq r- •* o o d •* to t~ CO <o oo o «3 ■>*i "5 m "O to >n to (M co o to os co t~ o"* 



t-t CO W CO --# w r 



O •"« 

<J CO 



oof-'*ocDoooooo omt^TOoooooooo'^oooo 

OO«>^-O>CO00OOO Ot-001:^OOO>OOO"3O<NOOOO 
"3 O »0 00 O -^ O CO O •<** Tti t^fM i-Ht^OiOOiOOOr^^OSOCNOOt^O 



3«-i <u 



+»+=+a +^ +J +^"£3 +^-U +3+> 

nj.wfUWO'^WrtWim (u™ 030 wo) 
MCL,0<;0I1<<MC5< O <0 <10 



c E c* 

aj U cS 
COOW 



J3 M a 
o 



•c 

m 






O 
O 

T) O 

82 



•3 

2.M 






5 G o 



c 



o- 

3 -3 



•9 > 






P 



■g-s 

So 
fJ-S.2 g 



3 3 3 3 




o ni 
O 



(:;3 333333333 33333333333333333 3 

c<i t-t T-H ^-H ^H »-H cq f-H (M (M T-H cqtMcsKN F-to cq ^h 






lO -<31 CO <C us CO U3 CO O CO CO t}1 CO CO -^ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO -^ 00 CO CO CO kO 



>« PI 
o o 

■"■^ 
■ti Pi 

cii d 



:: :t :: 3 3 3 



3 3 3 3 3 3 3 



rt 



a t. 




d O 


■a c! 


■g|!«l OS 


S .1 




"a 3 


c\i o o p = 


ci.2 C3 


H 

., Mac 

., Cair 

Cha 




ra^3 ! 


«o 


OS 





3 




o 




»-) 


9 

+J3 ■ 


: 3 «3 


C« 




O 


CO 


(U 


Ci3 


P 


W 



3 3 3 3 3 3 



3 ►>, ^ 



3 3 3 3 3 3 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



345 



Cost 
per sq. 
yd.Ex- 
cl'ding 

Curb. 


C0OU5OOOO'^C^00CD03'^t-*N 


0»CC^COlO'^lOiOt*-'«J<OSW3»00»005 

■aicxjoot^tooo-irtC^-oi-^OM-Hiooo 


rt.-.rt,-<N(M-H>-<r-l.-l»-<>-lrtrtrt 
«» c^ n ■<• 


in 


^NcocoeoeoNNNNTO 


Approx. 
Sq. Yds. 


ooi>>r~ooiooooooooo3 

ifJOTO— 'OtpOOOOOO-hOCO 
CJO-Ht^iOOOOOOOOO-*© 


MOOOOOOO 
lOCCOOOOOO 

oomoooojoco 


ooooooo 
woira^ooo 
cq OS o •* o> m t~ 


05«>-TC^00O00'O-HOt~OM "5 


e<5 cq to tk N M o t^ 


Cl t^'oo'i— I ■<«* 00 cc 


Nature 

of 
Filler. 


Asphalt 

Sand 

Cement 

Sand 

Cement 

Sarco 


cement 
Pioneer 
Cement 


■♦-> 

C M 
= = Ct;qiHi-,>-iU.i-u, 


Make of Brick 

or 
Kind of Block. 


Springfield brick 
Purington block 
Metropolitan 

Indiana block 
Hard pine 
Culver block 
Metropolitan 
Wassel 
Logan 
Brazil block 
Metropolitan 
Barr block 
Clinton block 
Indiana block 


Trimble block 
Athens 
Spillman 
Portsmouth granite 


Carlyle 
Granite 

Creo-Resinate 
Creosoted wood 

Purington and Metropol'n 

Metropolitan 

Metropolitan 

Various 

Granite block 


m 
w 

At 

O 


(M r-KMr-l — 1 


5 3 3 S 3 


2" to 3" sand 

2" sand 

Dry cement mortar 

2" sand 

2" " 

2" 

2" " 


Thick- 
ness of 
Founda- 
tion, 
Inches. 


tcooooooooocootooococo 




rt c 


Concrete 

Broken stone 
Concrete 

Old macadam 
Concrete 


= , = . . 


Gravel 
Concrete 

Slag 

Slag 

Crushed limest'ne 

Concrete 


E 
2 

u 
o 

a 


111., Taylorville 

" Winnetka 

Ind., Ft. Wayne 

" Indianapolis 

" Kokomo 
" Muncie 

" So. Bend 


Ky., Covington 


Mass., Lawrence 
" New Bedford 
" Springfield 

111., Chicago 



o 

CO 



346 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






(M CM T-H »-H T-H CO i-H CO *-l T-l IM CO c<HMCOCO 



■ItN (MCQCO 



^ y3 

o -"^ 
a cj- 



OOOOOOOOiOO-*Tt< 
OOCO-^OOOOOOt-hC^iOO 
:OtJ<05"OCOCT»0«D-^010005 



t^OOO O O O ■<*< O C30 ^H 05 »-i TJH •«* i-( O 
(MCOCOOO OOOb-TH0CT-ICX>t^O00O'^ 



TO ;^ 

2 ^ 



cBsS = 

ClJ <u " <u 
MO O 



js-o-d S 

w cij a! U 
<lW!/30 



. . g = 



o 

s 



13 



S M 



Si 

03 O 



o! 



wS 






o 

5 "^ 

.S-p.2 

Vi O ts 



o- 

3 '- 

uj c o 



CO o 
S a) o 

O O^ 



oagJJCCocjJJ 
o--gg^^o.Eg 

So.S s^sje^Q 

" C^ S^JJ « £ O 
StJOCQOOSCQO 



,« 4-> 

o o 

At 

O 



■0 


■d 




s = 5 qj = 


a= = = = 


3 


c4 


C8 




* * « 


=" » * » 




% H«H«fc 


% % H«H?»HM 




M^rfrt 


i~iy-iT^'^-^ 


(N 






X 



.a tn C g-ci 



O.O 

V-. Co 



CO CO CO CO to -^ »0 CO CO CM 00COCOO3CO ooococo 



• 00 CO CO CO 00 CD 



'2 
c-t; 1-1 

^2:3 g 

§0 CJ 



menu 



o 
o 



•a o 

C3 O 

cno 



■d 
'0. 



Ig § 



s 

Mm 



c 
o 

=1 






o 

'd 
c 

- d 



gja-d 
PQOO 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



347 



r4.i M ■ 



CC ^H rH -^ f-l »-H rH .-^ »-t ^H 1-1 t-l ^H ^^ r-H *-t ^H ^H T-< Cq (M .-4 <M Cq »-l »-( ,-H 



So-? 

< C/3 



oooo 



tot^o>o»ooooooooo 
t~rtO— <cnmoooooo 

cDCCOOOiOSOO-^OOO 



lomooooooooo 



0) 
b I- 

2 fe 



5 ttj m Bi 



•a 

,"1 n! 



1-. -M 

o c c- 



(U m " 



<u 



•CT3 

<5m 



C o 
« 5 



la S 



4>i 



O w 



JiE 









? bo.H 
o o v- 



Ah .,H T^ ki tfl 

a iH a? tn 

W Oj 05 o <u 



a^ = 

<> 



o 
o 

si 



Sell 
S c 2 " 

^ 3 m.t! 



S I* 

CJ o 

3 rt 
O 





T) 








C 








nt 














Tl 


o 


•n 




r: 


c = 


3 


m 


n! 




w 










>- 








C-tCM 





0) 




o 




o 




E 




nl 


Tl 


+3 
<u 

E 


T1 


T) 


C 


a 


ri 


nt 


01 


nt = 


k 


tfl 


o 


m 




% 


s- 


s- 


»■ 


-t!.rtNHt« 




1— < 


r-i 


1— 1 



r- m 3.S u 



00 CD iO 00 O O CO 00 1^ CX) 00 00 CO OCOCDCO-^ CO »0 -<*< IM CD CD CO IC 00 



o o 

w. Co 

d'O 
cS 3 



c 
o 

o 



> 








rt 








u. 








M 








■g"" 


E 




a> 




ai 




+> 


T! "i i" 


•rJ 


u 


f^ 


>-d o = 




>» 


s w 


cS c c 




nS 


C 


c5c55d 


O 


o 






O 



P^ 



E 
o 


•a 
c 


3 3 O 








c >> 


o 

a 


> 




Colum 
Conne 
Coshoc 


o cd 
C3.S 



+J (U 

oiz; 



tc 




be 


o 


p 


■a 










:-!. 


o 


w 


H 



,s = = 



•^ 1-1 



c 

P "i " Sm 
J3 o^ Jp* _• 



Oco!> 



C!i = 









348 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






05 O •* ^ t^ CC t-^ T-tr-l 05 t^ O OCJ »0 OO CO OS «D Tt< 



00 3^ 



^ <M IM '^ <M (M (M 



HIMMCM .(M 



-M 

d tH tfl 



OOOC^OOffi OO OiMtHOOOo 

O O O -* O en tH OO 0<M030000 

oocoiMcocrqco »cno Othcooi^'^ 

C^'iOtCc^T-iCO OSI>^ o'rHt-T^tC 



COO»-t 

ooc^ 

■-IO-* 



^° 



ii "j 












lU 






Ji 







a 
o 


(1) 




en 


q 


Jl 


!-• 




-1 


O 


H 


C 


o 


" 


»i3 






Cl 










o 








n 


+J 








-d 


n! 

Tl 








G 


el 








M 


O 







■u 






PQHm 



o 

O. o 
W o 



■a -o 

:2o.'3- 
2 H.2" 

Vh c8 h 






so 



Q^ t % % % t 



O IH S 



a c 

ft o o 



CO -^ O CDCOcOco CO lO CO CO CO IC CO Tji CO CO CO CO CO 






MO 



o 


g 


■M 


[> 


a 


nt 


<u a 


H 


» 


01 


n 




o 


Tl 


■s 






O 





a 

o 
u 



B 

bog I 
.S c-i 



^ TJ 



G X a) r* +^ 
0<| fehnPnCO - 



3 3 3 3 



§2 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



349 



Cost per 

Sq. Yd. 

Exclusive of 

Curb. 


toe 


1.98 

old b 1 . 30 

newbl .90 

repave 

1.49 

2.33 

2.23 

1.37-1.69 

1.55-1.75 

1.65 

1.80 

2.18-2.60 

1.19-1.60 

2.25 

1.68 

2.03 


Approximate 

Number 
Sq. Yds. 


U5 

to 

00 




60,000 

6,040 

10,468 

7,050 

251,236 

30,749 

5,945 

125,000 

50,161 
6,000 
2,408 

100,000 

581.000 


Thick- 
ness of 
Asphalt, 
Inches. 


Ht4 H« Hw 




Trinadad 

Trinidad 
Trinidad, Acme 
Obispo 

Trinidad 

Bermudez 

California 
Bermudez 

Trinidad 

Bermudez 
Bermudez, Cuban 
California 

Various 


Binder Thickness 

and 

Character 


li" concrete 

1" 
1" limestone 

with asphalt cem't 
i" stone, 1" thick 

1 stone with asphalt 
cement 

li" " 

1" broken stone 

1" 
1" gravel with 
asphalt cement 

1" 
li" stone 
2" compressed to li" 

li" asphalt cement 
and limestone 


Thick- 
ness of 
Founda- 
tion, 
Inches. 


tOtOtO CO -* to CO lO lO lO to to cototo to 


c 
.« o 

.E G 


Asphaltic con- 
concrete 

Concrete 


Report From. 


V 

:z;c 


1 

P 

3 


" Toledo 

" Youngstown 

Pa., Chester 
" Erie 

" Harrisburg 
" Scranton 

" Wilkesbarre 
R. I., Providence 
D. C, Washington 

111., Chicago 



350 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



> 

< 

< 

Q 



Pi 



W 

6h 



a 


Complete 

Per Sq. Yd. 

Excluding 

Curb. 


5,40-. 50 
,65 
,51 
.98 
.40 
.55 
.80 

.80 
.50 
.70 

.60-. 75 
,70 

.95-98 
1.01 
2,25 

.80-, 90 
.56 
.80 


Required 

Thickness 

Completed, 

Inches. 


°9 CO cq cq 00 o c^ cocsico 

to -"-1 '-^'-l -H 


t-O0t-S'(M«'°P 
'^'^CDCO 


Material 

tor 
Binder 
Course. 


None 

Screenings 
i" and dust 
Screenings 

Trap rock 
Slate " 
Screenings 
Dust & scrgs. 

Screenings 


S2 
d 
o 
u 

c 


'o'iS 
ll 


Chert 
Trap rock 
Trap rock 
Limestone 

Trap rock 
Slate " 


Tra;. rock 

Trap rock 
Limestone 


Size of 
Materi'l 

In. 


a 

.tj 1 iM 1 1 1 cq T-i 

T3 


.+,H-« rt -< CM CM CO CO 
T-HrHrH 1 1 | 1 | 1 

,-^ 1 jet 1 ( r^riinT^ 


Thick- 
ness 
Loose, 
In. 


OO 

* CD * 


Hc4i-4n H« CD 
CM ^^ rH »C CO CO CD 1 CO 


o 
o 

U3 


"o f! 


Slag 

Trap rock 
Trap rock 
Limestone 

Trap rock 
Slate " 
Granite 
Trap rock 

Limestone 
Sandstone 


Size of 

Materi '1 

In. 


C<llM^-*tO->*l-* H5<TOr*. HcM cq CO CC CO 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CM 1 (NIM-HCT 1 1 1 1 1 

CM CM ^H r-4 


Thick- 
ness, 
Loose, 
In. 


t~QO 

-^"^CMCOCOCOCO U^CM*OI lOt^OSGOlJ^JCO 


1 




g 

O 

a 


Ala., Birmingham 
Conn., Bridgeport 

Hartford 
111., Harvey 

" Rockford 
Ind., Muncie 

" Richmond 

Mass., Lowell 

" Nfiw Bfidforf] 


" Newton 
" Springfield 
Minn., Duluth 
N. J., Camden 

Ohio, Cleveland 

" Columbus 



ROADS, PAl-EMENTS\ WALKS. 



351 



o 


Complete 
Per Sq. Yd. 
Excluding 
Curb. 


1.09 

.45 
.34 
.56 

.90 

.70-85 

.55-65 

.58i 

.60-. 75 

1.20 

.79 

1 28 




Required 

Thickness 

Completed, 

Inches. 




IN 

^H j^ ,-1 T-H 








Material 
for 

Binder 
Course. 


4V' granite 
with scrg's 

Screenings 

Scr3enings 
Cinders and 
.screenings 


6 
2 




Trap rock 
Li-nestone 


3 
o 
O 
•d 
c 


Size of 

Materi '1 

In. 


(M(X<M>0 CO .Mrfjeq (M<M 
<M 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 " 1 II 




Thick- 
ness 
Loose, 
In. 






O cd 

•c'g 
Ml 


Limestone 

Trap rock 
Slag 

Slag 
Limestone 


o 


Size of 
Materi '1 

In. 


■* CM (M ■<}< CO 00 ■•<}< 
lllll 1 -IIMtO O^ 

cococq 




Thick- 
ness, 
Loose, 
In. 


1 "^ 
-^^ 00 1,—' 

asoTP 1 oo T, xsct^tOrt ooco 




B 
S 

u 
o 
o. 


C 
O 

p 

o 

o 


" Springfield 

" Toledo 
Wis., Lacrosse 

" Madison 

" Sturgeon Bav 
D. C, Washington 
111., Chicago 


'■ 


= 





352 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Prices for Estimating Street Work.* — Mr. George P. Carver gives 
the following prices. They are the prices per square yard on 
practically all classes of paving, and are used by the engineering 
department of one of the largest Massachusetts cities for estimat- 
ing purposes to determine amount necessary for appropriation. 

These figures are used, and to the total 10 or 15 per cent is 
added for incidentals. 

The prices in this list are made up from the figures submitted in 
bids for paving work in that city and are very close to actual 
figures. 

The flagging is granite and North River stone. 

The prices given are per square yard unless otherwise stated. 

*tBlock (granite) paving $2.35 

*ttBlock (granite) paving 3.20 

**ttBlock (granite) paving 4.10 

Telford macadam, 8 ins. plus 4 ins 1.50 

Macadam, 6 ins 1.00 

**Asphalt, 5-yr. guarantee 3.50 

**Asphalt, 10-yr. guarantee 3.75 

♦Paving with old granite blocks 1.00 

**Repaving with old granite blocks 2.75 

New blocks furnished on ground. 1.35 

Brick sidewalks ! 1.10 

Gravel sidewalks 0.40 

Crushed stone sidewalks 0.70 

New bricks furnished 0.55 

Laying bricks flat 0.55 

tRelaying old bricks 0.15 

Cobble gutters, old cobbles 1.25 

Tar concrete furnished and laid 1.25 

Gravel roadway, 12 ins. deep 0.55 

♦♦Wood paving, furnished and laid 3.50 

*Bit. brick paving 3.50 

Concrete base, 6 ins 0.83 

New flagging, furnished on ground 3.30 

tLaying flagging 1.00 

{Flagging cross-walks, furnished and laid 4.30 

•*ttFlagging furnished and laid 6.00 

**ttFlagging furnished and laid 5.15 

Nev/ edgestone furnished, per lin. ft 0.70 

Setting edgestone, per lin. ft 0.25 

Edgestone furnished and laid, per lin. ft. . . 0.95 

Circular edgestone, furnished and laid, per lin. ft. 1.55 

Granolithic sidewalks, per sq. yd 1.70 

Earth excavation (ordinary digging), per cu. yd. 0.38 

Rock excavation, per cu. yd ,. . . 1.75 

Setting manhole covers, each 3.00 

Extra work, actual cost plus 15%. 

* Gravel base ; t gravel joints ; ft pitch and pebble joints ; 
** concrete base. 

Cost of Unloading and Hauling Bricks.— Unloading bricks from 
a gondola car to wagons, each man will average 100 to 130 sq. yds. 
of brick per 10-hr. day. 

In 8 to 10 mins. a gang of 5 men and the driver will easily load 
a wagon with enough brick to lay 10 sq. yds., which is equivalent to 



*Engineering-Contracting, May 16, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 353 

a load of 2 tons. Such a load can be hauled by a team over an 
ordinary good, level earth street. 

In unloading the bricks at the curb line, the driver and another 
man in the wagon toss brick to two men who stack them up. They 
will unload the wagon (14 sq. yds.) in 8 to 10 mins. 

Summing up we have the following cost of loading and unloading 
(not including the lost team time) : 

Per sq. yd. 

COS hr. labor loading wagon, at $0.20 $0.0160 

0.05 hr. labor unloading wagon, at $0.20 0.0120 

Total $0,028 

Since the lost team time, while loading and unloading, amounts to 
about 20 mins. per load, or 2 mins. per sq. yd., we have a cost of 
1.4 cts. per sq. yd., when team time is worth 40 cts. per hr. 

A team travels 2% miles per hr., or 220 ft. per min. Hence 
the cost of hauling, when the load is 10 sq. yds. or 2 tons, is 3.2 cts. 
per sq. yd. per mile of distance between the car and the place of 
unloading. 

We have a fi.\ed cost of 2.8 cts. for labor of loading and unload- 
ing, plus 1.4 cts. for lost team time, or a total fixed cost of 4.2 cts. 
per sq. yd. Hence the following rule for the cost of hauling brick : 

To a fixed cost of 1,.2 cts. per sq. yd. add 3.2 cts. per sq. yd. per 
mile when the load is 2 tons. 

By using two extra wagons, one empty wagon at the car being 
loaded, and one full wagon being unloaded at the street, the item 
of "lost team time" can be almost entirely eliminated, for a team 
can be unhitched from an empty wagon and hitched to a loaded 
wagon in 1 min., and by fastening a chain from the rear of the 
loaded wagon to the tongue of the empty, the empty can be pulled 
up alongside the car ready for loading. When this is done, the 
"fixed cost" is reduced to 2.8 cts. per sq. yd. Then if 3 tons are 
hauled per load, as is common on city streets, the cost of hauling 
brick becomes: 

To a fixed cost of 3 cts. per sq. yd. add 2 cts. per mile of haul. 

The use of extra wagons is particularly desirable when a smaller 
gang than 5 men is engaged in loading, for with a smaller gang the 
lost team time would be correspondingly greater if there were no 
extra wagons. 

Gravity Conveyor for Handling Brick to Pavers From Stock Piles 
Without Breakage.* — Fig. 8 shows a simple device for handling 
paving brick from stock piles at the sides of the street to pavers, 
which has been successfully used by Carlson & Theselius, brick 
paving contractors, Chicago, 111., in paving work in Chicago and 
other western cities. The usual method of handling brick is by 
wheelbarrows. The barrows are loaded at the stock piles by wheel- 
ers, wheeled onto the street and dumped. There the dumped brick 
are arranged ready to the hand of the pavers by pliers. For say 



* Engineering-Contracting, April 21, 1909. 



354 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 355 

three pavers laying 1,500 sq. yds. per day there will be required 
eight wheelers and four pilers to handle the brick. In addition the 
loading and dumping of the brick results in more or less break- 
age. With the device illustrated it has been found easily possible to 
supply bricks to three pavers laying 1,500 sq. yds. per day with 
only four men, a saving of eight men over wheelbarrow work. 

The general arrangement of the device on the work is shown by 
Fig. 8. The device is merely a set of conveying rolls. Two boards 
5 ins. wide are set parallel and carry between them a train of 
wood spools. The axles of the spools extend through bushed holes 
in the side boards and have removable nuts at the ends, which 
permit oiling. The spools are spaced so as to have a clearance of 
% in. They are ordinary wooden spools, with a barrel 3% ins. 
long between shoulders. They are set so that the line of the 
shoulders is just below the top edges of the side boards ; this per- 
mits a steel strap guard to be fastened to the top edge of eanh 
side board so as to extend inward over the shoulders and prevent 
dirt anr! chips from lodging between the ends of the spools and the 
adjoining side boards. Below the journals the side boards are 
thinned down so as to permit such debris to fall out easily. The 
whole construction is very simple and forms, as has been stated, a 
train of rolls which, when set at an incline, will allow a brick, 
when set edgewise on the spools, to move from top to bottom by 
gravity. 

The conveyors described above are usually made in 16-ft. lengths. 
They may, of course, be made longer, but a 16-ft. length is easily 
carried by one man, and when much longer conveyors are needed 
two or more 16-ft. sections can be coupled end to end. When used 
on the street the ends of the conveyors near the sides of the street 
are supported on standards extending up from small trucks or car- 
riages which travel along the gutter. This method of support can 
be seen in the illustration. Two conveyors are employed, one ex- 
tending into the street from each side. The inner ends of the two 
conveyors meet at the center of the street and the outer ends extend 
beyond the supporting trucks and the glitters and past the ends of 
the stock piles. Just back of the trucks there is a hinge in each 
conveyor which permits the projecting end to be tilted up to clear 
trees, poles or other obstructions when the conveyors are shifted 
ahead. The incline given the conveyor is as flat as may be, so that 
the brick can be put on and taken off the conveyor with as little 
lifting as possible. An incline of 1 in. to 1 ft. is ample ; in fact 
it has been much flatter on most of the work done by Messrs. Carl- 
son and Theselius. In one case the incline was only 14 ins. in 24 ft. 

The method of operating the conveyors is quite clearly shown by 
the illustration. The loaders take the bricks from the piles and set 
them edge up and endwise on the spools. The movement of the 
brick is then by gravity down the conveyor. In putting the brick 
on the conveyor the loaders take care to place the best or smooth 
edge up, so that when the pavers take them off they do not have 
to turn them to find the best edge to come on top. The pavers 



356 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

grasp a brick in each hand and place both at once. The loaders 
take care, in placing the brick on the conveyors to keep the supply 
just ahead of the laying. If the conveyor is kept tight packed 
with brick all the time, they bind and the paver has to exert more 
force in lifting them, which reduces his speed. 

As stated above, with three conveyors a gang of seven men, 
four loaders and three pavers, will lay 1,500 sq. yds. of paving a 
day. This record has been frequently made by the contractors 
named above. These contractors have patented the device and are 
putting it on the market. They will furnish these conveyors made 
up in 16-ft. lengths or longer at $2 per lineal foot. 

Cost of Laying Bricks. — Bricks are ordinarily carried in wheel- 
barrows from the piles along the curb and dump on the finished 
pavement behind the bricklayers. The average wheelbarrow load is 
about 40 "pavers," or 270 lbs., and is seldom more than 45 
"pavers," or 305 lbs. Such loads are readily wheeled over level run- 
ways and even up a short slope of 1 in 7. A man will readily load 
a barrow in 1% mins., at which rate, if Jie were doing nothing else 
but load barrows he would average 14,000 "pavers" loaded in 
10 hrs. But the men who load the bricks usually wheel them to 
place and dump them. Where the distance to be wheeled is about 
40 ft, it takes about % min. to go and return plus another % min. 
lost in dumping the barrow and in brief rests ; so that a day's work 
is 10,000 "pavers," or 175 sq. yds., loaded and wheeled 40 ft. 

Two men wheeling bricks to each bricklayer is a common ratio, 
and 300 sq. yds. laid per day by a bricklayer is considered a big 
day's work, although it is frequently exceeded. This would require 
the wheeling of 150 sq. yds. per man on wheelbarrow. 

Foremen are often very careless in spacing the wagon loads of 
brick along the curb, so that there are frequently too many bricks 
at one part of the street, and too few at another. When this is so, 
more men with wheelbarrows are required to deliver the bricks. 

The number of men to each bricklayer is ordinarily about as 
follows : — 

Per day. 

1 bricklayer $ 2.50 

2 men wheeling and delivering bricks 3.50 

1 man spreading sand cushion 2.25 

1 man ramming 1.75 

1% men grouting joints with cement -. . 2.65 

% man raising sunken brick, etc 0.85 

7 men total $13.50 

When the bricklayer, who really "sets the pace," lays 300 sq. yds. 
per day, the cost of laying and grouting is $13.50-^-300 = 41/2 cts. 
per sq. yd., to which % ct. must be added for foreman and water 
boy, making a total of 5 cts. per sq. yd. for laying the brick. 
This is a cost that may be attained under good management, and 
with skilled men. It is, perhaps, nearer an average to say that 
225 sq. yds. per day are commonly laid by each bricklayer, making 
the cost of laying 6 cts. per sq. yd., exclusive of foreman and 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 357 

water boy, or 6.6 cts. including them, assuming that a foreman 
supervises about 20 men, and that wages are as above given. 

Summary of Cost of Brick Pavement. — Based upon the foregoing 
data, we may summarize the cost of a brick pavement, bricks laid 
on edge, grouted with 1 to 1 cement mortar, as follows : 
Materials: 

55 "pavers," at $15.00 per M $0,825 

0.042 cu. yd. sand for cushion iy2 ins. thick, at $1.00 0.042 

0.004 cu. yd. sand for grouting joints, at $1.00 0.004 

0.028 bbl. cement for grouting joints, at $1.50 0.042 

Total materials $0,913 

Lator: 

Hauling brick 1 mile (2 + 3 cts.) $0,050 

Laying brick and grouting ' 0.050 

Total labor $0,100- 

Total materials and labor $1,013 

1/6 cu. yd. concrete base, at $3.60 0.600 

% cu. yd. earth excavation, at $0.30 0.100 

Grand total $1,713 

The above costs of concrete base and of earth excavation are 

merely assumed for illustration, the details of those classes of 

work being given elsewhere. 

The cost of filling of the joints of a brick pavement is discussed 

in detail in the next paragraph. 

Cost of Filling Joints of Brick Pavement. — To determine the area 
of brick pavement occupied by the joints, refer to the table on 
page 359. It will be noted there, for illustration, that 2% x 8% x 
4-in. bricks laid on edge require 57.2 bricks per sq. yd. when laid 
with %-in. joints, or 61 bricks if it were possible to lay them so 
close that there would be no joints. Hence the joints occupy an 
area equivalent to 61.0 — 57.2 = 3.8 bricks per sq. yd. But 3.8 -H 
61 = 6.2%, which is the percentage of area occupied by joints. 
Since the joints are 4 ins. deep, each sq. yd. of pavement contains 
6.2% X (4 -^- 36) = 0.007 cu. yd. of grout or tar used to fill the 
joints. If cement grout is used, then the amount of sand and 
cement per cu. yd. for any specified proportions is ascertained by 
referring to Tables I and II in the Concrete Section. 

Thus, Table I shows that about 4 bbls. of cement and 0.6 cu. yd. 
of sand are required per cu. yd. of 1 to 1 mortar. Hence a sq. yd. 
of brick pavement laid with pavers will require 0.007 X 4 bbls. =: 
0.028 bbl. cement, and 0.007 X 0.6 cu. yd. = 0.0042 cu. yd. sand. 

In like manner, we find that about 2% bbls. cement and 0.8 cu. 
yd. of sand are required per cu. yd. of 1 to 2 mortar. Hence, 
0.007 X 2% = 0.019 bbl. cement will be required to grout a sq. yd. 
of brick; and 0.007 X 0.8 = 0.0056 cu. yds of sand. 

If paving blocks, 3 % x 8 % x 4 ins., are laid with % -In. joints, it 
will be seen on page 359 that 44.5 blocks lay a sq. yd., while with- 
out joints it would require 46.9 blocks, or a difference of 2.4 blocks, 
which is 5.1% of the area. Hence, using the same method of 



358 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

analysis as above given, it would require 5.1% X (4 -^ 36) = 0.0057 
cu. yd. of grout or tar to fill the joints. Therefore it would require 
0.023 bbl. cement and 0.0034 cu. yd. sand to fill the joints of a 
square yard of blocks with a 1 to 1 grout. With a 1 to 2 grout, it 
would require 0.016 bbl. cement and 0.0046 cu. yd. sand per sq. yd. 

If a tar or pitch filler is used, the 2% x 8% x 4-in. "pavers" will 
require 0.007 cu. yd., or 0.19 cu. ft. of tar per sq. yd. Since there 
are 7% gals, per cu. ft., this is equivalent to 1.3 gals, per sq. yd. 
Tar is usually sold in 5 2 -gal. barrels, but the size of the barrel 
should always be specified. 

If 3% X 8% X 4-in. "blocks" are used, 0.0057 cu. yd., or 0.15 
cu. ft., or 1.1 gal. of tar will be required per sq. yd. 

Tar has a specific gravity of 1.25, and therefore weighs 78 lbs. 
per cu. ft., or a trifle more than 10 lbs. per gal. 

As above given, the labor of grouting joints of "pavers," in- 
cluding mixing the Portland cement and sand and brooming it into 
the joints, is less than 1 ct. per sq. yd., where the men work at all 
vigorously, but even this is equivalent to $0.01 -^ 0.007 cu. yd. = 
$1.40 per cu. yd. of cement grout, and is, therefore, susceptible of 
considerable reduction, as will be seen by subsequent examples. 

The labor cost of melting and pouring tar into joints is usually 
about 1 ct. per gal., when wages are $1.75 per 10 hrs. 

Number and Weight of Paving Brick Per Square Yard. — The so- 
called "standard brick" for house building is 2% x 8% x 4 ins., 
and for a time brick for paving purposes were also made of the 
same dimensions. Within recent years the size of the standard 
brick for paving purposes has become 2%x8%x4 ins., and such 
bricks are commonly called "pavers." It takes 52 to 57 of these 
"pavers" per sq. yd. A larger size, 3^4 x 8% x4 ins., is also much 
used, and is known as "block. ' Some variations from these dimen- 
sions occur, as in Hallwood block, which is 3x9x4 ins. ; and as 
neither the engineer nor the contractor ca^ be sure of the exact 
side of brick that will be delivered, it is always necessary to secure 
from manufacturers a statement as to the sizes they make. 

When the sizes are known there is a factor of uncertainty to the 
inexperienced, and that is the thickness of the grouted or tarred 
joints between bricks as ordinarily laid. I have found as the aver- 
age of a large number of measurements that the thickness of the 
average joint is about % in., unless the "pavers" are made with 
projecting lugs to give a wider joint. 

The following table gives such data as will ordinarily serve in 
estimating the number of brick that will be required. Brick are 
Occasionally laid with extremely close joints about one-sixteenth 
inch, in which case about 3% more "pavers" laid on edge will be 
required than given in the table, but close laying is not only ex- 
pensive work for the contractor, but objectionable also in that it is 
then impossible to fill the joints perfectly. 

For street pavements the bricks or blocks are laid on edge (mak- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 359 

ing a brick pavement 4 Ins. thick), but for sidewalks they are 
usually laid flatwise. / believe that in residence streets the bricks 
should usually be laid flatwise for true economy's sake. 

No. of Brick Per Square Yard. 

With 1^ -in. No Allowance 

Size of Brick. Joints. for Joints. 

2^x8x4, laid flatwise 38.7 40.5 

2^x8x4, laid edgewise 67.1 72.0 

2^x8%x4, laid flatwise 37.5 39.3 

2%x8i/ix4, laid edgewise 65.1 69.8 

21/2x81/2x4, laid flatwise 36.4 39.3 

2i/>x8i/. x4, laid edgewise 57.2 61.0 

3^x81/3x4, laid flatwise 36.4 38.1 

314x81/2x4, laid edgewise 44.5 46.9 

3x9x4, laid flatwise 34.4 36.0 

3x9x4, laid edgewise 45.5 48.0 

Having obtained the price per thousand (M) for the paving 
brick, f. o. b. factory, and freight rate to destination, the weight 
of tlie bricks must be known to estimate total cost f. o. b. cars 
at destination. Tlie specific gravity of paving brick ranges from 
1.9 to 2.7. Tests of 12 Ohio makes show a range of 1.95 to 2.25. 

Assuming a specific gravity of 2.2, a square j^ard of brick pavers 
4 ins. thick would weigh 385 lbs., and a square foot would weigh 
43 lbs., as laid with %-in. joints. Whence, by taking from the 
bidding sheet the number of quare yards of pavement and multiply- 
ing by 385, the total weight is readily ascertained; or, for all 
practical purposes, divide the number of square yards by 5, and the 
quotient will be the mimber of short tons of freight. 

It is convenient to remember that a "paver" (2% x 8i^ x 4 ins.) 
weighs about 6% lbs. and a "block" (3i/4x8i/^x4 ins.) weighs 
8% lbs. These are actual averages of several makes of New York 
State bricks that I have used. 

Cost of a Brick Pavement, Champaign, 111. — Mr. Charles Apple 
gives the following data on the cost of a brick pavement laid in 
1903 at Champaign, 111. The work was done by contract, the con- 
tract price for grading being 23 cts. per cu. yd., and for brick 
pavement on concrete base, $1.29 per sq. yd. 

The grading was done with drag-scoop scrapers, wheel-scrapers 
and wagons, each being used as demanded by the length of haul. 
Earth was loosened with plows to within 3 ins. of subgrade and 
this last layer then removed with pick and shovel. 

The cost of removing the last 3 ins. was 2 cts. per sq. yd. (or 
24 cts. per cu. yd.) with labor at $1.75 per day of 10 hrs. There 
was a total of 26,715 cu. yds. of grading, and there were 38,504 
sq. yds. of pavement. 

The subgrade was compacted with a horse-roller weighing 150 
lbs. per lin. in. at an average cost of about 0.05 cts. per sq. yd. 

The concrete foundation was 6 ins. thick, composed of 1 part 
natural cement, 3 parts of sand and gravel, and 3 parts of broken 
stone. All the materials were mixed with shovels, and were 
thrown into place from the board upon which the mixing was done. 
The material was brought to the steel mixing board in wheel- 



360 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

barrows from piles wnere it had been placed in the middle of 
the street, the length of haul being usually from 30 to 60 ft. 

When the concrete base had set, a sand cushion 1% ins. thick 
was placed upon it, and upon this the brick wearing surface was 
laid. 

The cost of the brick wearing surface is given in the following 
table, and is based upon the assumption that 1,000 paving blocks 
will lay 25 sq. yds. of pavement, or 40 blocks per sq. yd. This 
ratio was determined by actual count after the pavement was laid. 
To this cost will have to be added something for rejected bricks, 
the amount depending upon how closely the inspection is done at 
the kilns. 

Cost of 6-in. Concrete Base for Pavement. 

No. of Sq. yds. Total Cost per 

men. per day. wages. sq. yd. 
Rolling subgrade (1 roller, 2 

teams, 1 driver) 1 8,000 $ 4.75 $0.0005 

Mixing and tamping concrete : 

Turning with shovels 6 12.00 

Throwing into place 4 8.00 

Handling cement 2 3.50 

"Wetting with hose 1 1.75 

Tamping 2 3.50 

Grading concrete . '. 1 1.75 

Wheeling stone 6 10.50 

Wheeling gravel 4 7.00 

Foreman 1 4.00 



Total 27 900 $52.00 $0.0580 

Total labor per sq. yd $0.0585 

Materials: 

0.2 bbl. cemont, at $0.50 $0.10 

0.1 cu. yd. sand and gravel, at $1.00 0.10 

0.1 cu. yd. broken stone, at $1.40 0.14 $0.3400 



Total for material and labor per sq. yd $0.3985 

This is practically 40 cts. per sq. yd., or $2.40 per cu. yd. of 
concrete for materials and labor. It will be noted that the labor 
cost of making and placing the concrete was only 35 cts. per cu. 
yd., average wages being nearly $1.85 a day. Excluding the fore- 
man, the 26 men placed 900 sq. yds. or 150 cu. yds. per day, which 
is nearly 6 cu. yds. per man. This record is so abnormally high 
that I am satisfied the concrete did not measure * ins. thick, as 
stated by Mr. Apple. Certainly 0.2 cu. yd. of stone and sand com- 
bined could not make a sq. yd. of 6-in. concrete. It is more than 
likely that the compacted concrete actually did not measure much 
more than 4 ins. thick. 

The cost of hauling and laying the brick blocks (40 per sq. yd.) 
was as follows : 

Hauling BrV?,-; ; Per sq. yd. 

0.01 day labor loading wagons from car, at $1.75 $0.0175 

0.08 day team hauling, 1 mile at $3.00 0.0240 

0.008 day labor unloading at curb line at $1.75 0.0140 

Total, hauling brick $0.0555 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 3G1 

Laying Brick: 

0.0033 day labor, spreading sand cushion, at $1.75 $0.0057 

0.0066 day wheeling brick to layers, at $1.75 0.0115 

0.0033 day bricklayer,, at $2.50 0.0083 

0.0022 day labor, sweeping and filling joints with sand, 

at $1.75 0.0039 

0.0012 day team rolling pavement, at $3.00 0.0037 



Total, laying brick $0.0331 

Grand total, labor, hauling and laying $0.0886 

Materials: 

0.0277 cu. yd. sand cushion (1 in.), at $1.00 $0.0277 

40 brick block f. o. b. destination, at $16.00 per M 0.6400 

0.0023 cu. yd. sand filler, at $1.00 0.0023 



Total materials $0.6700 

The following is a summary of the foregoing: 

Per sq. yd. 

0.435 cu. yd. grading, at $0.23 $0.1000 

0.167 cu. yd. concrete base 0.3985 

Brick and sand cushion 0.6700 

Hauling brick 0.0555 

Laying brick 0.0331 

Grand total $1.2571 

The contract price was $1.29. Note that the joints were filled 
with sand and not with grout. 

It will be seen that each man loading blocks from car to wagon 
averaged 100 sq. yds., or 4,000 blocks, per 10-hr. day; and that 
each man unloading wagons averaged 125 sq. yds., or 5,000 blocks 
per day. Each bricklayer averaged 300 sq. yds. and each man 
wheeling bricks to the layer averaged 150 sq. yds. 

Cost of 80,000 Square Yards of Brick Pavement^ Iowa. — The fol- 
lowing is quoted from Engineering-Contracting, June 23, 1909. 
During 1905 and 1906, a large amount of brick paving and cement 
curb was built at Centerville, la., by contract. Mr. M. G. Hall 
required the inspectors to keep a careful force account of the work 
done, and the following data are a summary of the records thus 
gathered. 

Purington paving bricks were laid on a concrete base, with a 
1%-in. sand cushion between. The joints were filled with a 1:1 
cement grout. Expansion joints of asphalt filler were provided 
from curb to curb, every 50 ft., and along each curb. The fol- 
lowing costs do not include grading. 

The concrete base was a 1 : 3 % : 6 mixture and it was machine 
mixed. There appears to have been a serious error made either 
in recording or in calculating the amounts of cement, sand and 
broken stone used, for, as will be seen below, Mr. Hall's data 
show about two-thirds as much of each of these materials per 
cubic yard as are required by a 1 : 3% : 6 mixture. Mr. Hall's data 
were originally published in "Engineering News" April 2, 1908, 
and were not there analyzed as we have analyzed them below, 
which probably accounts for his failure to discover the discrep- 
ancy. This emphasizes the importance of using the cubic yard as 



362 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the unit in checking up costs of concrete, instead of relying solely 
upon the square yard. ■> 

Our analysis of the cost of the 5-in. concrete base, for three jobs 
aggregating 58,000 sq. yds., shows the following: 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Sand wheelers, at 20 cts. per hr 12.24 

Concrete wagons, at 40 cts. per hr 8.42 

Men on mixer, at 22 % cts. per hr 5.62 

Spreaders, at 22% cts. per hr 5.47 

Tampers, at 20 cts. per hr 1.93 

Water boy, at 10 cts. per hr 0.72 

Extra men, at 20 cts. per hr 1.93 

Foreman, at 30 cts. per hr 1.93 

Coal for mixer, at $2.50 per ton 1.58 

Total labor 39.84 

This is practically 40 cts. per cu. yd., exclusive of interest, de- 
preciation and repairs on mixer. Since the concrete was 5 ins., 
thick, divide any of the above items by 7.2 to get the cost per 
square yard. 

According to Mr. Hall's records, the cost of materials was as 
follows, when reduced to the cubic yard basis: 

Per cu. yd. 

0.56 bbl. cement, at $2.00 $1.12 

0.40 ton sand, at $0.70 0.28 

0.52 cu. yd. stone, at $1.20 0.62 

Hauling cement 0.02 

Hauling sand 0.14 

Hauling stone 0.29 

Total materials $2.47 

The sand weighed 2,700 lbs. per cu. yd., and the stone weighed 
2,626 lbs. per cu. yd. 

Since the materials would have to be about 50 per cent more 
than above given to make a cubic yard of concrete tamped in 
place, there is evidently an error, and the cost of materials, at the 
unit prices given, would be about $3.70 per cu. yd., Instead of $2.47. 
The cost of laying 58,000 sq. yds. of brick pavement was as 
follows : 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Brick wheelers, at 20 cts. per hr 1.52 

Bricklayers, at 22 % cts. per hr 0.88 

Men spreading sand, at 22% cts. per hr 1.05 

"Water boy, at 10 cts. per hr 0.15 

Other men, at 20 cts. per hr 0.96 

Foreman, at 30 cts. per hr 0.41 

Total 4.97 

By dividing the square yard cost of any item into the correspond- 
ing rate of wages, the number of square yards per hour is obtained. 
Thus, each bricklayer laid 22.5-5-0.88 = 25.6 sq. yds. per hr., or 256 
sq. yds. per day. Since there were 53 bricks per sq. yd., this is 
equivalent to 13,568 bricks per bricklayer, which is an excellent 
output. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 363 

On another job, where 26,300 sq. yds. were laid, the cost of 
laying was as follows : 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Brick wheelers, at 20 cts 1.05 

Bricklayers, at 25 cts 0.75 

Brick handlers, at 20 cts 0.26 

Men spreading sand, at 25 cts 0.76 

Men wlieeling sand, at 20 cts 0.06 

Patchers, at 20 cts 0.21 

Water boy, at 10 cts 0.28 

Other men, at 20 cts 0.21 

Foremen, at 30 cts 0.32 

Total 3.70 

Here each bricklayer averaged 330 sq. yds. per 10-hr. day; and, 
as there were 56 bricks per sq. yd., this is equivalent to 18,480 
bricks per bricklayer per day. There was a car track down the 
center of this street. 

The cost of the bricks ranged from 76 14 to SO cts. per sq. yd., the 
following being a fairly typical cost of the materials and labor : 

Per sq. yd. 

53 bricks, at ?15 per M $0,800 

Hauling bricks 0.035 

Sand for 1% in. sand cushion, at 96 cts. per cu. yd. 

delivered 0.041 

Total materials $0,876 

Labor laying brick, as above detailed 0.050 

Total $0,926 

The joints were filled with a 1 : 1 cement grout, the cost of which 
was as follows for 58,000 sq. yds.: 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Screening sand, at 20 cts. per hr 0.05 

Dry mixers, at 22% cts. per hr 0.15 

Wet mixers, at 20 cts. per hr 0.20 

Rubbers, at 20 cts. per hr 0.43 

Wheelers, at 20 cts. per hr 0.13 

Other men, at 20 cts. per hr 0.03 

Water boy, at 10 cts. per hr 0.04 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr 0.14 

Total labor 1.17 

0.017 bbl. cement, at $2.00 3.40 

0.034 ton sand, at $1.05 0.35 

Grand total 4.92 

On the 26,300 sq. yd. job the labor of grouting was only 0.9 cts. 
per sq. yd. 

The cost of the expansion joints (every 50 ft. and along each 
curb) was as follows per sq. yd. of pavement: 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Labor, at 20 cts. per hr 0.32 

Pitch, at $4.80 per bbl 0.89 

Total 1.21 



364 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Summing up we have : 

Per sq. yd. 

Concrete, labor $0.06 

Concrete materials (too low) 0.34 

Bricklaying, labor 0.05 

Brick and sand cushion 0.88 

Grout, labor 0.01 

Grout, materials 0.04 

Expansion joints, labor and materials 0.01 

Grand total $1.39 

For costs of cement curb on this job, see page 449. 

Cost of Laying Brick Pavement, Gary, Ind.*— Mr. E. M. Scheflon 
gives the following. In 1908, Madison street was paved by con- 
tract for 3,800 ft. long by 38 ft. wide. The brick pavement was laid 
on a natural sand base, and grouted with cement. Common labor- 
ers received $2 per 10 hrs. The labor cost of laying the brick, not 
including the cost of hauling the brick to the street, was as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 
0.00255 day labor, preparing subgrade, at $2.00. .. .$0.0051 

0.0194 day labor, carrying bricks, at $2.00 0.0388 

0.00318 day bricklayers, at $3.50 0.0112 

0.0002 day team, rolling, at $5.50 0.0011 

0.0036 day labor, grouting, at $2.00 0.0072 

Total labor, 16,800 sq. yds $0.0634 

It will be noted that there were 6 men carrying brick to each 
bricklayer, and that each bricklayer laid ($3.50 -^ $0.0112) 312 sq. 
yds. per day. This is an excellent output for the bricklayers, but a 
very poor showing for the men who delivered the brick, apparently 
due to the fact that they did not use wheelbarrows. 

Cost of Laying Bricks, New York State.— On one job, 30,000 
"pavers" were laid per day by the gang of 4 bricklayers and 10 
men, or 132 sq. yds. per bricklayer. The management was fairly 
good, but the bricklayers worked with no energy. The other men 
worked well. 

Per sq. yd. 

4 pavers, at 25 cts. per hr., each 1.9 

3 laborers wheeling, at 15 cts. per hr 0.8 

1 laborer spreading sand, at 15 cts. per hr 0.3 

3 laborers grouting, at 15 cts. per hr 0.9 

2 laborers ramming, at 15 cts. per hr 0.5 

1 laborer raising sunken brick, at 15 cts. per hr. ... .. 0.3 

1 foreman, at 30 cts. per hr 0.6 

Total 5.3 

Bricks Laid Per Day Per IVlan, Jackson, IVlich. — In paving a street 
with shale brick, at Jackson, Mich., in 1895, there were about 
200,000 bricks used for 3,500 sq. yds., or 57.1 bricks per sq. yd. 
The bricks were 2%x4%x8 ins., with rounded corners. On a 
street 42 ft. wide, 6 bricklayers, supplied with brick by helpers, 
laid 70,000 bricks in 9 hrs. or 11,666 bricks, or 204 sq. yds., per 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 14, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 365 

bricklayer. The ordinary average, liowever, was 7,000 bricks, or 
only 123 sq. yds., per bricklayer per day. Note that the average 
day's output was only about two-thirds the best day's output. It 
is evident that these bricklayers did not exert themselvs, for even 
their best day's record of 204 sq. yds. per layer per day lacks 50% 
of being as large a day's work as is recorded elsewhere in this 
book. 

Twelve boys filled the joints with tar. To do this a cone-shaped 
pouring can was used. There was a stopper in the point of the 
cone, controlled by a rod leading to the hand of the workman. 

Cost of a Brick Pavement In Minneapolis. — Mr. Irving E. Howe 
gives tlie following data on laying 17,000 sq. yds. of brick pave- 
ment in 1897. The work was not done by contract, but by day 
labor. Six weeks were required with a force of about 65 men. 
An old cedar block pavement on a plank foundation had to be re- 
moved, and the street graded. The subgrade was rolled with a 
7-ton horse roller. A 6-in. concrete foundation was then laid, in 
proportion of 1 natural cement, 2 sand, 5 broken stone. There 
were required 1.16 bbls. of natural cement per cu. yd. of concrete, 
at 76 cts. per bbl. The stone cost $1.15 cts. per cu. yd. delivered, 
and the sand cost 30 cts. per cu. yd. delivered. The total cost of 
the concrete laid was $2.80 per cu. yd. Laborers mixing received 
$1.75 per day. The Purington Paving Brick Co., of Galesburg, III., 
furnished 198 car loads of brick, 2't4x4x8-in. size, guaranteed 
to lay 56 to the sq. yd., costing the city $15.50 per M, or 87 cts. 
per sq. yd. on the cars at Minneapolis. The manufacturers guar- 
anteed the bricks for ten years. A 1-in. sand cushion was laid on 
the concrete. To secure a perfect crown 1-in. strips of wood were 
nailed to the concrete every 12 ft., from curb to curb. An iron 
shod straight edge or scraper was placed on these strips and 
dragged across the street to bring the sand cushion to a perfect 
surface. Then one of the wood strips was pulled up and moved 
ahead. After a block of bricks had been laid, they were rolled 
with a roller, broken bricks replaced, and the joints grouted under 
a special contract of 17% cts. per sq. yd. for the grouting. Ex- 
clusive of this grouting the actual cost per square yard was as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Removing old cedar paving $0,035 

Grading 0.032 

Concrete, natural cement, 6 ins. thick 0.467 

Planking over concrete, lumber, etc 0.008 

56 bricks, at $15.55 per M 0.870 

Hauling brick 0.038 

Sand cushion, 1-in., at 65 cts. cu. yd 0.018 

Laying brick 0.032 

Total per sq. yd. (not including grout) $1,500 

The pavers received $2 a day, laborers $1.75, teams $3.50. It 
will be noticed that the hauling cost 6 8 1/2 cts. per M of bricks. 
Cost of a Brick Pavement, Memphis, Tenn. — Mr. Niles Meri- 



366 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

■wether gives the following data on the cost of 1,300 sq. yds. of brick 
pavements laid by day labor (probably colored) in 1893: 

Concrete base (8-in.) : Per sq. yd. 

Natural cement, at $0.74 per bbl $0.19% 

Sand, at $1.25 per cu. j'd 0.07 y^ 

Broken stone, at $1.87 per cu. yd 0.35% 

Labor hauling stone and making concrete 0.15% 

Total concrete $0.68 

Sand cushion 07 

62 paving bricks, at $18.20 per M 1.13 

1-25 bbl. pitch, at $5.25 0.21 

Sand used in pitching 0.01 

Labor paving and pitching 0.15 

Total $2.35 

Grading and removing old material 0.23 

Grand total $2.58 

The cost of curbs distributed over the pavement added 10 cts. 
more per sq. yd. Common laborers were used to lay the bricks, at 
$1.25 to $1.50 per day of 8 hrs. The mortar for concrete was 
mixed 1 : 2, and enough mortar used to fill the voids in the stone. 
It took 1.36 bbls. of Louisville cement per cubic yard of concrete. 
On three other jobs of about the same size, the costs were prac- 
tically the same as above. On one street Hallwood blocks were 
used, requiring 50 blocks per sq. yd., and 1 bbl. of pitch for every 
25 sq. yds. On one job, where Virginia paving bricks were used 
56 bricks were required per sq. yd., and the labor cost of laying the 
brick and pitching the joints was 11 cts. per sq. yd. 

It will be noted that the cost of materials was unusually high, 
and that the labor was not efficient. 

Cost of Brick Pavement, Baltimore, Md. — In Engineering-Con- 
tracting, Aug. 18, 1909, was published an article giving the costs 
of various kinds of pavements laid in 1908 by forces in the employ 
of the city of Baltimore. I give the following excerpts merely to 
show the enormously high costs that invariably occur when such 
work is done by city day labor instead of by contract. 

In laying one brick pavement, the labor of mixing and placing 
the 6-in. concrete base was $0,217 per sq. yd., or $1.30 per cu. yd. 
of concrete. It never costs a capable contractor more than half 
this, even when he does not use a concrete mixer, and I have 
known many contractors to mix and lay concrete for 5 cts. per sq. 
yd., 6 ins. thick, or 30 cts. per cu. yd., when a machine mixer was 
used, as recorded subsequently in this book. 

In laying the bricks for this same street, the labor cost $0,342 
per sq. yd. This does not include $0,096 per sq. yd. for hauling the 
brick. Brick blocks were used, averaging about 40 per sq. yd., 
and costing $25 per M, or $1.00 per sq. yd. 

On another street (8,400 sq. yds.) the "vitrified brick paving, 
labor and materials" cost $1.56 per sq. yd. Since brick cost $1 per 
sq. yd. and paving sand cost $0.65 per cu. yd., it is evident that 
the labor item of laying the brick was even greater than on the 
other street above given. The $1.56 does not include the 6-in. con-- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 367 

Crete base, which cost |0.676 per sq. yd., nor the excavation, which 
cost $0,099 per sq. yd. 

Almost as bad an example of the inefficiency of the day labor 
system is given in the next paragraph. 

Cost of Removing, Chipping Off Tar and Relaying Brick. — ^It is 
frequently desirable to know what the cost will be of taking up, 
cleaning old brick and relaying. A gang of men, working leisurely, 
"by the day for the city," accomplished the following in Rochester, 
N. T. Each laborer chipped the tar off 500 to 700 bricks in eight 
hours. Replacing a strip of pavement 4 ft. wide over a sewer re- 
quired a gang of 17 men, employed as follows, after the pavement 
had been removed and concrete relaid : 

Wages for Cost per 

8 hrs. sq. yd. 

3 men toothing or chipping out bats $ 4.50 $0.08 

6 pavers 15.00 .25 

2 men furnishing brick 3.00 .05 

2 men ramming, etc 3.00 .05 

4 men melting and pouring tar 6.00 .10 

Total $31.50 $0.53 

The average per 8-hr. day by the above gang was 60 sq. yds., the 
best day's work being 70 sq. yds. 

It seems almost incredible that the cost of such repaving was 
53 cts. a sq. yd., but it well illustrates the inefficiency of day 
labor for a city. 

Cost of Chipping Tar Off Bricks. — When a brick pavement with 
tar joints is taken up, the tar must be chipped off the old bricks 
before re-laying them. This is usually done with a hatchet, after 
cooling the bricks in a bucket or tub of water. As an average of 
a good many thousand brick thus cleaned, I found that one laborer, 
working deliberately, could be counted upon to clean 60 bricks per 
hour. With wages at 15 cts. per hr., this is equivalent to $2.50 per 
M for cleaning the bricks. 

Cost of Removing and Replacing a Brick Pavement. — Mr. C. D. 
Barstow gives the following relative to removing a strip of brick 
pavement 3 ft. wide and 373 ft. long, preparatory to digging a 
trench. The pavement was laid on a concrete base 7% ins. thick. 
The laborers were negroes, and the work was done in 1892 in a 
Southern city. Laborers received $1.25 per 10 hrs., and white 
foreman received $3. The cost was as follows per sq. yd.: 

Removing brick mid concrete: Cts. per sq. yd. 

Laborer, at $1.25 7.0 

Foreman, at $3.00 1.2 

Total 8.2 

Relaying concrete: 

Laborer, at $1.25 7.9 

Relaying brick: 

Laborer, at $1.25 4.5 

Bricklayers, at $2.00 6.5 

Bricklayers' helpers, $1.75 2.8 

Total relaying brick 13.8 



368 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Materials: 

14 new brick, at 1% cts 21.0 

0.12 cu. yd. sand, at f 1.00 12.0 

0.15 tabl. cement for concrete, at $1.20 18.0 

Total materials 51.0 

Summary: 

Removing brick and concrete 8.2 

Relaying concrete 7.9 

Relaying brick 13.8 

Materials 51.0 

Grand total 80.9 

Cost of Laying a Stone Block Pavement, St. Paul.* — While gran- 
ite block pavement is much less popular now than it was a few 
years ago, it is not likely that stone block pavements will disap- 
pear from use entirely for many years to come. This is particu- 
larly true of cities where sandstone of good quality is available for 
pavements. The Medina sandstone of central New York is a justly 
popular pavement for business streets. This sandstone is extremely 
dense and tough, having been partly metamorphosed until it is 
almost a quartzite. A very similar sandstone is found in Minne- 
sota and is extensively used in St. Paul and Minneapolis. 

Neither the Medina sandstone nor the Minnesota sandstone is 
open to the objection that may be raised against granite or trap 
rock blocks on the score of slipperiness. Both granite and trap 
rock wear smooth and glassy under traffic, and the corners of the 
blocks become rounded. But the sandstones just mentioned always 
remain gritty and never wear smooth, nor do the corners of blocks 
become rounded. In fact, when the joints are filled with Portland 
cement grout, a good sandstone pavement appears like one block 
of solid stone after it has been in use a while ; yet it offers an 
excellent foothold for horses in spite of the apparent absence of 
joints. These facts are stated in justification of an article on a 
class of pavement which has been called out of date. It is alto- 
gether likely that New York City itself, which has tried and is still 
trying so many experiments with paving materials, will some day 
give Medina sandstone the trial that it deserves as a pavement for 
heavy traffic. 

On the steep streets of Tacoma, Wash., sandstone block pave- 
ments are being laid, but the sandstone does not appear to be of as 
good a quality as Medina sandstone. Nevertheless it seems worth 
a trial, for asphalt is too slippery for such steep grades as are en- 
countered in certain of the Tacoma streets. 

Whatever may be the ultimate history of stone block pavements, 
it is evident that many city engineers and contractors will have 
to estimate the cost of laying such pavements, and for their 
benefit the following data are offered: 

In the work to be described a base of Portland cement concrete 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 3, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 369 

(1:3:6) was laid in the usual manner, and a sand cushion spread 
over the concrete. The sandstone blocks were hauled in wagons 
and tossed out into the street, instead of being piled on the side- 
walk along the curb, as is often done. A considerable saving in 
the cost of laying is effected by throwing the stone blocks upon the 
concrete in advance of the paving gang, and a somewhat larger 
saving would be possible if dump wagons were used. If the street 
is about 40 ft. wide, the stone blocks are preferably piled in four 
long piles parallel with the curbs, as shown in Fig. 9. No attempt 
Is made to stack the blocks up regularly, but they are merely 
tossed out of the wagons. A space is left between the piles so that 
strings can be stretched to guide the pavers in laying the blocks 
to grade. 

To insure laying the pavement with the proper crown, three sight 
rods were made. Two of them were like T squares, made of a 
wooden leg % x 2 ins. with a crosspiece at the top. The other 
sight rod was made so as to telescope, as shown in Fig. 10, and had 
a leg about 1 in. square that was provided with a groove on one 
side for a distance 2 ft. below the crosshead. In this groove a 2-ft. 
rule was set, thus countersinking the rule so that its face was flush 
with the face of the leg. When this sight rod is extended so that 
the upper half of the 2-ft. rule Is visible, the length of the rod is 
4. ft., which is precisely the length of each of the other two sight 
rods. Before using the rods, a red or blue chalk line is struck 
with a chalked string on the face of each curb exactly at the fin- 
ished grade of the pavement. Then at intervals along the curbs, 
paving blocks, Bi, Bg, Be and Bio, are temporarily set so that their 
upper faces are at grade. A sight rod is then held on each of 
the blocks, B,. and Be, at each curb, and the telescopic sight rod is 
held on a block, B2, one-quarter of the distance across the street, 
as shown in Fig. 10. The telescopic leg of this sight rod is lowered 
enough to give the drop that secures the exact crown to the pave- 
ment shown in the specified cross-secticn, and the rod is clamped 
with the thumb screw. The paving block. Bo, is then raised or low- 
ered until the tops of the three sight rods are exactly on line. 
Then paving blocks Bs and B4, are likewise put on grade ; strings 
are then stretched from these blocks back to surface of the com- 
pleted pavement. With these three strings to guide them, the 
pavers can readily lay the pavement exactly to grade. It is ob- 
vious that where paving materials are piled up in the street, it 
would be impracticable to use a straight edge from curb to curb, 
hence the necessity of some such method as the one just described. 

On this particular piece of work each stone block averaged 
Gx6x9% ins. and weighed nearly 30 lbs. A wagon load averaged 
200 blocks, or 3 tons. Slat bottom wagons were used. This load 
was hauled over hard earth roads for much of the distance, and 
over the sand cushion on the concrete base. 

The blocks were delivered in gondola cars, and unloaded from 
the cars into the wagon by two men, assisted by the driver. About 
half a wagon load (100 blocks) were tossed from the car into the 



370 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



>r 



* 




n 






^ 


I 


■§ 


^ 
^ 


^9 


1 


:5; 


1 
1 




J 


1 





Bs 



I 



. I 'l'l ' l' l 'l'l^ 



B|Oi 



K 



-H 



Plan of ?avemen+, 




Cross Section. 
Fig. 9. Method of Laying Stone Blocks. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 371 

wagon box, the driver and the two men standing in the car. Tlien 
the driver would get into the wagon and pile up the rest of the 
blocks witli some regularity as fast as the two men would pass 
them out to him. When the men were tossing the blocks into the 
wagon, each man averaged 14 blocks per minute when all he had 
to do was to stoop to pick up a block, but when it became neces- 
sary to walk to the opposite side of the car to get the blocks, each 
man would pick up and deliver only 7 blocks per minute. Under 
the latter condition the two men in the car would hardly keep the 
driver busy stacking up blocks in the wagon, yet a short-sighted 
foreman would have had one man in the wagon to each man in the 
car. With wagons coming along at regular intervals, the two men 
aided by the driver would load a wagon every 10 minutes. 

In unloading the wagon on the street, one man and the driver 
consume about 5 minutes, each man tossing out 20 blocks per min- 
ute. To allow for slight delays in waiting for other wagons, etc., 
about 20 minutes should be taken as the average time consumed 



Fig. 10. Telescopic Sight Rod. 

in loading and unloading the 200 blocks in each wagon. With 
wages of laborers at 20 cts. per hour, and team with driver at 
45 cts. per hour, the fixed cost of loading and unloading (including 
lost team time) is 35 cts. per wagon load, or $1.75 per 1,000 pav- 
ing blocks. The rule for determining the cost of loading, unload- 
ing and hauling is, therefore, as follows : 

To a fixed cost of $1.15 per 1,000 blocks, add $1.80 per mile of dis- 
tance between the car and the point of delivery on the street. 

Since it takes about 20 of these paving blocks per square yard, 
we must divide the above figures^by 50 to get the cost per square 
for loading and hauling. Then we have this rule : 

To a fixed cost of 3% cts. per square yard, add 3% cts. more per 
square yard for each mile of distance between the car and the 
point of delivery on the street. 

The above cost of hauling is based on team wages of 45 cts. per 
hour, a speed of 2% miles per hour, and a 3-ton load. 

The paving gang engaged in laying the stone blocks consisted of 
3 skilled pavers and a helper, whose principal duty was to deliver 
sand wherever the sand cushion was not sufRciently thick. Each of 
the 3 pavers was paid 5 cts. per sq. yd. for laying the blocks. Con- 
sequently the work was rapidly done. There were no men engaged 
in rammiiig the blocks, but occasionally one of the pavers would 





mm<-77?i/mi>Si;mv 




1 


Ji_ — 




n 




V 


1 U 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 M 1 1 


A 


) 


"''-£>-)% /?(//e 






Countersunk 



372 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

spend a few minutes ramming. Each of the three pavers averaged 
70 sq. yds. per day of 10 hours, or 7 sq. yds. per hour, although 
as much as 85 sq. yds. per paver were laid in one day. 

The joints between the blocks were grouted with Portland cement 
mortar mixed in the proportion of one bag of cement (1 cu. ft.) 
to one wheelbarrow of sand. The sand was not measured, but 
probably averaged about 2 cu. ft. to the wheelbarrow. The grout 
was mixed in a sheet iron tub, shaped somewhat like a long bath- 
tub, about 18 ins. deep, 30 ins. wide, and 6 ft. long, provided with 
wooden strips (2x6 Ins.) bolted to each side of the tub and pro- 
jecting beyond the ends to serve as handles. The grouting gang 
was organized as follows: 

1 man wheeling sand. 
1 man carrying cement. 

1 man carrying water. 

3 men mixing grout with hoes. 

2 men sweeping grout into joints. 

These men averaged a batch of grout (about 2% cu. ft.) every 3 
minutes, and a batch covered about 4 sq. yds. Hence a barrel of 
cement would cover about 16 sq. yds. With wages at 20 cts. per 
hour for laborers, the labor cost of grouting was 2 cts. per sq. yd. 
With sand at $1.00 per cu. yd. delivered, the cost of sand for grout- 
ing was 2 cts. per sq. yd. ; and, with cement at $1.60 per bbl., the 
cost of cement for grouting was 10 cts. per sq. yd. After the 
grouting was completed a thin coat of sand was spread over the 
entire pavement, about 200 sq. yds. being covered by 1 cu. yd. 
of sand. 

Summing up we have : 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Loading and unloading blocks 3 % 

Hauling blocks 1 mile 3 % 

Laying blocks, pavers, at 35 cts. per hr 5 

Laying blocks, helper, at 20 cts. per hr 1 

Labor, grouting, wages, at 20 cts. per hr 2 

Total labor 15 

Add 10% for foreman, etc 1 % 

Total 16% 

Material for grout : 

1-16 bbl. cement, at $1.60 10 

1-50 cu. yd. sand, at $1.00 2 

1-200 cu. yd. sand (cover), at $1 % 

Total 12:^ 

The above does not include the concrete base nor the sand custi- 
ion between the base and the stone blocks. 

Cost of Stone Block Pavement, Rochester, N. Y.— We have first 
to consider the dimensions of the blocks. When made of granite, 
they are split with wedges to tolerably uniform sizes ; but when of 
stratified rock, like Medina sandstone, a carload of blocks will 
show wide variation in size of individual stone. In depth, of 
course, the blocks must be quite uniform, and 6 ins. depth is usually 
specified. In New York City 4 ins. is specified as the maximum 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 373 

width of granite blocks, and it may be assumed as a certainty that 
they will not be found less than the maximum allowed, since 
to split them of less width out of granite would add ma- 
terially to the cost per square yard. In Rochester, N. Y., 5% ins. 
is specified maximum width for Medina blocks but, due to the thin 
stratification of the stone, they frequently come 3 ins. in width. 
The maximum length specified i^ usually 12 ins., the minimum 
8 ins. Granite blocks which are quite uniform in size are sold by 
the 1,000, and sometimes by the square yard, laid. Medina blocks 
vary so in size that they are sold by the square yard. 

Joints are ordinarily about %-in. wide, and are filled first with 
gravel or sand, into which hot tar is poured. In New York City 
hot gravel is first poured in to the depth of 2 ins. and hot tar 
poured upon it till voids are filled ; then another 2-ln. layer of 
gravel and tar is added, and so on until the joint is full. By this 
method one-third to half the volume of the joints is tar. In 
Rochester the Medina sandstone joints are first filled clear to the 
surface with hot sand (damp sand will not run) ; then men with 
pointed wire pins like a surveyor's "stick-pin," used in chaining, 
force the sand down or pick it out if there is an excess, until the 
surface of the sand is 1% to 2 ins. below the surface of the block 
pavement. Hot tar is then poured in and fills the upper 2 ins. of 
the joint without penetrating to the bottom. This method gives as 
good satisfaction, apparently, as the New York method. 

In order to economize tar, which is quite an item, I would sug- 
gest a combination of the two methods ; that is, first fill the joint 
with sand to within 2 ins. of the surface, then fill the upper 2 ins. 
with hot pea gravel (screened) and pour in tar. 

Cement grout is used as a joint filler in some cities. 

With blocks 3% x 12x6 ins., there are 26 per sq. yd. where 
joints are V2-in. and the area of joints is 13% of the total area, 
and the volume of joint filler is nearly 0.6 cu. ft. per sq. yd. of 
pavement. If tar is worth 10 cts. a gallon, or 75 cts. a cu. ft, 
and one-third the volume of the joint is tar, the cost for tar alone 
will be 0.6 x % x 75 = 15 cts. per sq. yd. of pavement, or 1% gals. 

Due to the fact that only one man helped the drivers load their 
wagons from the car, and only one man helped unload the wagons 
at the curb, the cost of loading and hauling was so excessive as not 
to be typical of what can be accomplished under good manage- 
ment, even where extra wagons are not used. Therefore, in the 
following summary of costs of this Rochester pavement I shall 
give the same costs for loading and hauling that appear on page 
371. 

The wagon load in the Rochester work averaged 2.7 tons. 

After the blocks were stacked up at the sides of the street they 
were laid out on edge in the street in advance of the pavers, and 
assorted into sizes of uniform thickness, which laborers using 
wheelbarrows did at a cost of about 3 cts. a sq. yd. Two skilled 
pavers, with one laborer as a helper to supply stone, formed a 
gang. A paver laid 5 to 8 sq. yds. an hour ; 6 sq. yds. per hr., or 



m HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

60 sq. yds. per 10-hr. day, may be taken as an average for safe 
estimating, which, with pavers' wages at 30 cts. an hour and labor 
at 15 cts., makes cost of laying 6 cts. per sq. yd. 

Following the pavers, come a gang of 3 men ramming and rais- 
ing sunken stone, 1 screening sand for joints, 2 heating sand and 
tar, 1 wheeling sand for joints, 1 sweeping sand into joints, 7 pok- 
ing sand down into joints and digging out excess, 5 filling upper 2 
ins. of joints with tar, making a gang of 20 men following the 
pavers, and with wages at 15 cts. an hour, such a gang covering 
60 yds. an hour, or 60 sq. yds. per day, makes the cost of ram- 
ming and filling joints 6 cts. a sq. yd. Summing up, we have for 
the total labor cost: 

Per sq. yd. 

Loading and unloading . .$0,035 

Hauling 1 mile 0.035 

Distributing blocks 0.030 

Laying 0.060 

Filling joints 0.060 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr., 30 sq. yds 0.013 

2 water and errands boys 0.007 

Total labor $0,240 

Cost of Medina block pavement : Per sq. yd. 

Vs cu. yd. street excavation $0.15 

6-in. concrete foundation 0.50 

1-18 cu. yd. sand cushion in place, at $1.08 0.06 

Medina block (6-in.) f. o. b. Albion, N. Y 1.15 

Freight to Rochester 0.07 

Unloading, hauling and laying 0.24 

1.5 gals, tar at 10 cts. a gal 0.15 

1-50 cu. yd. sand for joints 0.02 

Total $2.34 

Add for contractor's profit 0.26 

Total contract price $2.60 

In paving four streets with Medina sandstone blocks, at Roches- 
ter, N. Y., the average amount of joint filler was 1.4 gallons of 
paving pitch per sq. yd. 

The foregoing cost data apply to work done over large areas 
with fairly well organized gangs ; but on small areas, such as pav- 
ing gutters 3 ft. wide, I have had pavers average only 3% sq. yds. 
per hour per paver, each paver securing his own blocks from 
piles along the curb. 

By comparison with the cost of similar work done at St. Paul, 
described previously, it will be seen that this Rochester work was 
not as economically done. It should be noted, however, that in 
St. Paul a cement grout filler was used, while in Rochester the joint 
filler was tar. 

Cost of Stone Block Pavement^ Baltimore, Md.* — In 1908 there 
were 1,517 sq. yds. of Medina sandstone blocks laid by day labor 
forces for the city, replacing old wood blocks. 

Wood blocks were removed from the tracks on Fayette St. from 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 375 

Calvert to Charles streets, and also on Calvert street from Balti- 
more to Lexington street, and were replaced with Medina sand- 
stone. The joints of the pavement were poured witli Warren'^ 
Puritan brand bloclc filler and followed with a covering of hot 
gravel. The itemized cost of the work was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Blocks $2,350 

0.0325 cu. yd. stone dust, at $1.20 0.039 

0.02 cu. yd. screened gravel, at $1.90 0.038 

41.9 lbs. filler, at $1 per cwt 0.419 

1.3 lbs. coal, at $4 ton 0.003 

Hauling 0.094 

Labor 0.354 

Total (1,517 sq. yds.) $3,297 

This high cost is characteristic of all the work done by the city 
forces in Baltimore. 

Cost of Granite Block Pavement, New York.— Mr. G. W. Tillson, 
in "Street Pavements and Paving Materials," p. 204, gives the fol- 
lowing data on the cost of granite block pavement in New York 
City in 1899. The day was 10 hrs. long: 

Concrete gang : Per day. 

1 foreman $ 3.00 

8 mixers on two boards, at $1.25 10.00 

4 wheeling stone and sand, at $1.25 5.00 

1 carrying cement and supplying water, at $1.25.... 1.25 
1 ramming, at $1.25 1.25 

Total, 240 sq. yds. (40 cu. yds.), at 8.6 cts $20.50 

The concrete is shoveled direct from the mixing boards to place. 
Cost 1:2:4 concrete : Per cu. yd. 

1% bbls. natural cement, at $0.90 $1.20 

0.95 cu. yd. stone, at $1.25 1.19 

0.37 cu. yd. sand, at $1.00 0.37 

Labor 0.51 

Total $3.27 

"With concrete 6 ins. thick this is equivalent to 54.6 cts. per 
sq. yd. for the concrete foundation. 

The granite blocks were laid two days later with the following 
gang: 

Per day. 
10 pavers, at $4.50 $45.00 

5 rammers, at $3.50 17.50 

6 chuckers, at $1.50 9.00 

20 laborers, at $1.25 25.00 

2 foremen, at $3.50 7.00 

Total, 650 sq. yds., at 16 cts $103.50 

This is equivalent to 65 sq. yds. per paver per day. 

Per sq. yd. 

Labor laying blocks, as above given $0.16 

221/2 granite blocks, at $55 per M 1.24 

3% gals, paving pitch, at 7 cts 0.24 

IVz cu. ft. gravel for joints, at $1.95 per cu. yd... 0.10 

1% cu. ft. sand for cushion, at $1.00 per cu. yd 0.06 

1 sq. yd. concrete, as above given 0.55 

Total $2.35 



376 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A gang laying granite blocls pavement on a 7-in. bed of sand was 
as follows: 

Per day. 
4 pavers, at $4.50 $18.00 

2 rammerSj at $3.50 7.00 

3 chuckers, at $1.50 4.50 

3 laborers, at $1.25 3.75 

Total, 280 sq. yds., at 12 cts $33.25 

This is equivalent to 70 sq. yds. per paver per day. 

Per sq. yd. 

Labor $0.12 

24 granite blocks, at $55 per M, delivered 1.32 

0.2 cu. yd. sand, at $1 0.20 

Total $1.64 

Apparently the labor cost of melting and pouring the pitch filler 
is included in work done by the 20 laborers. 

Cost of Laying Granite Block Pavement, New York.*— The work 
was done in 1903 at 96th street. The paving was done by contract 
and was commenced Oct. 23, and finished Dec. 20 of the same year. 
The work consisted of laying 5,167 sq. yds. of granite block pave- 
ment on a 6-in. concrete base. The blocks used were 12 in. x 314 
in. X 7 in., and 116,250 of them were laid. The total number of 
lineal feet of joints that had to be tarred was 161,975. 

In unloading and piling stone on the sidewalks the material was 
handled by the laborers by hand, the distance over which the stone 
was carried being but a few feet. It was found that each laborer 
unloaded and piled 1,390 blocks, or 62 sq. yds., per day. 

The following was the labor cost, it being estimated that 22.5 
blocks make 1 sq. yd. : 

Unloading and Piling Blocks: Per sq vd 

0.016 day labor, at $1.75 $0028 

0.0006 day foreman, at $3.50 0.002 

Total $0,030 

Excavating Old Pavement and 6 Ins. Earth: 

0.077 day labor, at $1.75 $0,135 

0.0054 day foreman, at $3.50 0.019 

Total $0,154 

Mixing and Laying Concrete Base: 

0.128 day labor, at 1.75 $0,225 

0.008 day foreman, at $3.50 0.028 

Total ;. ..$0,253 

Paving and Tarring Joints: 

0.021 days pavers, at $4.00 $0,084 

0.0175 days pavers' helper, at $2.00 0.035 

0.0042 days rammers, at $4.00 0.025 

0.0017 days spreading sand cushion, at $1.75 0.003 

0.013 days filling Joints with gravel, at $1.75 0.023 

0.004 days pouring tar into joints, at $1.75 0.007 

0.007 days tending tar and gravel kettles, at $1.75. . 0.012 
0.002 days foreman, at $5.50 0.011 

Total $0,200 

* Engineering-Contracting, June 20, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 377 

It will be noted none of this work was done economically. The 
labor on the concrete, for example, was double what is commonly 
required under good management. 

Each paver laid only 1,066 blocks, or 47% sq. yds. per day, which 
is an equally miserable showing. 

Cost of Granite Block Pavement, Baltimore, Md.* — This work in- 
volved laying 12,500 sq. yds. of granite block pavement on Light 
St., Baltimore, during Aug. 8 to Dec. 8, 1908. The work was not 
done by contract, but by city forces working by the day. The 
excessively high cost of the labor per sq. yd. adds another ex- 
ample to the invariable rule that it is cheaper to do such work by 
contract. 

It is stated that during the 4 mos. one week was lost on account 
of bad weather and three weeks on account of the failure of the 
blocks to arrive on time. During a large part of the time, two 
8-hr. shifts were worked daily. The Belgian blocks were quar- 
ried in Maine and shipped to Baltimore by boat, the first boat 
arriving Aug. 24. There were 24% blocks per sq. yd., the price 
being $68.50 per M delivered on the line of the work. 

The cost of the 6 -in. concrete base was as follows, the mixture 
being 1: 3% : GVa : 

Per cu. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Gravel, 1 cu. yd $1.10 $0,183 

Sand, 1/2 cu. yd., at $0.72 0.36 .060 

Cement, 4 bags 1.285 0.214 

Total materials $2,745 $0,457 

Labor 0.786 0.131 

Grand total $3,531 $0,588 

It is stated that an engineman, at $2.50 per 8 hrs., and 13 labor- 
ers, at $1.67, operated a % cu. yd. mixer (part of the time using a 
Ransome and part of the time using a Smith mixer), and the 
average 8 hrs. run was 333 sq. yds., or 56 cu. yds. ; but the ex- 
ceedingly high cost of $0,786 per cu. yd. for labor could not have 
occurred had the output averaged even the 56 cu. yds. 

The average organization of the paving gang and the wages 
paid were as follows : 

Per S hrs. 

1 foreman, at $4.00 $ 4.00 

6 pavers, at $4.00 24.00 

2 rammers, at $3.00 6.00 

4 carts (including horse, cart and driver), at $2.50. 10.00 

7 pourers, at $1.75 12.25 

16 laborers, at $1.66% 26.62 

2 stone cutters, at $4.00 8.00 

Total $90.87 

Special efforts were made to keep this gang constantly em- 
ployed, and absolutely no time was lost by it other than delays 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 22, 1909. 



378 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

occasioned by bad weather and failure of blocks to arrive on time. 
The concrete base at all times was kept well in advance of the 
pavers, experience having shown that the laborers would do better 
and quicker work when they could see an abundance of it ahead 
and no interruption. The average day's work complete for this 
gang was 267 sq. yds. or 44% sq. yds. to the paver. This makes 
the cost 34 cts. per sq. yd., and does not include hauling the blocks 
from the boat to the street. This 34 cts. per sq. yd. is just about 
three times what it would cost a competent contractor, as will be 
seen by comparison with records above given. 

It should be noted that the joints were filled with gravel and 
pitch, and that the labor of the 7 "pourers," being $12.25 per day, as 
above given, amounted to 4.6 cts. per sq. yd. It is stated, how- 
ever, that the total labor cost of pouring was 5.75 cts. per sq. yd., 
from which it would appear that about 2 laborers (of the 16) were 
used to open barrels and keep the fires going, etc. 

Coal, at $4 per ton, was used to melt the pitch and heat the 
gravel, and this wood cost % ct. per sq. yd. of pavement. The 
tar kettle had a capacity of 2 tons, and was mounted on wheels. 
The gravel heater, also on wheels, had a capacity of 32 cu. ft. 
of gravel, but did not meet the requirements, so that two un- 
mounted sheet iron pans (3% x7 ft.) were also used. It is stated 
that prior to the use of this tar kettle a.nd the gravel heater, fuel 
(wood, at $5 per cord) had cost 1% ct. per sq. yd. 
Summarizing the cost, we have: 
Materials: Per sq. yd. 

24% granite blocks delivered on street, at $68 per M $1.6900 

0.083 cu. yds. stone dust for cushion (instead of sand), 

at $1.05 0.0875 

0.039 cu. yds. gravel for joints, at $1.80 0.0700 

48 lbs. tar for joints, at $0.01 0.4800 

1% lbs. coal for heating tar and gravel, at $4.00 per ton. ... 0.0025 

Total materials , $2.3300 

Labor: 

Heating and pouring filler and gravel $0.0575 

Other labor laying blocks 0.2675 

Total . $2.6550 

Concrete base (6-in.) as above given 0.5880 

Grand total $3.2430 

This does not include removing an old pavement and grading. 

The very high cost of the tar filler per sq. yd. is noteworthy. If 
it weighed 10 lbs. per gal., then there were 4.8 gals, per sq. yd., 
an altogether unnecessary amount. 

After the final pouring of the tar ("Warren's Puritan filler), the 
pavement was covered with hot gravel. 

Cost of Dressing Old Granite Blocks, Baltimore, Md.* — Before lay- 

*Engineering-Gontracting, Sept. 22, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 879 

Ing a new granite pavement on Light St., Baltimore, 6,500 sq. yds. 
of old granite blocks were taken up and relaid by city forces. The 
cost of laying the new blocks is given on page 377. 

The following costs relate only to the dressing of the old blocks 
and relaying them. The costs were exceedingly high, due to the 
fact that the work was done by city forces. 

Each man dressing old granite blocks averaged 253 blocks per 
8-hr. day, and tlie cost was $13.16 per M, which indicates that the 
stonecutters received less than $3.30 per day. When relaid the 
labor cost was as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

Dressing and laying old blocks $0.4325 

Heating and pouring filler and gravel 0.0575 

Total labor $0.4900 

Por rates of wages and organization of the gang engaged in 
laying, see page 377. 

Cost of Taking Up and Relaying a Cobble Stone Pavement.* — In 

repairing pavements, the costs of labor vary greatly, owing to the 
fact that the repair work is done in small patches and there is 
much time lost in the moving of tools from place to place as well as 
the time the men consume in moving. Records of these costs are 
exceedingly difficult to obtain, but we are fortunate in being able 
to give the cost of doing a repairing job that involved enough work 
to keep a repair gang busy for a day, so, that some idea of the 
cost of the various labor items can be calculated. 
The wages paid were as follows for an 8-hr. day: 

Foreman $4.50 

Laborers 1.66 

Pavers 5.30 

Rammers 3.90 

2-horse wagon and driver 5.00 

Cart and driver 3.50 

The work consisted of cobble stone paving, between the curb and 
a street car track, being 10 ft. wide and 104 ft. long. A 10-in. 
gutter of flag stones was laid 15 ins. from the curb ; the inter- 
vening 15 ins. being laid with cobbles. In all there were 115.55 sq. 
yds. of paving, 9.55 sq. yds. of this being in the gutter, and 14.55 
sq. yds. being between the gutter and the curb. 

The system of carrying on the work was for three laborers to 
loosen the cobbles with bars, being followed by three laborers with 
picks, who piled the stones within reach of the pavers and kept the 
ground beneath the paving loosened with their picks. A wagon 
hauled ashes from the city stock pile to be used beneath the new 
paving, and it also hauled some cobbles from the yard that were 
needed. One laborer spread the ashes for the pavers. 

One paver set the gutter and paved between the curb and the 
gutter. The curbing was not disturbed. This paver laid 24 sq. yds. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 2, 1907. 



380 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in the day, more than one-third of it being gutter. The other 
three pavers did the rest of the laying, doing not quite 31 sq. yds. 
apiece. Two rammers rammed 106 sq. yds. of paving, being the 
entire amount less the gutter. The man who spread the ashes 
followed the rammers spreading sand over the work. The cart 
hauled the sand. At the close of the day the 7 laborers cleaned up 
in a few minutes. 

The various labor items cost as follows: 
Tearing up and handling stone: 
3 laborers with bars $4.98 

3 laborers with picks 4.98 $ 9.96 

Paving: 

1 laborer on ashes and sand $ 1.66 

4 pavers 21.20 

2 rammers 7.80 30.66 

Hauling materials: 

Cart sand $3.50 

Wagon for ashes and stone 5.00 8.50 

Superintendence 4.50 

Grand total $53.62 

The cost per sq. yd. was : 

Tearing up and handling stone $0,086 

Pavir ^ 265 

Superintendence 040 

Hauling materials 073 

Total cost per sq. yd $0,464 

The cobble stones averaged about 8 ins. deep, hence the cost 
of tearing them up and stacking them was nearly 40 cts. per cu. yd. 
Cost of Laying Asphalt Block Pavement, New York,* — In the up- 
per part of New York City asphalt block piAvements have been in 
use for many years and have steadily grown in popularity, particu- 
larly for residence streets. Formerly it was the custom to lay the 
blocks on edge, following the precedent of stone block and brick 
pavement construction ; but within recent years the asphalt blocks 
have been laid flatwise, thus forming 8. wearing coat of asphalt 
blocks 3 ins. thick, each block being 3x5x12 ins. The old theory 
that a block pavement of any kind should be made of blocks set 
on edge is thus utterly overthrown, and it is not unreasonable to 
expect to see the time when paving bricks will also be laid flatwise, 
thus effecting a great economy in material. About five years 
ago the managing editor of this journal wrote an article setting 
forth the reasons why paving bricks of larger size, known as 
"blocks," should be laid flatwise instead of edgewise, but conserva- 
tism among city engineers is so strong that, so far as we know, not 
a single city has adopted the plan of laying paving brick flatwise. 

Coming now to the method of laying asphalt blocks in New York 
City, we find another departure from precedent in that the ven- 
erable "sand cushion" has been abandoned. Of course a base of 



*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 26, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 381 

concrete is provided in the usual manner, but, instead of laying a 
sand cusliion on tliis base, it is now the practice to spread a thin 
coat of cement mortar on which the asphalt blocks are laid. This 
mortar coat is % in. thick, made of 1 part cement to 4 parts sand. 
It is mixed dry and wheeled onto the concrete in barrows, roughly 
spread with shovels and rakes and then leveled off with a wooden 
straight edge. To insure perfect leveling and the desired thick- 
ness of mortar, strips of wood V^ in. thick are laid at intervals of 
about 10 ft. Then two men shove a straight edge over these strips 
until the dry mortar is spread evenly. After this a man with a 
hose sprinkles the mortar until it is quite damp and ready to receive 
the asphalt blocks. 

No attempt is made to bed the asphalt blocks down into the mor- 
tar, but they are merely laid firmly and given a rap with a 
hammer. In order to keep the courses of blocks in perfect line, a 
man with an ax follows the pavers and shoves over any parts of 
courses that are crooked by prying the blocks along with the ax 
blade shoved into the joint. 

The blocks are loaded in wagons from boats or cars, hauled to the 
site of the work in advance of the concreting, and stacked in 
piles on the sidewalk along the curb. Asphalt blocks are not as 
tough as stone or brick and must be handled more carefully. In 
loading, as well as in unloading, one man tosses blocks to another 
man who stacks them up in the wagon, or on the sidewalk. About 
300 blocks make a wagon load, and as each block weighs 18 lbs., a 
load is approximately 2.7 tons. In loading the blocks from gondola 
cars into wagons, it takes two men in the car to deliver blocks to 
one man in the wagon, who piles them up. "With four men in the 
car and two men on the wagon (including the driver as one of these 
two men), 300 blocks are easily loaded in 10 minutes, even when 
the men in the car have to walk several steps to get each block. 
But when the blocks are merely picked up and tossed to the men 
in the wagon, these six men will load 300 blocks in 7i/i mins. If 
tlie teams are in sufficient number for one team to arrive at the 
car every 10 mins., the 5 men (and the driver) load 1,800 blocks 
per hour. "With wages of laborers at 20 cts. an hour, and team 
with driver at 45 cts., the cost of loading (including lost team time) 
is 80 cts. per 1,000 blocks, or 1.7 cts. per sq. yd. 

Then the hauling costs $1.20 per 1,000 blocks per mile of haul 
from car to place of unloading, when 300 blocks form a load, speed 
of travel being 2% miles an hour. 

In unloading the wagon the driver and another man in the wagon 
toss blocks to two men on the sidewalk, who pile them up. These 
men unload 300 blocks in 7% mins. without difficulty, but allowing 
10 mins. for unloading, so as to include waits for wagons; we have 
a cost of 60 cts. for unloading each 1,000 blocks including the lost 
time of the team. Hence, to estimate the cost of handling and 
hauling, with wages as above given, use the following rule : 

To a pxcd cost of $1.1)0 per M for loading and un''oa/'ing (in- 
cluding lost team time), add $1.20 per M for each mile of haul. 



382 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The organization of the gang laying the pavement (exclusive 
of the gang laying the concrete base), is as follows: 

Per hour. 

4 pavers laying blocks, at 40 cts $ 1.60 

16 men carrying blocks, at 20 cts 3 20 

1 man lining up blocks, at 20 cts .' ^20 

2 men splitting blocks, at 30 cts .' . ' 'go 

1 man laying strips for straight edge, at 30 cts .' .30 

7 men mixing mortar, at 20 cts 1.40 

6 men wheeling and spreading mortar, at 20 cts.... 1.'20 

2 men raking mortar, at 20 cts ^40 

2 men leveling mortar with straight edge, at 20 cts.. 40 

1 man sweeping sand into joints, at 20 cts "20 

1 foreman, at 50 cts .'50 

42 men, total, 160 sq. yds., at 6% cts $10.00 

This is equivalent to 40 blocks per paver per hr., or 360 per day. 
This gang worked 9 hrs. daily, and when engaged in laying 
blocks averaged ISO to 200 sq. yds. per hr„ There was no loafing 
on the part of the men who carried the blocks to the pavers, nor on 
the part of the pavers. But the 17 meiv mixing, wheeling and 
spreading mortar averaged only 23 cu. yds. of mortar placed per 
day, which is not a very good record. 

The asphalt blocks were carried, two at a time, by hand, and were 
not delivered in wheelbarrows. They were laid to break joint by 

4 ins., and this left a good deal of work to be done at the curbs in 
cutting at least two blocks to fill out each course. The two 
men splitting blocks for this purpose were unable to keep up with 
the paving gang. Hence, at intervals, the whole gang stopped 
paving and went back to assist in splitting blocks to close the 
courses, and to fill the joints of the blocks with sand. 

No cement is mixed with this sand filler, but loads of dry sand 
are hauled onto the pavement, dumped, spread, and swept into the 
joints. A cubic yard of sand fills the joints of about 200 sq. yds. 
of block pavement. 

The time required to spread the sand filler and fill out the courses, 
when included with the time actually spent in laying reduced the 
average output to 160 sq. yds. per hour, making a cost of 6 14 cts. 
per sq. yd. for laying the mortar and blocks and filling the joints 
with sand. Wages actually paid were somewhat lower than those 
above given, being $1.50 for 9 hours for laborers and $2.50 to $3.00 
for pavers. The pavers did not belong to a union. 

It will be noted that each of the 4 pavers averaged 45 sq. yds. 
per hour when not engaged in cutting and fitting blocks at the end 
of courses, and, as a matter of fact, on the best day each paver 
averaged 55 sq. yds. per hour, or 495 sq. yds. per day. 

To the contractor who has been used to laying stone block pave- 
ment only, these records may seem erroneous. Even the brick 
paving contractor may be Inclined to doubt theii accuracy. It 
should be remembered, however, that one asphalt block covers 

5 X 12, or 60 sq. ins. of surface, and that it takes only 21 asphalt 
blocks per square yard, as compared with two or three times that 
number of paving bricks or blocks. 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS. WALKS. 383 

The time consumed in selecting stone blocks and in bedding 
them in the sand cushion materially reduces the output of the pavers 
compared with asphalt block work. 

Cost of Asphalt Block Pavement, Baltimore.* — This work was 
done in 190S by city day labor forces, and, as is usual in such cases, 
the cost was high. An 8-hr. day was worked, wages being as given 
on page 377. 

Nearly 30,000 sq. yds. were laid in 1908, some of it on a con- 
crete base, of which the following is a typical cost where the con- 
crete was 6 ins. thick, the stone dust cushion being 1 in. thick, 
and the asphalt block wearing coat being 3 ins. thick. The blocks 
were 3x5x12 ins. 

Per sq. yd. 

1-6 cu. yd. concrete base, at $3.60 $0,600 

0.07 cu. yd. stone dust, at $1.20 0.084 

20.7 asphalt blocks, at $65 per M 1.340 

Labor laying blocks 0.220 

Total $2,244 

Cost of Creosoted Wood Block Pavement, Minneapolis.* — Minne- 
apolis was among the first cities in tlie United States to lay creo- 
soted wood block pavement to any extent. At the end of 1902 the 
city had over 200,000 sq. yds. of this type of pavement, and since 
then this yardage has been largely increased. Minneapolis was also 
probably the first city to use blocks made of Norway pine and 
tamarack to any considerable amount. 

The following figures show the actual average detailed cost of 
about 145,000 sq. yds. of pavement constructed in various parts of 
Minneapolis in 1908. The figures were obtained from pay rolls, bills 
of materials and estimates and are the actual cost for labor and 
materials for constructing the pavement. 

The average unit cost per square yard for the 145,000 sq. yds, 
of creosoted wood block pavement was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Removing old cedar paving $0.0270 

Grading 0.1320 

Concrete base (labor and materials) 0.5226 

Cushion sand, at $0.60 per cu. yd 0.0200 

Creosoted paving blocks (f. o. b. Mpls. ) 1.3900 

Hauling blocks 0.0450 

Laying blocks 0.0590 

Hauling cement 0.0090 

Paving pitch filler, at 5.7 cts. per gal 0.0570 

Hauling pitch for filler 0.0100 

Labor on filler 0.0120 

Asphalt filler along St. R. R. tracks 0.002.9 

Headers (plant) 0.0030 

Sand on finished paving 0.0100 

Tools 0.0200 

Rolling 0.0100 

Cleaning up finished street 0.0050 

Miscellaneous materials 0.0030 

Miscellaneous labor 0.0100 

Total $2.3475 

* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 



384 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Summarizing the labor items of laying the wood block pave- 
ment, we have : 

Per sq. yd. 

Laying blocks $0.0590 

Labor on pitch filler 0120 

Rolling 0.0100 

Cleaning up 0.0050 

Total ?0.0860 

Haulmg blocks 0.0450 

Miscellaneous labor 0.0100 

Grand total $0.1410 

This does not include labor of removing old pavement and 
grading. 

The organization and wages of the gang directly engaged In 
laying the blocks were about as follows: 

Per day. 
6 pavers, at $2.50 $15.00 

6 helpers setting up blocks, at $2 12.00 

7 wheelers, at $2 14.00 

4 sand cushion men and sweepers, at $2 8.00 

2 sand cushion men and sweepers, at $2.25.... 4.50 

2 sand cushion men and sweepers, at $2.50 5.00 

1 grader, at $2.25 2.25 

1 water boy, at $1.20 1.20 

Total (1,050 sq. yds.) $6i'95 

This gang averaged about 1,050 sq. yds. per 8-hr. day for the full 
season's work. This included waits for material at times and 
delays for other causes. Some days the gang laid as high as 
1,400 sq. yds. 

The detailed cost of the concrete base was as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Crushed limestone, at $1.65 per cu. yd $0.2186 

Sand, at $0.60 per cu. yd 0.0374 

Cement, at $1.12 per bbl 0.1122 

Labor 0.1303 

Street railway concrete 0.0241 

Total $0.5226 

The above figures include, of course, a number of items peculiar 
to the city, which might. not obtain in another community. For 
instance, the first item — removing old blocks (cedar) happens only 
in a few streets, but yet amounts in total to enough materially to 
affect the cost price and must be considered. Al='o In the detailed 
cost of the concrete, there is included an item for street railway 
concrete. This item would not appear elsewhere, bnt is a very con- 
siderable one in Minneapolis. The street ra^wiy company main- 
tains paving from the outer edge of the rails in one track to the 
outer edge of the rail in the other track, and does not include the 
ties extending beyond the rail, 1% ft. in each case, and for con- 
venience to them and to the city, the railway company puts in the 
concrete base from the rail to end of the tie at the same time it puts 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 385 

In the concrete for the tracks, the city paying the company for it. 
This constitutes the item of "street railway concrete." An item of 
"headers" also is included. This is a 4 x 10-in. plank set on edge at 
the returns on unpaved streets to protect the edge of the new 
paving. 

The cost varies in different localities in the city, there being 
as much as 25 cts. per square yard difference. This is due to 
difference in length of hauls for materials, difference in the grading 
and from other local conditions. 

The concrete is mixed by hand. It is 5 ins. thick and is mixed in 
the proportion of 1:3:7. The stone used in 1908 was a crushed 
limestone, costing on an average $1.65 per cu. yd., on the basis of 
$1 per cu. yd. at the crusher, the city doing the hauling. The 
cement cost $1.12 per barrel f. o. b. Minneapolis, and the mason 
sand for concrete cost on an average 60 cts. per cu. yd. 

The filler used in the work was distilled from coal tar and was 
furnished by the Barrett Manufacturing Co. It was brought on the 
streets in hot tanks. The season's work averaged about 10 lbs. 
of pitch filler to the square yard of finished pavement. This is a 
little less than one gallon to the yard. 

The sand cushion was 1 in. thick and the fine sand used cost on 
an average 60 cts. per cu. yd. 

The blocks used were Norway pine and tamarack, 4 ins. thick, 
and were treated with 16 lbs. of oil to the cubic foot. 

Common labor was paid at the rate of $2 per day, teams were 
paid $4 per day, block layers $2.50 per day, and a few special 
men from $2.25 to $2.50 per day. An 8-hr. day was worked. 

All the work was done by force account under the direction of 
B. H. Durham, street engineer, to whom we are indebted for the 
above information. 

Labor Cost of Creosoted Wood Block Pavement at Seattle.* — The 

following data abstracted from the "Pacific Builder and Engineer" 
show the labor cost of constructing some creosoted wood block pave- 
ment on 4th Ave. in Seattle. The blocks had a cross-section of 
3x4x8 ins. and were made from selected Western Washington 
fir stock. They were treated by the Pacific Creosoting Co. at its 
Eagle Harbor works. The sub-base for the pavement consisted of 
6 ins. of concrete, on which was placed a 1-in. cushion of cement 
and sand mixed 1 : 3, spread and sprinkled. 

During one day's work 322 sq. yds. of the pavement were laid, 
the organization of the gang and wages being as follows : 

Per day. 

16 laborers, at $2 per day $32.00 

1 paver, at $5 per day 5.00 

Superintendent, at $5 per day 5.00 

Total, 322 sq. yds., at $0.1303 $42.00 

^Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 4, 1909. 



386 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This gang mixed the grout, spread it and laid the bloclis at the 
following cost : 

Per sq. yd. 

Laborers $0.0993 

Pavers 0.0155 

Superintendent 0.0155 

Total .'$0.1303 

The concrete base cost 90 cts. per sq. yd. by contract. Sand cost 
$1.25 per cu. yd. delivered, and cement was $2.25 per bbl. deliv- 
ered. About 4,000 sq. yds. of pavement was constructed. 

It should be noted that there was an unnecessarily large number 
of laborers (16) to one paver. 

Cost of Creosoted Wood Block Pavement, Holyoke, Mass.* — The 

following work was done in 1906, by day labor, under the super- 
vision of Mr. James L. Tighe, city engineer. About 5,500 sq. yds. of 
wood blocks were laid on a 5-in. concrete base, the concrete being 
a 1:3:6 mixture. The 1-in. cushion coat was a 1 : 7 mixture. An 
8-hr. day was worked. The organization of the gang for excavating, 
concreting and paving with blocks was as follows : 

Excavation: Per day. 

1 steam roller and engineman hauling plow $ 10.00 

4 men on plow, at $2.00 8.00 

20 men loading earth, at $2.00 40.00 

4 teams hauling (% mi.), at $4.00 16.00 

2 men finishing subgrade, at $2.00 4.00 

Total excavation $ 78.00 

Hauling Stone and Sand: 

6 men loading stone from cars, at $2.00 $ 12.00 

2 teams hauling stone, at $4.00 8.00 

3 men loading sand in pit, at $2.00 6.00 

2 teams hauling sand (0.8 mi.), at $4.00 8.00 

Total hauling broken stone and sand $ 34.00 

Mixing Concrete: 
20 men mixing and placing by hand, at $2.00 $ 40.00 

Paving: 

4 men mixing and placing cement cushion, at $2.00..$ 8.00 

2 pavers laying blocks, at $2.00 4.00 

6 pavers' tenders, at $2.00 12.00 

1 man spreading sand over pavement, at $2.00.... 2.00 

Total paving $ 26.00 

Supervision: 

2 foremen, at $3.10 $ 6.20 

1 superintendent 5.00 

Total supervision $ 11.20 

Grand total labor .$18».20 



'Engineering-Contracting, May 13, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 387 

This gang excavated earth and laid 300 sq. yds. per 8-hr. day, 
hence the labor cost was : 

Per sq. yd. 

Excavation $0,260 

Hauling bi'oken stone and sand 0.113 

Mixing and placing 5-in. concrete 0.133 

Paving 0.087 

Supervision 0.037 

Total $0,630 

The cost of the concrete materials was about as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

0.14 cu. yd. broken stone for concrete, at $1.20 $0.17 

0.07 cu. yd. sand (pit royalty), at $0.10 0.01 

0.14 bbl. cement for concrete, at $1.67 0.24 

Total materials for concrete. $0.42 

We have the following cost : 

Materials for Wearing Coat: Per sq. yd. 

54 creosoted blocks, at $3.95 $2,140 

0.03 bbl. cement for mortar cushion, at $1.67 0.050 

0.03 cu. yds. sand for mortar cushion, at $0.55 0.017 

Total materials for wearing coat $2,207 

Labor on Wearing Coat: 

Men on cement cushion $0,027 

Pavers laying wood blocks 0.013 

Pavers' tenders 0.040 

Man spreading sand over blocks 0.007 

Supervision, 6% of labor 0.005 

Total labor on wearing coat $0,092 

Concrete Base: 

Materials for 5-in. concrete base $0,420 

Labor on concrete base, incl. 6% for supervision. .. .$0,140 

Total, excluding grading $2,859 

Grading, incl. 6 % for supervision 0.276 

Grand total $3,135 

Life of Wood Block Pavement.*— Mr. William Weaver gives the 
following English data : 

Wood paving has received my special attention since 1872, when it 
came into extended use. 

In Kensington, May, 1882, I had laid experimental areas of creo- 
Boted wood blocks, respectively 3 ins., 4 ins. and 5 ins. deep, jointed 
in different ways, and as the result of careful observation, I advised 
my board to lay 4-in. creosoted deal blocks in Sydney place, an 
omnibus route leading from Fulham road to South Kensington sta- 
tion. These blocks were laid close, and grouted first with pitch 
and then with Portland cement, the work being carried out in 
November, 1889, and the blocks lasted until June, 1901, when the 
road was repaved in a similar manner. 

The conclusion at which I have arrived, after my experiments 
initiated in 1882, was that creosoted deal furnished the most 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 15, 1909. 



388 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

suitable and economical road pavement ; further, that 5-in. blocks 
lasted as long as 6-in., and that 4-in. creosoted blocks answered 
all the requirements of roads where the traffic is not excessive. 
In order to understand that a 5-in. will last as long as 6-in. paving, 
it must be borne in mind that wood paving must be renewed as soon 
as its general surface ceases to drain itself ; and this happens 
when the blocks forming the haunches of the road are reduced 
between 1 in. and 2 ins. in depth, the channel or watercourse mean- 
while not being exposed to similar traffic, sufEer no diminution of 
depth. 

The above conclusions are fully borne out by Table XIV of in- 
stances, extracted from my annual reports, which furnishes details 
of 304,220 yds. of 5-in. and 137,164 yds. of 4-in. wood paving laid 
in Kensington since 1887. 

In connection with that list, an instructive comparison is fur- 
nished by the history of the wood laid in the Hammersmith road 
in continuation westward of the area laid in Kensington ; at the 
same time (May, 1886), Hammersmith laid down 6-in. plain deal 
blocks which lasted a little over six years, being replaced in July, 
1892, with 5-in. jarrah blocks. After eight years the jarrah blocks 
were reversed and rebedded in July, 1900, and replaced with 5-in. 
creosoted deal in July, 1903. The 5-in. creosoted deal adjoining in 
Kensington, laid in May, 1886, lasted until September, 1901, equal 
to the combined lives (less two years) of the plain deal with jarrah 
together. 

Further, with regard to the above schedule, I may add that all the 
roads enumerated are omnibus routes, but the traffic on each, of 
course, varies in severity. 

In conclusion, I would point out that by reducing the depth of 
the wood (each inch of reduction means over a shilling per yard 
saved), and, further, by about doubling the life of the wood by 
creosoting, wood paving need no longer be considered an expensive 
luxury, but must be regarded as a sanitary and economical substi- 
tute for macadam, where costing over 8d. per yard annually to 
maintain. At the same time it must not be lost sight of that such 
substitution has a tendency to increase the rateable value of the 
abutting property, owing to the improved appearance, cleanliness 
and quietude of ihe road. 

Cost of Asphalt Pavement in California.*— Through the kindness 
of Mr. Charles Kirby Fox, C. B., we are enabled to give the costs 
of two asphalt paving jobs in a Southern California city. 

The first piece of work was done under a Vrooman act con- 
tract, the contract price being $1.89 per sq. yd. It consisted of the 
construction of pavement on two blocks of street. The street was 
48 ft. wide, had 2^^ ft. concrete gutters, a rise of 6 ins. to 8 ins. 
and a grade of 1 per cent. It drained well and there were no water 
holes. The pavement consisted of a 5-in., 1:3:6 concrete base, a 
1-in. binder course and a 2-in. asphalt wearing surface. 



*Engineering-Contracting, April 1, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



389 



d o o to o CO ["• CO 

0) (MiH r-l 



•CO 
MO 



gcoto<=><= 



o o 
-a -a 



in O M 00 00 00 05 O* Tf tH 
t-It-IiH --1 r-. 1-1 — -- 



OOOOMOOa^SS °? 
QO00QOQo2;0O°° 00 



t^j v^ w- -* %_. (; 



^ 00 00 00 00 00 rii: ~ °oi:oooo«>o=oo°o«'oo^55i: 

*g|d rHrHrHrHrt"^ "^ rH '"< ^ ^ tH rt .^ --H -H ^ rt ^ -H 

psQQOc^M § ^kooSSSS§o;2;oh; 



►J 
n 
< 



09 
X 
t) 

o 



2 c 



S .2- 



-a 

' N— Q, 



a 

4) 



si 



-a 

-a 
m 
-t-> 
o 

CQ 

o 



C^ Cd 03 {tJ 

aj 0) <D a, 

'O'3'O rrj 



P rt cj ri cd i:^ 
<; 4) oj 0) <u 0) 



0) 0) cu oj^ b 0) 01 « a> <u 
o o o£ Oi!» d-S o o o o 
o o o tH o fc. H^ ° o o o o 
t, t, t, uj ^, c^ ra o) o !^ s~, u u 



.S.S.S.S.S.S.S 

I I I I I I I 

lo ir; imc5 -^ Tj* -^ 



CCCCClfiCCCCdC 



m U5 lo m ■<i< m urj in !£> to in •* •* ■* 






o oosot>a5(M 

lfi> IM00OOM< 

lo lit) T—t CO c<i m 

to" THcoiocoeo 



"^OOCO 

OOmirtrH 
00 CO CD CO 






cd *^ 



bo 

s 



B 

o 

to 
c 
"S 

c 

0) 



c 
* • S 

? .=^ . 
r ID t- o o o 
o^occS 

tC Q W (D g 

W W PQO 



bo 

s 

S 



t: o ii ca 
rt rt o 

WmoW 



•a 

(U 

a 



X 
H 






c 
o 
u 

(1) 

13 

a 



390 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Grading. — The grading cost $0.1233 per sq. yd. and was done by 
the following organization : 

Per day. 

1 foreman, at $5 $ 5.00 

1 timekeeper, at $3 3.00 

1 engineman, at $3, part time on steam roller 

and part time on plowing 3.00 

2 teams plowing, at $4 12.00 

6 teams hauling, at $4 24.00 

14 laborers shoveling, at $2 28.00 

Total, 610 sq. yds $75.00 

Concrete Base. — The 5 -in. concrete base was made of a 1:3:6 
mixture. On Job No. 2 it was found, however, that these propor- 
tions did not work well, as all the voids were not filled, and that 
a 1:3:5 or 1:4:6 mixture made a better concrete. The concrete 
was hand mixed on two 7 x 7-f t. boards, in the following manner : 
First, the sand and cement were dumped on the board and hoed 
across and wet ; then the stone was dumped on the mortar and the 
whole mess pulled back and forth across the boards and set on the 
ground in about the place it was to occupy. In the meantime the 
other board was being filled up and the operation repeated, the first 
board being pulled a little forward and refilled. The concrete 
secured was fair. The cost of mixing and placing the concrete was 
as follows : 

Per cu. yd. Per sq. yd. 

0.93 bbl. cement, at ?2.50 $2.28 $0,316 

0.45 cu. yd. sand, at $0.80 0.31 0.043 

0.9 cu. yd. stone, at $2.00 1.80 0.250 

Tools and water. 0.12 0.016 

Labor and superintendence 1.20 0.166 

Total $5.71 $0,791 

The wages and organization of the gang engaged in mixing and 
placing the concrete base were as follows: 

Per day. 
1 superintendent, at $5 $ 5.00 

1 timekeeper, at $3 3.00 

2 laborers, at $2, wheeling sand 4.00 

3 laborers, at $2, wheeling stone 6.00 

6 laborers, at $2, mixing 12.00 

1 laborer, at $2, tending water 2.00 

2 laborers, at $2, leveling and spreading 4.00 

1 laborer, at $2, tamping 2.00 

Total, 31.7 cu. yds., at $1.20 $38.00 

The tools used were as follows : 

Two 7 X 7-ft. mixing boards, 7 wheelbarrows, 12 picks, 12 shovels, 
6 hoes, 300 ft. of hose, 1 tamper, 12 lanterns and 1 tool box. 

Binder. — The 1-in. binder course cost as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

Asphalt, at $20 per ton $0,063 

Binder stone, at $2 per cu. yd 0.081 

Labor and plant 0.045 

Total $0,189 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS. WALKS. 891 

The 2-in. asphalt wearing surface was mixed in a plant having a 
capacity of 8 cu. ft. The tools used in connection with the wearing 
surface work consisted of a 2 1/2 -ton (30-in.) roller, a 300-lb. hand 
roller, a fire pot, 2 Watson wagons, 2 smoothers, 6 tampers, 6 
shovels, 2 dirt picks, 6 asphalt picks, 3 rakes, 5 brooms and 4 
wheelbarrows. 

The cost of the 2-in. asphalt wearing surface was as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

Asphalt, at $20 per ton $0,198 

Sand, at $1 per cu. yd 0.045 

Dust, at $10 per ton 0.090 

Labor 0.090 

Plant 0.198 

Total $0,621 

The high plant charge of 19.8 cts. was due in part to the mixing 
plant. This occupied two cars. In addition the job was very small, 
consisting of two 330-ft. by 46-ft. blocks. 

The wages and organization of the gang engaged in the wearing 
surface work were as follows : 

Per day. 

Superintendent, at $5 $ 5. 00 

Timekeeper, at $3 3.00 

1 engineman, at $3.50 3.50 

1 mixer, at $3 3.00 

1 mixer helper, at $2.50 2.50 

1 mixer dipper, at $2.50 2.50 

2 men shoveling to heater, at $2.00 4.00 

3 men wheeling, at $2 6.00 

2 teams hauling to streets, at $4 S.OO 

2 rakers, at $3 6.00 

3 shovelers, at $2.50 7.50 

1 smoother, at $2.00 2.00 

1 tamper, at $2.10 2.10 

2 roller men, at $2.50 5.00 

1 engineman on roller, at $3.50 3.50 

1 man sweeping, at $2 2.00 

Total $65:60 

The second piece of work was done in the fall of 1907 by private 
contract, at a contract price of $1.89 per sq. yd. The work con- 
sisted of the construction of pavement on five blocks of streets and 
four alleys. The streets were 48 ft. wide, had a rise of 6 ins., and a 
grade of 1 per cent ; they had no gutters. The alleys were 20 ft 
wide and had a grade of 0.4 per cent to 1 per cent. The alley that 
had a 1 per cent grade drained well, but those where grade was 
less had to be ironed out. The alleys had no gutters. Experience 
in the city where this pavement was laid has shown that if the 
gutters fall more than % in. to the foot they can be made to drain 
by using the straight edge. If the fall is less than % in. there will 
he water holes. Where the gutter has to be raked it was found 
advisable to have double the fall per foot. The pavement consisted 
of 4-in., 1:3:6 concrete base, a 1-in. binder course and a 2-ln. 
wearing surface. 



392 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Grading. — The grading was done by another contractor and cost 

?0.099 per square yard, the work being done by the following force: 

Per day. 

1 foreman, at $3 $ 3.00 

% timekeeper, at $3 1.50 

1 engineman, at ?3, part time on steam roller 

and part time plowing 3.00 

2 teams plowing, at $4 8.00 

8 teams hauling dirt away, at $4 32.00 

18 laborers shoveling, at $2 36.00 

Total ?83.50 

Concrete Base. — The concrete base was laid by the contractor 
who did the grading. The concrete was mixed in a Ransome mixer, 
a 3 cu. ft. barrow of sand being dumped into the mixer first, then 1 
cu. ft. of loose cement and finally two barrows of stone. After sev- 
eral turns of the mixer the mass was discharged and taken in 
scoops by the laborers and put in place. Two laborers spread the 
mixture, two laborers leveled it, and two more laborers tamped, it. 
The mixture was as wet as it could be without the mortar running 
from the stone. Each wheelbarrow man had two helpers. The gang 
usually consisted of 28 men; 42 men were the most that could be 
used to advantage. The concrete on this job was better than that 
on the first job. The cost of the 4-in. concrete base was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. Per sq. yd. 

0.95 bbl. cement, at $3.00 $2.85 $3.l6 

0.45 cu. yd. sand, at $0.80 0.31 0.034 

0.91 cu. yd. stone, at $2.00 1.82 0.202 

Labor and superintendence 0.974 0.108 

Rent of machine, repairs, oil 0.246 0.027 

Total .". $6.20 $0,687 

The stone used in the concrete was hauled from cars about % 
mile distant, the cost of unloading and hauling being as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, at $3 , $0.03 

Laborers, at $2 15 

Teams, at $4 .19 

Total $0.37 

This cost is included in the $2 in the table. 

The wages and organization of the force engaged in mixing and 
placing the concrete base were as follows: 

Per day. 

1 foreman, at $100 per month $ 4.00 

1 engineman on mixer, at $3.50 3.50 

1 handyman, at $2.50 2.50 

1 team, at $4 4.00 

1 laborer tending mixer discharge, at $2 2.00 

2 laborers carry and measure cement, at $2.... 4.00 

1 laborer at $2 wheeling sand, and 1 laborer 

at $2 helping 4.00 

2 laborers at $2 wheeling stone, and 2 laborers 

at $2 helping 8.00 

2 laborers dumping concrete, at $2 4.00 

2 laborers tamping, at $2 4.00 

9 laborers taking concrete from machine, at $2. . 18.00 

Total. 60 cu. yds $58.00 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 393 

These concrete men evidently worked with no energy, as is shown 
by their miserably small output with a good plant. 

The plant used consisted of a Ransome concrete mixer with 6 h.p. 
gasoline engine mounted on wlieels, one 1 cu. ft. cement box, four 3 
cu. ft. wheelbarrows, 29 scoops, 12 short-handled shovels, 18 long- 
handled shovels, 12 picks, 400 ft. of hose, three tampers, 12 lanterns 
and one tool box. 

Binder. — The stone used in the binder had the dust screened out 
and was passed through a 1% in. screen. It was found, however, 
that this did not leave enough fine stuff, pea size or thereabouts, so 
screenings from the sand were taken and from this was screened 
out all particles above 1 in. in size. One part of these screenings 
was mixed with two parts of broken stone and heated to 200° P. 
Four cubic feet of this was mixed with 27 lbs. of melted asphalt, 
making a strong binder. The cost of the binder v/as $0,171 per 
square yard. 

The wearing surface was mixed in batches of the proportion of 
4 cu. ft. of sand, heated to about 300° F.. 30 lbs. of cold dust, and 
50 lbs. of melted asphalt. These were mixed very thoroughly, usual- 
ly taking 1% minutes to the batch. The mixture usually arrived on 
the street at about 280° F. It was found that a 4 cu. ft. batch would 
lay about 20 sq. ft. of 2 in. surface. The cost of the wearing sur- 
face was $0,549 per square yard. 

The wages and organization of the force engaged in preparing and 
laying the binder and the wearing surface .were as follows : 

Per day. 

Superintendent, at $120 per month $ 5.00 

1 engineman. at $3.50 3.50 

1 mixer, at $3.00 3.00 

1 mixer helper, at $2.50 2.50 

1 heater, at $2.50 2.50 

1 man shoveling sand and 1 man shoveling 

marble dust, at $2.50 2.50 

1 scraper team, at $4.00 4.00 

2 teams hauling to street, at $4.50 9.00 

1 engineman on roller, at $3.50 3.50 

2 rakers, at $3.00 6.00 

2 shovelers. at $2.50 5.00 

2 hand roller men, at $2.50 5.00 

2 tampers, at $2.50 5.00 

Total $56.50 

The plant used consisted of a 4 cu. ft. mixer, a 5 ton (38 in.) 
roller, a 500 lb. hand roller, a fire pot, 3 Watson wagons and teams, 
a scraper, 3 rakes, 3 shovels, 2 tampers, 3 smoothers, 1 asphalt pick 
and 2 brooms. 

Summary. — A summary of the costs of the two jobs is as follows : 

Job 1. Job 2. 

Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Grading $0,123 $0,099 

Concrete 0.791 0.687 

Binder 0.189 0.171 

Surface 0.621 0.549 

Ofiice, collection and general expense 

estimated 0.180 0.180 

Total $1,904 $1,686 



394 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Job 2 had more material and better workmanship per unit than 
Job 1. It was better managed, especially in the asphalt department. 
Job 1 had an asphalt mixer requiring two cars to move, while on 
Job 2 the mixer required but one car, but it cost more to move the 
latter. The small plant was the most economical. On concrete work 
the lost time of steady pay men when they were not mixing 
amounted to about 10 cts. per cubic yard ; usually, however, when 
these men were not mixing they were engaged on other work.. 

Cost of 77,200 Square Yards Asphalt Pavement.* — Mr. F. E. Puffer 
gives the following : 

The cost of laying 77,208 sq. yds. of asphalt pavement in an east- 
ern city, which was a season's work, was as follows : 

The price paid for common labor was $1.50 a day, and $5 a day 
for team and driver. 

^ ^. . . Total 

Grading street: Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Sundries $0,021 

Labor 0.204 

Teams ($5 a day) 0.087 $0,312 

Concrete base (6-in.): 

0.173 bbl. natural cement, at $0.83 $0,144 

0.055 cu. yd. sand delivered, at $0.98.... 0.054 

0.176 cu. yd. stone delivered, at $1.62 0.285 

Sundries 0.015 

Labor laying 0.094 

Labor, general 0.001 $0,593 

Binder (ly^ ins.): 

Materials $0,188 

Fuel 0.016 

Tools and sundries 0.001 

Labor, yard (mixing, etc.) 0.026 

Labor, laying 0.023 

Labor, general O.OOi 

Teams, hauling ($5 a day) 0.024 $0,279 

Surface (2-in.J: 

Materials $0,645 

Fuel 0.022 

Tools and sundries , 0.054 

Labor, yard (mixing, etc.) 0.053 

Labor, laying 0.047 

Labor, general 0.028 

Teams, hauling 0.035 $0,884 

General expense: 

Salaries $0,018 

Rent and expenses 0.014 

Plant, etc 0.025 $0,057 

Grand total $2,125 

The exact proportions of the materials used in the binder and in 

the surface coats are not available, but the prices paid for materials 

and supplies were as follows : 

Binder stone, per cu. yd $ 1.00 

Asphalt, per ton 50.75 

Petroleum residuum, per gal .07% 

Sand, per cu. yd 65 

Pulverized limestone, per ton 3.50 

Coal (anthracite) used in dryers, per ton 3.00 

Coal (soft) used under boilers, per ton 2.85 

Wood to heat asphalt tanks, per cord 4.00 



* 



Engineering-Contracting^ Feb. 5, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 395 

It will be noted that the cost of the asphalt was much higher 
than it is at present, the present price being about $30 a ton. Since 
there are about 4 lbs. of asplialt per sq. yd. of binder, and about 
19 lbs. per sq. yd. of surface coat, the difference of $20 a ton (or 
1 ct. per lb. of asphalt) would reduce the above given costs by 4 cts. 
per sq. yd. of binder and 19 cts. per sq. yd. of surface coat. 

An old plant having a value of about $22,000 was used. The 
plant repairs amounted to $1,525, or 2 cts. per sq. yd., which Is 
unusually low. Ordinary plant charges are about 7% cts. per sq. yd. 
where a modern plant is used, but in such cases the labor cost is 
lower than in this case. I have made no allowance for interest on 
and depreciation of plant. 

The fallacy of attempting to estimate the cost of asphalt pave- 
ments from a single day's operation is clearly shown by comparing 
the records of costs on different jobs extending over considerable 
periods of time. Marked differences of cost occur, arising partly 
from variations in local conditions, and partly from the varying 
efficiency of the workers, and partly from the exactions of the 
inspector. 

The following are the costs of three different streets, showing 
how costs vary. 

Contract A was performed under favorable weather conditions 
on a suburban street, close to the source of supply of concrete ma- 
terials and far from the paving plant. The cost was a little below 
the season's average above given: 

CONTRACT A. 

(3,284 sq. yds.) 

Total 

Grading street: Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Sundries $0,019 

Labor 0.123 

Teams 0.089 " $0,231 

Concrete base (6-in.): 

Natural cement, at $0,866 per bbl $0,138 

Sand, at $0.92 per cu. yd 0.051 

Stone, at $1.77 per cu. yd 0.295 

Sundries 0.015 

Labor 0.093 $0,592 

Binder (I'^-in.): 

Materials $0,192 

Fuel 0.011 

Tools and sundries 0.002 

Labor, yard 0.024 

Labor, laying 0.024 

Teams hauling 0.024 $0,277 

Surface (2-in.): 

Materials $0,673 

Fuel 0.026 

Tools and sundries 0.055 

Labor, yard 0.047 

Labor, laying 0.042 

Labor, general 0.029 

Teams hauling 0.035 $0,907 

General expense $0,042 $0,042 

Grand total $2,049 



396 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Contract B was the last contract of the season. Weather was 
unfavorable but not severe. Length of haul was less than the aver- 
age for the season. The forces, except asphalt, were somewhat 
demoralized by the fact that the job would soon end. The cost 
was naturally high. 

CONTRACT B. 

(5,278 sq. yds.) 

Total 
Grading street: Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Sundries $0,021 

Labor 0.138 

Teams 0.129 $0,288 

Concrete base (6-in.): 

Cement, at $0,845 per bbl $0,142 

Sand, at $1.18 per cu. yd 0.063 

Stone, at $1.93 per cu. yd 0.321 

Tools and sundries 0.015 

Labor 0.104 $0,645 

Binder (lYo-in.): 

Materials $0,195 

Fuel 0.011 

Labor, yard 0.030 

Labor, laying 0.025 

Teams hauling 0.025 $0,287 

Surface (2-in.): 

Material $0,666 

Fuel 0.023 

Tools and sundries 0.056 

Labor, yard 0.041 

Labor, laying 0.053 

Labor, general 0.029 

Teams hauling 0.035 $0,903 

General expense $0,057 $0,057 

Grand total $2,180 

Contract C varies from the others in having a 1-in. binder and a 
1 1/2 -in. surface specified. As a matter of fact, however, the asphalt 
was laid thicker than specified, due to the fact that the men had not 
been used to laying any light pavement that year. The work was 
located near the paving plant, also near the source of supply of 
cement, etc. The weather was good. The cost was naturally low. 



CONTRACT C. 

(2,404 sq. yds.) 

Grading street: Per sq. yd. 

Sundries $0,021 

Labor 0.110 

Teams 0.091 

Concrete base (6-in.): 

Cement, at $0,876 per bbl $0.15J 

Sand, at $0.71 per cu. yd 0.039 

Stone 0.205 

Tools and sundries 0.016 

Labor 0.069 



Total 
Per sq. yO 



$0,222 



$0,480 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 397 

CONTRACT C (CONTINUED). 

(2,404 sq. yds.) 

Total 
Binder (1-in) : Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Materials $0,152 

Fuel 0.009 

Sundries 0.001 

Labor, yard 0.027 

Labor, laying 0.020 

Teams hauling 0.005 $0,215 

Surface (lYt-in.): 

Materials ; $0,495 

Fuel 0.019 

Tools and sundries 0.042 

Labor, yard 0.043 

Labor, laying 0.062 

Labor, general 0.02 2 

Teams hauling 0.007 $0,690 

General expense $0,057 $0,057 

Grand total $1,664 

Cost of Asphalt Pavements at Winnipeg. — The following data are 
given by H. N. Ruttan, City Engineer of Winnipeg, Manitoba, on the 
cost of laying asphalt with a mumcipally owned plant. In 1899, the 
city purchased a second-hand stationary plant for $12,322, and made 
the following additions : 

New 10-ton roller $ 3,500 

New sheds, etc 733 

Tools bought 1899 262 

Tools bought 1900 12J. 

Maintenance 1899 568 

Maintenance 1900 1,048 

$ 6,232 
Second-hand plant 12,322 

Total $18,554 

The maintenance items consisted largely in repairs to the second- 
hand plant necessary to put it in lirst-class condition. The plant 
includes 2 asphalt melting tanks, sand drum, cold and hot sand ele- 
vators, millstone for grinding limestone, storage tank for hot asphalt, 
storage bins for ground limestone and hot sand, mixer of 7 cu. ft. 
capacity, 60-hp. boiler, 30-hp. engine, air compressor and receiver, 
5-ton roller, 10-ton roller, and accessories. The force required to 
operate the mixing plant was as follows : 

1 superintendent $ 8.00 

1 engineman 3.00 

2 firemen 4.00 

2 asphalt melters 4.00 

1 asphalt dipper and mixer 2.00 

' 1 measurer of sand and limestone 2.00 

2 sand and limestone shovelers 2.00 

1 record keeper 4.00 

1 man for odd jobs 2.00 

Total labor for 9 hrs $31.00 

I have assumed the above rates of wages, but it is stated that the 



398 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

total cost of operating was $40 a day, which doubtless includes the 
cost of 1% or 2 tons of coal. It is stated that in 1900 the prices of 
materials and labor were as follows, on cars: 

Asphalt, per short ton $36.00 

Portland cement, per bbl 3.65 

Sand, per cu. yd 1.35 

Broken stone, per cu. yd 1.10 

Common labor is said to have been 17% to 20 cts. per hr. ; teams, 
40 cts. per hr. 

Asphalt pavement, consisting of l^^-in. binder and 2-in. wearing 
surface, laid on a 4% -in. Portland cement concrete foundation, cost 
$2.04 per sq. yd. for materials and labor. The concrete foundation 
cost $0.74 per sq. yd., leaving $1.30 per sq. yd. for the asphalt and 
the grading. It will be noticed that interest and depreciation are not 
included. 

The plant has a capacity of 1,000 sq. yds. of 2-in. wearing surface, 
or 1,500 sq. yds. of 1%-in. binder, which is equivalent to saying that 
it has a capacity of about 60 cu. yds. of asphalt, measured in the 
.street, per day of 9 hrs. 

In 1899 the city laid 45,800 sq. yds. ; in 1900, it laid 22,000 sq. yds. 
If we assume 30,000 sq. yds. as a fair average for a term of 10 years, 
the plant would pay for itself by charging 6 cts. per sq. yd. for plant, 
and it would be occupied about 60 days of actual work per year. 
But we should not lose sight of the fact that the services of an 
expert to run the plant could not be secured on the basis of a few 
dollars a day for only a small fraction of the year. Indeed the 
cost of an expert's annual salary alone might very easily run up the 
cost an amount equivalent to 10 cts. per sq. yd. 

Since the above was written I have secured the following addi- 
tional data for the year 1903. The plant has been enlarged and its 
estimated value is now $21,082. The charges against this plant for 
the year 1903 were as follows: 

Maintenance and repairs $2,297 

V> cost of new tools 236 

4% interest on $21,082 843 

6% depreciation on $21,082 1,054 

Lost taxes 100 

Total plant charge, 65,381 sq. yds. at 6.93 cts. .$4,530 

In 1903 there were laid 65,381 sq. yds., so that the charge for 
plant was 6.93 cts. per sq. yd. The soil is clay and upon it ig 
spread 3 ins. of sand and gravel before laying the concrete base. 
The cost of the pavement in 1903, including grading, was as follows: 

Per sq. yd. 

Grading, including cross-drains ^n , f 

Sand, 3-in. foundation 0.15 

Concrete, 4 1/2 ins. thick 0.65 

Binder coat 0.28 

Surface coat O.bu 

Plant charges "•"' 

Total ?l-90 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 399 

The prices paid for materials, f. o. b. Winnipeg, in 1903, were 
as follows : 

Portland cement, per bbl $ 2.96 

Broken stone, per cu. yd 1.30 

Sand and gravel, per cu. yd 1.00 

Crushed granite, per cu. yd 5.00 

Asphalt, per ton 26.37 

Maltha, per imp. gal 0.12 

Common labor, per 9-hr. day $1.80 to 2.25 

Skilled labor, per 9-hr. day 2.70 

Foremen $3.00 to 4.00 

Superintending chemist (for 5 or 6 mos. ) 8.00 

Mr. Ruttan informs me that a 2-in. surface coat (Bermudez) 
costs as follows at the mixer : 

Per sq. yd. 

0.06 cu. yd. (135 lbs.) sand, at $1.35 $0,081 

21 lbs. dust, at $2.60 per ton 0.027 

3.5 lbs. oil, at 11/2 cts 0.048 

15 lbs. Bermudez (gross), at 1.93 cts 0.291 

Labor at the mixing plant 0.048 

Fuel (wood) 0.018 

Total, at the mixer $0,517 

This gives a weight of 117 lbs. per cu. ft. 

Cost of Laying Asphalt Pavement. — The following shows the 
labor cost of laying asphalt on a concrete base at Rochester, N. T. 
A binder coat, %-in. thick, was first laid; then a wearing, or sur- 
face coat 1% ins. thick; making a total of 2 ins. The gang consist- 
ed of 16 men, working part of the time on the "binder" and part of 
the time on the "surface coat," as follows : 

Binder gang. Surfacing gang. 

4 barrow loaders. 4 shovelers. 

4 barrow wheelers. 5 rakers. 

2 rakers. 2 tampers. 

2 tampers. 2 smoothers. 

1 wagon unloader. 1 cement spreader. 

1 tar melter. 1 iron heater. 

1 iron heater. 1 foreman. 

1 foreman. - — • 

— 16 men. 

16 men. 
The binder gang averaged 2,250 sq. yds. (=: 31 cu. yds.) in 10 hrs. 
of %-in. binder coat laid, although they frequently laid 390 sq. yds. 
in an hour. The surfacing gang averaged 1,800 sq. yds. (=75 cu. 
yds.) of 1%-in. surface coat in 10 hrs., although they frequently laid 
260 sq. yds. in an hour. There were two asphalt steam rollers con- 
stantly at work, with this gang of 16 men. In laying several thou- 
sand yards of this 2-in. asphalt pavement, I found the average labor 
cost to be as follows, the gang laying 1,000 sq. yds. per day: 

15 laborers, at $1.50 $22.50 

1 foreman, at $4.00 4.00 

2 roller engineers, at $3.00 6.00 

Fuel for rollers 2.50 

Total for 1,000 sq. yds. of 2-in. asphalt, at 3% cts.. .$35.00 
This is equivalent to 3% cts. per sq. yd. for laying and rolling, 
or 63 cts. per cu. yd. 

The haul from the mixer to the street was 3 miles, and each 



400 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

team made 4 trips daily, averaging only 1% cu. yds. of loose ma- 
terial per load. It took 2 % cu. yds. of loose material in the wagons 
to make 2 cu. yds. packed by the roller, or a shrinkage of 25%. 
The wagons were slat-bottom wagons, and it took about 8 mins. to 
dump a wagon, but fully as much more time was lost waiting for 
other wagons, turning around, etc., which time was made up by 
trotting back. There were 17 teams kept busy, at $3 per day each, 
making the cost 5 cts. per sq. yd. for hauling the asphalt 3 miles. 

Cost of Asphalt Pavement, New York.* — ^In the following tabula- 
tion is given the labor cost to the contractor of laying 8,900 sq. yds. 
of asphalt pavement on Broadway, from 110th street to 119th street, 
west side. New York. The work was done in November, 1904. The 
wages paid were on the basis of an 8-hr. day. The concrete founda- 
tion for the asphalt pavement was 5 ins. thick and was composed 
of 1 part of cement, 3 parts of sand and 6 parts of broken stone. 
In preparing the concrete for the foundation a Foote mixer was used. 
The inefHciency of the concrete workmen is well shown by the fol- 
lowing cost : 

Concrete: Per sq. yd. 

0.008 day foreman, at $3.75 $0 03 

0.162 day laborers, at $1.50 243 

0.008 day teams, at $5.00 04 

0.008 day steam engine, at $3.50 02 8 

Total concrete labor, per sq. yd $0.34 

Binder: 

0.0004 day foreman, at $4.00 $0.0016 

0.0008 day engineman, at $4.00 0032 

0.0063 day labor, spreading, at $1.75 Oil 

0.0009 day labor, ramming, at $2.25 002 

Total binder, per sq. yd $0,018 

Wearing surface: 

0.0005 day foreman, at $4.00 $0,002 

0.0040 day laborers, at $1.75 007 

0.0010 day engineman, at $4.00 004 

0.0070 day labor, spreading, at $1.75 012 

0.0008 day labor, raking, at $2.50 002 

0.0009 day labor, ramming, at $2.25 002 

0.0016 day labor, ironing, at $2.50 004 

Total surface coat, per sq. yd $0,033 

The binder was 1 in. thick, and the surface coat was 1% ins. 
thick, making a total of 2% ins. of asphalt. It will be seen that the 
laying cost of laying this asphalt was 1.8 cts-|- 3.3 cts. = 4.1 cts. per 
sq. yd. 

Cost of Patching Asphalt, Indianapolis, Ind.t— Mr. S. R. Murray 
gives the data upon which the following is based. 

Work on the municipal repair plant of Indianapolis, Ind., was 
begun on April 16, 1908, and on June 16, 1908, the first asphalt mix- 
ture was turned out. The plant was made by Werthington & Berner 
and has a capacity of 1,200 sq. yds. of 2-in. asphalt. The total cost 
of the plant, one 5-ton steam asphalt roller, four dump wagons. Are 
wagons, office building, roller, stone dust and tool sheds and all tools 

* Engineering-Contracting, May 16, 1906. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 27, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 401 

necessary to carry on the work, amounted to $20,557.68. This also 
includes the cost of grading off the yard for plant, putting brick 
driveway under mixer and cement floor around cold sand elevator. 
The plant itself cost $15,525. 

Between June 16 and Dec. 31, the following was the plant output: 

Boxes. 

Surface mixture 16,691 

Binder 1,730 

Total 18,421 

A "box" was 9 cu. ft. of mixed material measured at the plant. 
Hence the total output was 165,789 cu. ft. of surface and binder, 
measured before rolling. With this there were laid : 

Sq. yds. 

Surface, or wearing coat 92,472 

Binder 11,271 

It will be seen that each box (9 cu. ft.) of surface mixture made 
5.54 sq. yds. of wearing surface, indicating that the wearing surface 
measured 2.17 ins. thick before rolling. If it was compressed 33% 
under the roller, the thickness was reduced to 1.45 ins. If it was 
compressed 16%% (a common assumption) the thickness was re- 
duced to 1.8 ins. 

The total cost of 82,908 sq. yds. of wearing surface (without any 
binder) laid in repairing 50 different streets was $51,900, or $0,625 
per sq. yd. for all expenses, including interest, at 5%, on the $20,600 
plant for 6% mos., and depreciation at 5% for 6% mos. 

This $0,625 per sq. yd. is equivalent to $3.46 per box of 9 cu. ft., 
or $0.39 per cu. ft. 

The work was done on the same basis as other city work, 8 hrs. 
per day, and was performed under the most favorable conditions, as 
a great many of the repairs were large and close together. Only 
one day was lost account of rain, and four days lost waiting for 
material. 

Only seven hours were lost on account of the plant not being ready 
when called upon ; two hours on account of the breaking of a driv- 
ing pinion and five hours for replacing brick work in the furnace 
under the sand drier. This, it will be noted, is a very small loss of 
time when it is considered that the plant turned out 18,421 boxes 
in all. 

Maltha California asphalt was used for the most part on the re- 
pair work ; but on account of the West Michigan St. being under 
guarantee and specifications calling for this material, Trinidad Pitch 
Lake asphalt was used in its resurface, which involved 9,500 sq. yds. 

Petroleum residuum was used as a flux and the very best of ma- 
terial and workmanship were used throughout. 

The cost of materials used in the plant was as follows. 

California asphalt, $23 per ton. 

Trinidad asphalt, $29 per ton. 

Limestone dust, $3 per ton. 

Residuum oil, average 5 cts. per gal. 

Sand, 90 cts. per cu. yd. 

Common labor was' paid 20 cts. per hour, skilled asphalt men re- 



402 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



ceived $2.50 per 8-hr. day, teams were paid for at rate of $3.50 per 
day, roller engineers received $3.50 per day, and foremen received 
$4 per day. 

High Cost of Patching Asphalt, New Orleans.* — The total amount 
of asphalt pavement in New Orleans, maintenance of which by its 
constructors had expired prior to Jan. 1, 1908, was 549,749 sq. yds. 
Of this amount 398,536 sq. yds. is to be maintained by the city, and 
151,213 sq. yds. by the New Orleans Ry. & Light Co. 

In order to care for this pavement the city decided to erect a 
plant, and accordingly in 1904 asked bids for furnishing and erecting 
a repair plant. The specifications under which bids were asked gave 
the fullest latitude to bidders in designing the arrangement of the 
plant and in selecting the machinery, apparatus, fixtures, etc. It 
was required, however, that the plant be operated with coal as a 



/V /?T~ 



Rtllinq 
Pen 




Fig. 12. Asphalt Plant. 



fuel, and that it be capable of turning out each 10-hr. working day 
not less than 1,000 sq. yds. of binder when laid IVs ins. thick after 
compression on the street, or 1,000 sq. yds. of pitch asphalt wearing 
surface when laid 2 ins. thick after compression. The Warren Bros. 
Asphalt Paving Co., of Cambridge, Mass., was the only bidder, and 
on Dec. 5, 1905, its bid was accepted. The plant was accepted by 
the city on Aug. 21, 1906. A report on the operation of the plant for 
the year ending Aug. 31, 1907, has just been made by Mr. W. J. 
Hardee, City Engineer, and from this report has been taken the 
matter in this article. 

The plant. Fig. 12, was erected in a lot of ground 175 ft. x 260 ft., 
owned by the city and formerly employed for garbage disposal pur- 
poses. The plant, furnished and erected by the Warren Bros. 
Asphalt Paving Co., covers about 1,500 sq. ft. of ground and con- 
sists of a building formed of concrete foundation, brick walls and 
floors and roof of steel beams, expanded metal and cinder concrete. 
The boiler and engine section is 1 story high ; the dryer section and 
the asphalt melting tanks section are each 2 stories high, and the 
central or tower section, containing the sand bin, the mineral dust 
bin, and the mixer, is 3 stories, or 32 ft. high. The boiler and 



*Enffineering-Contracting, Feb. 5, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS. WALKS. 403 

engine, the dryer, and the asphalt melting tanks each have a sub- 
stantial foundation of concrete, independent of the foundation of 
the buildings. The hot sand, or stone bin, and the mixer, together 
With their auxiliary apparatus, are carried on a conical-shaped 
steel frame, 4-legged tower erected just within the building and 
resting on pier concrete foundations independent of building 
foundations. 

The cost of the plant and the appurtenant structures was as 
follows : 

Demolition of old garbage plant buildings ? 475 

Asphalt plant — Warren Bros. Asphalt Paving Co.'s 
contract, $16,862.50 ; city alterations and additions, 

$2,736.50 19,599 

Yard fences and gates 859 

Switch tracks 1,189 

Yard pavements and drains 6,721 

Tower tank and filter 1,330 

Water pipes and outlets 1,015 

Warehouse and platform 1,471 

Asphalt shed 289 

Blacksmith shop and equipment 222 

Stable, rolling pen and wagon shed 5,311 

Stone crusher and storage bin 1,966 

Yard material bins 332 

Office and store room building 5, ."109 

Landing bins an'd roads 1,432 

Lighting 352 

General cleaning of premises 298 

Total $48,365 

Note. — No allowance is made for value of the land. 

The live stock consist of 17 mules and 3 horses ; the mules are 
used in wagons and carts and the horses in buggies. 

The rolling stock consists of 10 Watson (2-cu. yd.) asphalt dump 
wagons; 8 (1-cu. yd.) single- mule dump carts; 2 Tennessee 4 -wheel 
wagons with capacity of 4,000 lbs. each; 1 (4-wheel) float dray, 
5-in. tires, with capacity of 6 tons ; and 1 single-horse storm buggy. 
Each wagon and cart is equipped with a canvas (tarpaulin) cover. 

In addition to 134 tools of various kinds necessary to operate the 
plant furnished by the Warren Bros. Asphalt Paving Co., the plant 
is equipped with the following : 1 Fairbanks platform scales mount- 
ed on rollers for weighing materials; 1 (4-wheel) 3 ft. 10 in. by 2 
ft. ] in. Fairbanks wagon hand truck ; 12 iron frame and bed wheel- 
barrows ; 6 short-handle shovels ; 12 long-handle shovels ; 10 axes ; 
6 picks ; 8 crowbars ; 8 sledgehammers, assorted sizes ; and a num- 
ber of small tools of various kinds. 

The street tools consist of the following : 2 large-size tool boxes ; 
18 wooden street barriers; 1 Universal 8-ton steam asphalt roller; 
1 Universal 3% -ton steam asphalt roller; 1 1,000-lb. iron hand 
asphalt roller; 1 (4-wheel) fire wagon for heating, tamping and 
smoothing irons; 1 (2-wheel) 100-gal. mixing kettle; 18 asphalt 
tamping irons; 15 asphalt smoothing irons; 66 asphalt axes; 107 
picks; 18 mattocks; 102 long-handle shovels; 40 short-handle 
shovels; 24 iron frame and bed wheelbarrows; 6 axes; 200 lin. ft. of 
1-in. diameter wire wrapped rubber hose ; 6 sledgehammers ; 8 



404 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

chisels of various sizes ; 10 crowbars ; and a number of small tools 

of various kinds. 

The testing laboratory, operated in connection with the plant, is 

equipped with cement testing apparatus, oil tester, briclc testei-, etc. 
The cost of this equipment may be summarized as follows : 

Live stock, harness and stable equipment $ 6,197 

Rolling stock and equipment 3,180 

Plant tools 837 

Street tools 5,492 

Office furniture 447 

Laboratory equipment 1,490 

Total - $17,644 

Soon after the plant was placed in operation the city ordered it 

to do a considerable amount of work not originally contemplated. 

This included the repairing of streets other than those paved with 

asphalt, and accordingly the following additional equipment was 

purchased : 

Pioneer 7-ton steam road roller $1,113 

Champion steel road grading machine 150 

Austin 700-gal. capacity road sprinkler 396 

Rolling stock 1,027 

Railroad plows with extra points 39 

Wheel scrapers 140 

Harness 139 

Live stock 1,700 

Total $4,704 

For the plow and grading machine mules 17^^ hands high and 
weighing about 1,600 lbs. were secured. 

Summarizing, the total cost of the plant and . equipment is seen 
to be as follows : 

Structures and their equipment $4 8,365 

Equipment 17,673 

Additional equipment 4,704 

Total cost $70,583 

The largest day's run made by the asphalt plant was on June 24, 
1907, when surfacing (new pavement) the Esplanade-Claiborne Ave. 
intersection. In 9 hrs. 205 boxes, gross, of "wearing surface" mix- 
ture were turned out ; 3 Watson wagons hauled this material from 
the plant to where it was laid, a distance of a little more than 2 
miles; and this material completed 1,020 sq. yds. of pavement in- 
tended to be 2 ins. in thickness. The cost of the fuel and labor, 
including wages of plant foreman, employed in preparing the "wear- 
ing surface" mixture ; the wages of wagon drivers and the care and 
feed of the teams ; and the labor, including foreman, roller men and 
fuel, in laying this "naptha coat" and "wearing surface" amounted 
in all to $127.23, or 12.47 cts. per sq. yd. 

The repair plant force worked every working day of the year 
when it did not rain. The asphalt plant worked 141 days and 
turned out 9,883 boxes, or 88,947 cu. ft. of wearing surface mix- 
ture. It was estimated that a 9 cu. ft. box would lay 5 sq. yds. of 
2-in. wearing surface, assuming that the loose material compresses 
16%% under the roller. On this assumption 49,415 sq. yds. of 2-in. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 405 

wearing surface would have been laid. As a matter of fact, only 
44,300 sq. yds. were laid, due to using a greater thickness than 
2 ins. This greater thickness was necessitated because no "binder" 
coat was laid to replace any of the old binder removed from tlie 
street. Instead of a binder coat, the concrete was "painted" with 
a "naphtha coat." 

Naphtha binder was not only much cheaper, but Mr. Hardee con- 
siders it also much more substantial and durable. Naphtha coat is 
formed of vaporized gasoline and asphalt mixed in equal propor- 
tions ; it is put on the concrete foundation, when the same is 
perfectly dry, by hand, with brushes, just as paint would be applied, 
and to the least possible thickness ; it is practically impervious to 
moisture and prevents the moisture that is commonly ever present 
in the concrete foundation of our pavements from attacking, through 
capillary attraction, the base of the asphalt "wearing surface" and 
rotting it ; additionally, the "naphtha coat" effects a strong union of 
the concrete foundation and the asphalt "wearing surface" and pre- 
vents the latter from being displaced in warm weather, as is so fre- 
quently the case in old pavements in which gravel "binder" has been 
employed. In repairing old pavements, whei-e the combined thick- 
ness of the "binder" and "wearing surface" was considerably more 
than 2 ins., concrete was generally added to the original concrete 
foundation. 

Prom time to time such laborers, additional assistant foremen and 
other employes, as were required, were hired by the day. When 
operations were first commenced nearly all the plant and street 
employes were negroes, but as fast as white men who could satis- 
factorily do the work were found, the negroes were displaced ; within 
a few months six negroes only remained and these were engaged 
at the plant on a class of work for which white men were not well 
fitted. 

Teamsters and some of the laborers were paid at the rate of $1.75 
per day ; but the large majority were paid at the rate of ?2 per 
10-hr. day. Pavers, stone workers and brick masons were paid 
from ?2.50 to $4 per 8-hr. day. 

The following is a list of the permanent employes : 

Annual wage. 

Superintendent I 2,500 

Secretary 1,800 

Stenographer 720 

Street foreman 1,500 

Assistant street foreman 1,200 

Yard foreman 1,500 

Engineman 1,500 

Fireman 780 

Steam loller engineman 1,380 

Blacksmith 1,080 

Yard cle-k 720 

Messenger 600 

Hostler 720 

Night watchman 720 

Veterinarv 180 

ChemiPt. "=y of $1,800 900 

Chemist helper, 1/2 of $720 360 

Total $18,160 



406 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

For reasons that are not made at all clear in his report, Mr. 
W. J. Hardee, City Engineer, deducts the following salaries from 
the above, and puts them in an account that he designates by the 
very ambiguous phrase "Special Charges" : 

Chemist $ 720 

Chemist helper 310 

Engineman 1,450 

Fireman 725 

Total salaries in "Special Charges" $3,205 

Deducting this $3,205 from the annual salaries of $18,160, we 
have left $14,955, which somehow becomes $15,674 when recorded in 
the "Annual Employes' Salaries." 

Then the account of "Special Charges" contains the following: 

Salaries (as above given) $ 3,205 

% laborer's wages at the plant 8,092 

342 tons coal at the plant, at $2.84 972 

Supplies at the plant 606 

Wood at the plant 76 

Gas and laboratory supplies 16 

Damaged cement 100 



Total "Special Charges" $13,067 

Then under an account designated as "General Charges" is placed 
the $15,674 of "annual employes' salaries," also "one-half day labor- 
ers' wages at the plant" ; but, unless the purpose Is to confuse the 
analyst of these costs, there appears to be no sound reason for 
separating the "plant labor" into two halves, as is thus done. 

The following is the statement of "General Charges" : 

Annual employes' salaries $15,673.96 

One half day laborer's wages at plant 8,092.35 

Live stock feed 3,032.76 

Electric hghting 331.75 

Electricity for crusher 133.35 

Water at plant 300.00 

Water on street 163.50 

Blacksmith's supplies 87.52 

Office supplies 436.00 

Stable supplies 309.30 

Horseshoeing 494.70 

Extra teams 1,629.10 

Car fare and incidental expenses 570.90 

Lost and worn-out tools 265.80 

Lost live stock 270.00 



Total "General Charges" $31,790.99 

The cost of 300 cu. yds. of concrete and 35,905 sq. yds. of "wear- 
ing surface" supposed to be 2 ins. thick, was as follows per sq. yd. of 
2-in. asphalt wearing surface: 

Total. Per sq. yd. 

Materials $15,279 $0,425 

Special Charges (pro rated) 6,761 0.189 

General Charges (pro rated) 11,090 0.309 

Other labor 7,177 0.200 



Total, Repairs to Asphalt $40,307 $1,123 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 407 

As I shall show presently, there is no valid excuse for prorating 
the "Special Charges" or the "General Charges" in this manner. 

In addition to the above given repairs, 8,400 sq. yds. of new 
asphalt pavement, on a 6-in. concrete base, were laid, and excavation 
made for the same, at the following cost : 

Total. Per sq. yd. 
Materials (asphalt and concrete 

materials) ?12,130 $1,444 

Special Charges (pro rated) 6,305 0.750 

General Charges (prorated) 10.342 1.231 

Other labor 8,812 1.050 

Total, New Pavement $37,589 $4,475 

This is "saving the contractor's profits" with a vengeance. A 
cost of $4.4 8 per sq. yd. of 2-in. asphalt on a 6-in concrete base, is 
approximately three times what it would cost any capable con- 
tractor. Bear in mind, also, that the $4.48 does not include any 
allowance for plant interest and depreciation. 

Finally, in addition to the asphalt repairs and the new asphalt 
pavement above given, there was a considerable amount of "Mis- 
cellaneous Improvements," such as curb setting, repairing with 
crushed stone, grading, filling, and the like, the total cost of which 
was: 

Materials $13,854 

General Charges (pro rated) 10,364 

Other labor 7,129 

Total, Miscellaneous Improvements $31,347 

Analysis of the above costs discloses how the "special charges" 
and the "general charges" were prorated, namely, according to the 
cost of the materials used on the three classes of work, i. e., on (1) 
repairs, (2) new pavement, and (3) miscellaneous. A more absurd 
distribution could not be imagined, for here is an expensive ($70,000) 
asphalt plant, with 34% of its "general charges" prorated to curb 
setting, grading, etc. ! "Were this not done, the costs of the asphalt 
repairing and new pavement would show up even higher than they 
do in the above tabulations. 

I have arranged the cost of materials and supplies used during 
the year, under five heads, as follows : 

Asphalt Materials and Supplies: 

465.99 tons asphalt, at $18.50 $ 8,561 

125,527 lbs. fluxing oil, at 71/2 cts 940 

6,753 gals, naphtha, at 15 cts 1,019 

3,900 cu. yds. sand, at $1.27 4,953 

321 tons mineral dust, at $5.50 1,764 

389 tons coal, at $2.84 1,105 

90 cords wood 563 

Total asphalt materials $18,905 

Concrete Materials: 

1,936 bbls. cement, at $2.04 $ 3,944 

700 cu. yds. sand, at $1.27 889 

564 cu. yds. gravel, at $2.27 1,272 

696 cu. yds. brickbats (for crushing), at $1.48 1,032 

Total concrete materials $ 7,137 



408 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Miscellaneous Materials: 

3,178 cu. yas. clay gravel, at $1.50 $ 4,786 

3,618 cu. yds. lake shells, at $1.46 5;304 

3,200 new granite blocks, at 7 cts 227 

4,600 old granite blocks, at 4 cts 184 

9,000 new building brick 98 

8,500 old building brick 25 

32,924 lbs. cast iron 1,289 

3,026 lin. ft. drain pipe 979 

Total $12,892 

Office Supplies: 

Laboratory $ 24 

Office 436 

Engineer 606 

Total supplies $ 1,066 

Stable: 

122,172 lbs. oats, at 1 Yz cts ? 1,820 

6,600 lbs. bran, at 1 ct 66 

39% tons hay, at $24.72 983 

Stable supplies $309, blacksmith $87 396 

Total stable $ 3,265 

Grand total $43,265 

These prices are all for materials delivered at the plant. 

The foregoing distribution, under the five heads, may be slightly 
in error. The sand, for example, is given as 4,600 cu. yds., without 
.statement as to its use. About 1,400 cu. yds. of new concrete base 
were laid, which would require about 700 cu. yds. of sand, and I 
have, therefore, distributee^ it in that manner, although there was 
a certain small, but unstated, amount of concrete laid on old con- 
crete base to bring it up to grade. 

This distribution of the cost of materials shows conclusively the 
absurdity of prorating the "General Charges" and "Special Charges" 
according to the cost of materials. A glance at the items under 
"Miscellaneous Materials" proves that no appreciable part of the 
cost of operating a $70,000 asphalt plant should be properly prorated 
to "Miscellaneous Improvements," as was done. It is true that a 
rock crusher (which crushed only 1,143 cu. yds. of stone and brick- 
bats during the year) and a road machine, and a few tools (worth 
about $2,000, exclusive of mules) were used on tue "Miscellaneous 
Improvements" ; but so insignificant was the plant necessary for that 
work that it is manifestly wrong to prorate any asphalt plant 
charges or any asphalt plant operating expense to these "Miscel- 
laneous Improvements." I have been at some pains to point out 
these details, for it is a very common practice for managers of 
municipally operated plants to conceal the true costs of operation 
by prorating charges in this fashion. The following is my own 
analysis of the year's operating expense, which errs, if at all, on 
the side of liberality toward the managers of this municipal plant. 
I shall not include the cost of the grading nor of the concrete for 
the new pavement laid, but confine the summary only to the cost 
of asphalt repairs, giving total costs, and cost per "box" (9 cu. ft.) 
of wearing surface, there being 9,883 boxes (88,947 cu. ft.), equiva- 
lent to 49,415 sq. yds. 2 ins. thick after rolling: 



I 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 409 

Per box. 
„ , . ^ , Total. (9 cu. ft.) 

Salaried employes $18,160 $1,838 

Laborers' wages at plant 16,184 1.637 

Feeding Stock, Etc.: 

Feed for regular teams $ 3,033 

Blacksmitli supplies 88 

Stable supplies 309 

Horse shoeing 495 

Lost live stoclv 270 

Extra teams hired 1,629 

Total, teeding stock, etc $ 5,824 $0,589 

Street Labor, Teamsters, Etc. 

On 35,900 sq. yds. repairs $ 7,177 

On 8,400 sq. yds. new 2-in. surface (estimated) 1,780 

Total street labor, teamsters, etc $ 8,957 $0,907 

Office Expense, Etc.: 

Engineers' supplies $ 606 

Office supplies 436 

Laboratory supplies 24 

Total office expense, etc $ 1,064 $0,107 

Asphalt Materials and Supplies: 

465.99 tons asphalt, at $18.50 $ 8,561 

125,527 lbs. fluxing oil, at 71^ cts 940 

6,753 gals, naphtha, at 15 cts 1,019 

3,900 cu. yds. sand, at $1.27 4,953 

321 tons mineral dust, at $5.50 1,764 

389 tons coal, at $2.84 1,105 

90 cords wood 563 

Total asphalt materials and supplies $18,905 $1,914 

Miscellaneous Plant Expense: 

Electric lighting $ 332 

Water 300 

Lost tools, etc 266 

Total miscellaneous plant expense $ 898 $0,091 

Plant Charges: 

Interest, 5% of $65,000 $ 3,250 

Depreciation, etc., 10% of $65,000 6,500 

Total plant charges $ 9,750 $0,987 

Grand total $79,724 $8,070 

Note. — I have made no allowance for "ground rental." 
Upon Mr. Hardee's assumption that a "box" of wearing coat will 
lay 5 sq. yds. of 2-in. wearing coat, we have simply to divide all the 
above items of "cost per box" by 5, to arrive at the cost per sq. yd., 
which summed up is as follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

Salaried employes $0,368 

Laborers' wages at plant 0.327 

Feeding stock, etc 0.118 

Street labor, teamsters, etc 0.181 

Office expenses, etc 0.021 

Asphalt materials and supplies 0.383 

Miscellaneous plant expense 0.018 

Plant charges 0.198 

Total $1,614 



410 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The item of plant charges (interest, depreciation and repairs) 
does not appear in the report of the city engineer, although such an 
item should always appear, nor is there any allowance for interest 
on the ground occupied, although it certainly had value. I have as- 
sumed the conventional 5% interest and 10% depreciation and repairs 
on $65,000 plant (omitting about ? 5,0 00 of plant used on "Miscel- 
laneous Improvements"). It should be noted that the first cost of 
this plant is unusually high. 

A small part of the item of "Feeding Stock, Etc.," should unques- 
tionably be charged to "Miscellaneous Improvements" and to haul- 
• ing materials for concrete, but I am unable to segregate the 
amount, which is inconsiderable anyway. 

The item of "Street Labor, Teamsters, Etc.," is exact for the 
35,900 sq. yds. of repairs, but the report gave no details that would 
enable one to arrive at the corresponding cost for the 8,400 sq. yds. 
of asphalt laid on the new concrete base, so I have prorated it at the 
same cost as for the 35,900 sq. yds. of repairs, namely at 20 cts. 
per sq. yd. This cannot be far wrong, and, in any event, the new 
pavement was less than 20% of the total wearing coat. 

We have in this work the highest cost of 2-in. asphalt wearing 
coat of which I have any knowledge. It even exceeds the cost of 
Brooklyn municipal work. It forms, indeed, an object lesson of the 
gigantic folly of doing public work with a municipal plant instead 
of by contract. 

Note especially the fact that my analysis of the true cost of this 
repair work shows $1.61 per sq. yd., as contrasted with the $1.12 
(which, even at that, was an enormously high cost). By improper 
prorating of "general and special expenses" and by entire omission 
of any plant interest and depreciation charges, ground rental, etc., 
it is an easy matter always to give an appearance of lower unit costs 
than actually exist. 

In Engineering-Contracting, April 7, 1909, is given an abstract of 
Mr. W. J. Hardee's report for the year 1908, relating to this same 
plant. The following is a brief summary: 

Repairs of asphalt pavements $ 27,545.59 

New asphalt pavements 14,409.33 

Other kinds of new pavements 23,445.84 

Miscellaneous improvements 74,398.91 

Total $139,799.67 

The repair work consisted of the construction of 2,640 sq. yds. of 
naphtha coat and 24,081 sq. yds. of asphalt wearing surface, the cost 
per square yard of wearing surface being as follows : 

Total. Per sq. yd. 

Materials $ 8,S31 $0,367 

Labor 6,778 0.281 

Proportion special charges 3,153 0.131 

Proportion general charges 8,784 0.364 

Total $27,546 $1,143 

It will be noted that the same misleading method of prorating 
"special and general charges" was used, and that the unit cost of 
these repairs exceeded the cost of work done the previous year. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 411 

The new asphalt pavement work consisted in the construction of 
7,550 sq. yds. of pavement, the work including 14,580 cu. ft. of con- 
Crete, 7,500 sq. yds. naphtha coat and 7,500 sq. yds. 2-in. wearing 
surface. The gross cost of this was $14,409 or about $1.90 per 
sq. yd. 

The other new pavement work consisted in the construction of 
vitrified brick and gravel roadways, the total cost of the work being 
$23,445.84. The largest item of work was for miscellaneous improve- 
ments, these consisting of graveling roads, constructing oyster shell 
pavement, grading, etc. The total cost of these miscellaneous im- 
provements was $74,398. The output of the plant was 86,004 cu. ft. 
(9,778 boxes) wearing surface mixture, which was employed in new 
pavements and repair of old pavements. The crusher operated in 
connection with the asphalt plant crushed 7,834 cu. yds. of old stone 
at an average cost for labor and electricity of 51.4 cts. per cu. yd. 
The stone was furnished free of charge. The cost per cubic yard 
in the previous year was 46.66 cts. Including feed, hostler and 
stable boy's wages, veterinary's salary, shoeing, medicine, etc., it 
cost an average of 76 cts. per head per day to feed and care for the 
live stock, as against 64.9 cts. for the year ending Aug. 31, 1907. 

In the first annual report the cost of the plant including equip- 
ment is given as $70,583. Additions to the plant costing $4,261 were 
made in the second year, bringing the total investment for plant 
and equipment up to $74,844. The asphalt cost $19 per ton de- 
livered. 

Cost of Patching Asphalt, Marion, Ind.* — Mr. T. E. Petrie gives 
the following : 

The accompanying data relate to repair work in the city of Mar- 
ion, Ind., throughout the month of September, 1908. This is a very 
good average of the season's work, after the force was thoroughly 
organized and all equipment put into service. 

A city of the size of Marion could not afford a plant costing up- 
wards of $20,000, which would possibly remain idle eleven months 
out of the year ; so we had to look for a smaller and less expensive 
repair nlant. We have in our city 6.64 miles of asphalt streets, or 
123,486 sq. yds. The first street was constructed in 1899 and the 
last in 1902. T^Hiile we have some excellent asphalt streets, lome 
are much below the average. We found in past experience that to 
rely on the asphalt companies to do our repair work, it was neces- 
sary that our streets should become quite bad before any com- 
pany would agree to come in to do our repair work, as the repair 
yardage was so small that it would not pay them to move their 
plant to our city, so we could expect them once in two or possibly 
three years, even though the street was under guarantee. 

In the spring of 1908, even though two of our streets were yet 
under guarantee, our Board of Public Works came to an agreement 
Mith the Barber Asphalt Co. that the city should take care of all 
streets under guarantee and that the Barber Asphalt Co. would re- 
linquish all retainer claiins that they held against the city. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 10, 1909. 



412 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In the meantime three of our streets became quite bad, so we 
began to look about for some relief, and finally purchased one of 
Hooke's largest combined asphalt plants and a carload of asphalt. 
To this plant was added another pan and a 700-lb. hand roller. 
The cost of the plant was as follows: 

Combined fire wagon and asphalt heater $465 

Freight 42 

Extra pan 43 

Hand roller 6.5 

Handcart 10 

Total cost of plant $625 

Depreciation on the plant was figured on the basis of 60 days' use 
for the season, This, at 10 per cent, amounted to $62.50 or $25.72 
for the 25 days for which the cost records are given. 

We began work July 20, 1908, and finished or rather run out of 
material, Nov. 28th. While not working quite all the time we laid 
4,142 sq. yds. of patch work. Great care was taken about the work 
and it is almost impossible to detect many places where patches 
were made. We used the Acme asphalt, which came already fluxed, 
and three grades of sand, so as to obtain as nearly a standard mix 
as possible, as well as to make the mixture as dense as possible. 

We used Portland cement as a filler, instead of stone dust, which 
caused the price per sq. yd. to run up somewhat higher than it would 
have had stone dust been used. 

We had two experienced men in the gang and paid them 25 cts. 
per hour, all other men were paid 20 cts. per hour. A one-horse 
dump cart was used for hauling material from stock room to plant, 
also hauling prepared material to street, and cuttings or old asphalt 
away, usually hauling same on some nearby street as repairing ma- 
terial. The cart man was paid 27% cts. per hour. 

The full repair gang consisting of 8 men, 3 out on the street arid 5 
at the plant, and 1 horse cart and driver. 

Orders were giA'en to work until the pans were cleaned and filled 
with sand at the end of each day's work, ready for fire the next 
morning. 

Four-foot wood was generally used for firing, costing $5.50 per 
cord, yet some shorter wood was used, costing $1.75 per cord. The 
Portland cement cost $1.40 per barrel; sand cost $0.75 at the plant 
and the asphalt cost $30 per ton f. o. b. Marion. 

During the 25 working days in September a total of 1,308 sq. 
yds. of asphalt pavement of an average depth of 2 ins. was laid, 
there being 2,742 cu. ft. of asphalt riiixture used, costing 41 cts. per 
cu. ft. laid. The itemized cost was as follows : 

Total. Per sq. yd. 

Labor $ 483.64 $0.3697 

Asphalt (including freight), at $30 ton 340.34 .2602 

Sand, at $0.75 70.12 .0536 

Cement (instead of dust) 98.17 .0750 

Fuel 72.93 .0557 

Cartage, 30 tons asphalt 11.22 .0086 

Interest, 6% 15.00 .0114 

Depreciation, 10% 25.72 .0120 

Total $1,117.14 $0.8538 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 413 

Last season was an excellent one to do repair work, on account 
of there being but little rain. The sand was kept as dry as pos- 
sible, and therefore was covered at night, and at daytime in case 
of rain. This materially assisted in the progress of the work as well 
as in the saving of much fuel. 

The plant was located at some convenient point, near where con- 
siderable patching was to be done and care was taken not to move 
the plant too frequently, as this expense will cause the price per 
square yard to rise quite rapidly. We were able to get out eight 
batches per day, providing everything worked well. It is intended 
to enlarge the mixing pans before beginning work this season, and 
by so doing it is hoped to increase the output fully 25 per cent, and 
by using stone dust instead of Portland cement for filler, to cut the 
price down to at least $0.75 per sq. yd. or perhaps lower. 

There has been nothing allowed for superintendence of the work 
as either the city engineer or his assistant will have time to see that 
work is going on as it should. However, last season I gave this 
work quite considerable attention, measuring all patches made, as I 
desired to know just what it was costing per square yard. 

I do not anticipate that we will have as much repair work in the 
next two seasons as we had last season. 

Cost of Patching Asphalt, Marion, Ind.*— In 1908 the city of 
Marion, Ind., had 6.64 miles of asphalt streets or a total of 123,486 
sq. yds. of that kind of pavement. In that j^ear the city took over 
the maintenance of all of the asphalt paved streets and pur- 
chased one of Hooke's largest combined asphalt plants for the work. 
To this plant was added another pan and a 700-lb. hand roller. 
The cost cf the plant in 1908 was as follows: 

Combined fire wagon and asphalt heater $465 

Freight 42 

Extra pan 43 

Hand roller 65 

Hand cart 10 

Total $625 

In 1908 a total of 4,142 sq. yds. of patch work was laid. Fur- 
ther details of that year's work are given in our issue of Feb. 
10, 1909. 

Before beginning work in 1909 a new bottom was put in the 
Hooke pan, and it was also enlarged so that a batch of 16 5/6 
cu. ft. of loose mixture was turned out for the 1909 work, instead 
of 14% cu. ft. as in 1908. This should have increased the output 
as well as decreased the labor cost. Owing, however, to the fact 
that a different brand of fluxed asphalt was used in 1909, which, 
for the same amount of mixture, took about 25% more asphalt, the 

*Englneering-ContracUng, Dec. 15, 1909. 



414 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

material expense was increased, and also the labor cost as it took 
considerably longer to mix a batch. 

In the 1909 work stone dust was used as a filler, whereas in 

1908 Portland cement was used for this purpose. In this year's. 
work the Portland cement was used as a top covering only. 

The working force consisted of the following: 

Plant : 

1 man at 25 cts. per hr. 
4 men at 20 cts. per hr. 

Street : 

1 man at 25 cts. per hr. 

2 men at 20 cts. per hr. 

A one-horse dump cart was used for hauling material from stock 
room to plant, also for hauling prepared material to street and 
cuttings or old asphalt away. The driver was paid 27% cts. per 
hr. This was the same gang as in the 1908 work with the ex- 
ception of one man. The men, however, were not as energetic to 
push the work, as they were in the previous year and this brought 
up the labor cost. In addition the patches were smaller in the 

1909 work and this also caused the labor cost to increase, as when 
many small patches were made in succession the gang at the plant 
would be compelled to hold back waiting on the men on the street 
to prepare places to receive the material. 

The working season in 1909 was 33 days, and in that time the 
gang placed 1,451.5 sq. yds. of patches of an average depth of 
2 ins. This is an average of about 44 sq. yds. of patchwork per 
day. A total of 2,828.1 cu. ft. of loose mixture was produced in 
the season of 33 days or an average of 85.5 cu. ft. per day. This 
would be an average of about five patches per day, there being 
16 5/6 cu. ft. to a patch. As 2,828.1 cu. ft. of loose mixture made 
1,451.5 sq. yds. of compacted 2-in. patches, there was about 1.95 
cu. ft. of loose mixture per square yard of 2-in. compacted asphalt. 
This is 1.3 cu. ft. of loose mixture compacted down to 1 cu. ft. 
For fuel cord wood was used, 16.8 cords being used for this pur- 
pose. As the season covered 33 days the average amount of wood 
consumed per day would be about % cord. As there was an aver- 
age of five batches per day there was about 0.1 of a cord of wood 
used per batch. 

The cost of the various materials used in the work in 19C9 was 
as follows : 

Asphalt, including freight, per ton $28,714 

Sand at plant, per cu. yd 0.75 

Cement, per bbl 1.40 

Stone dust, including freight and drayage, 

per ton 3.52 

Cordwood for fuel, per cord 4.50 

Interest on the plant investment was figured at 6% per annum, or 
$37.38 for the year. Depreciation on the plant was figured at 10% 
per annum, or $62.50 per year. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 415 

The itemized cost of materials in the asphalt surface was as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 

2 ins. thick. 

27.17 lbs. fluxed asphalt, at 1.43 cts $0,388 

14.47 lbs. stone dust, at .176 cts 025 

.069 cu. yds. sand, at 75 cts 052 

.0033 bbls. cement, at $1.40 005 

Total materials for surface $0,470 

Labor, at 20 and 25 cts $0,426 

Wood, 16.8 cords, at $4.50 052 

Cartage of asphalt 005 

Interest on plant 026 

Depreciation on plant 043 

Grand total $1,022 

The average cost per cubic foot material and labor was 52% cts. 
A comparison of the 1908 costs and the 1909 costs may be of in- 
terest and accordingly we have abstracted the costs from the 
former year as given in our issue of Feb. 10, 1909. The costs 
for 1908 are for 25 working days in September, during which 1,308 
sq. yds. of asphalt of an average depth of 2 ins. was laid. The 
costs in the two years were as follows : 

1908. 1909. 

Per sq. yd. Per sq. yd. 

Labor $0.3697 $0,426 

Asphalt 2602 .388 

Sand 0536 .052 

Cement 0750 .005 

Stone dust .025 

Fuel 0557 .052 

Cartage 0086 .005 

Interest 0114 .026 

Depreciation 019b .043 

Total $0.8537 $1,022 

In the 1908 work the asphalt, including freight, cost $30 per ton, 
and wood cost $5.59 per cord. "With these exceptions the prices for 
material and labor are the same as in 1909. Portland cement was 
used for a filler in 1908, whereas stone dust was used in 1909. In 
the figures for the 1908 work the depreciation was figured for the 
25 days in September only on the basis of 60 days' use for the 
season ; while in the 1909 costs the depreciation is for the entire 
season. 

All of the work was done under the direction of T. B. Petrie, 
city engineer. 

High Cost of Patching Asphalt, Brooklyn, N. Y. — In Engineering- 
Contracting, May 27, 1908, a complete description is given of the 
municipal asphalt plant in Brooklyn, which was placed in opera- 
tion, June 13, 1907. The plant was constructed by the Warren 
Asphalt Paving Co. A 60 h.p. Babcock and Wilcox boiler, and a 
56 h.p. engine (Erie Engine Works) and a 9 h.p. engine (Sturde- 
vant Blower Works), furnish the power. Without going further 



416 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

into details of design, the following summary gives the cost of the 

plant : 

Contract price $22,485.00 

Engine and boiler foundations, piles, etc 509.54 

Office and sheds 712.00 

Fire ext'ing 150.00 

Oil tank 365.00 

Extra parts — machinery 411.76 

Office furniture and equipment 174.28 

Electrical work, wiring, lights, annunciators.. 58.80 

Four asphalt rollers 6,156.00 

Twelve asphalt trucks at 4,920.00 

Tools and gang equipment 2,000.45 

Miscellaneous 337.35 

Total $38,280.18 

Fixed Charges. 

Interest on payments on above at 5% $ 897.10 

Depreciations on plant at .10% (G^^ months) 

on $37,892.08 2,052.49 

Rent of plant grounds, $1,440 per year, 7 mos. 840.00 

Total per annum $ 3,789.59 

The plant was in operation 6% mos., in 1907, beginning June 
13, 1907, and there were 134 working days out of 202. 

The output of the plant was 6,951 boxes of wearing surface mix- 
ture and 1,524 boxes of binder, total 8,475 boxes. Each of these 
boxes held 9 cu. ft. of the mixed product, as measured at the plant. 
It was found that, during the hauling in wagons from the plant to 
the street, the wearing surface mixture consolidates and looses about 
3% of its volume, but the binder mixture does not consolidate ap- 
preciably. 

The average wagon load is 8 boxes, or 72 cu. ft. of mixture, and 
the average distance from the plant to the point of repairs was 4.14 
miles. Observations on 35 loads showed a traveling speed of only 
2.15 miles per hr. A team and wagon cost $6 per 8 hr. day. The 
cost of hauling, as given below, includes all delays at the plant and 
on the street, as well as the cost of hauling the old asphalt from 
the street to the dump, but it does not include the cost of hauling 
any materials to the plant, for all prices of materials include de- 
livery at the plant. The wages for an 8 hr. day were : 

Plant foreman $6.00 

Foreman 4.00 

Rakers 2.50 

Tampers 2.50 

Smoothers 2.00 

Laborers 2.00 

Team (with driver) 6.00 

In making a box of wearing coat 0.3 cu. yd. of net measure of 
sand was used, but allowing for losses in the yard, shrinkage on 
drying, etc., 0.4 cu. yd. of sand were bought. According to the 
statement of total weight of stone dust used, there were 84 lbs. per 
box, but, according to the cost per box, at $3.50 per ton, it would 
appear that 63 lbs. were used. 

No record was kept of the number of square yards repaired, the 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 417 

"box" (9 cu. ft.) being the unit of record. For purposes of com- 
parison, however. I have assumed that a 9 cu. ft. box of wearing 
surface would malte 5 sq. yds. of wearing surface measuring 2 ins. 
thiclt after rolling. If 9 cu. ft. of loose wearing surface shrinks 
1/6, or 16%%, under the roller, we have 71/2 cu. ft. of compacted 
wearing surface, which will make exactly 5 sq. yds. 2 ins. thick. 
However, careful measurements on 27 sq. yds., made in 1905 by Mr. 
John C. Sheridan, Chief Engineer of the Bureau of Highways of 
Brooklyn, showed the following: 

"When the concrete foundation was completed ordinates were 
taken every few feet from a line stretched from curb to curb. These 
sections were taken about 2V2 ft. apart. After the 1-in. binder 
was laid, measurements were made from the line over the same 
points, and after the 2-in. wearing surface was laid, similar meas- 
urements were taken at the identical points, the material having 
previously been measured in the truck. It was found that there was 
a shrinkage of 211,^ per cent from the loose measure in the truck 
to the measurement compacted in place, and that there was a shrink- 
age of 33 per cent from the plant measurement to the measurement 
compacted in place. This was on the wearing surface ; the shrink- 
age in binder was not determined."* 

If we were to assume the greater shrinkage indicated by this ex- 
periment, instead of the 16%% shrinkage from the measurement at 
the plant, we should get a very much smaller yardage of 2-in. pave- 
ment, and a correspondingly higher cost. I prefer, therefore, to 
give the benefit of the doubt to the managers of the Brooklyn muni- 
cipal plant, by assuming that a 9 cu. ft. box will make 5 sq. yds. 
of 2-in. wearing coat. 

The following costs per box, are as I have deduced them from 
the annual report for 1907, and the costs per sq. yd. are based upon 
the assumption just stated. 

Cost of Wearing Surface. 

Per 

Per box. sq. yd. 

(9cu. ft.) (2-in.) 

Materials: 

0.4 cu. yd. gross (0.3 cu. yd. net) sand at $0.75 . .$0,299 $0,060 

63 lbs. stone dust at $3.50 ton 0.110 0.022 

13 lbs., or 1.63 gals, flux at 6% cts. per gal 0.121 0.024 

91 lbs. asphalt at $24.80 ton 1.127 0.225 

Total materials $1,657 $0,331 

Supplies: 

0.037 tons soft coal for plant at $4.00 per ton $0,148 $0,030 

0.0056 tons hard coal for rollers at $5.50 0.031 0.006 

Oil and waste 0.030 0.006 

0.008 cords wood for street fire wagon at $11.34 0.091 0.018 

Miscellaneous supplies 0.030 0.006 

Total supplies $0,330 $0,066 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 19, 1909. 



418 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Wearing Surface (Continued). 

Per 
Per box. sq. yd. 
Plant Charges: (9cu. ft.) (2 in.) 

Rent $0,099 $0,020 

Dump privileges 0.018 0.004 

Interest on plant, 5% per yr 0.106 0.021 

Depreciation, 10% per yr 0.242 0.048 

Repairs to plant 0.091 0.018 

Repairs to tools 0.024 0.005 

Total plant charges $0,580 $0,116 

Lahor: 

Plant labor (including foreman) $1,438 $0,288 

Hauling, 4.14 miles 0.934 0.187 

Street labor (including foreman) 2.356 0.471 

Superintendent ($1,363 for 6% mos.) 0.161 0.032 

Total labor $4,889 $0,978 

Grand total ■. . . $7,456 $1,491 

Attention should be called to the fact that this plant is new, and 
that repair costs are therefore smaller than they will be later on. 
There is apparently nothing included for chemist's salary, etc. 
Nevertheless, the cost of $7.45 per "box," or $1.49 per sq. yd. of 2- 
in. surface, is enormously high. Note particularly the tremendous- 
ly high cost of each of the labor items, except the superintendent. 
Here is a cost of almost $1.00 Der sq. yd. for labor alone on a 2-in. 
wearing surface ! Compare this with records given elsewhere in 
this book. Even the outrageously high cost of similar municipal 
work at New Orleans is outdone by this municipal asphalt repairing 
in Brooklyn. (See page 402.) However, they are both typical of 
municipally-operated plants. 

The cost of the binder was as follows : 

Cost of Binder. 

Per box 
Materials: (9cu. ft. > 

0.385 cu. yds. stone at $1.45 $0,558 

0.46 gals, flux at 7% cts. per gal 0.034 

25.5 lbs. asphalt at $24.80 per ton 0.312 

Total materials $0,904 

Supplies (same as for Avearlng surface) $0,330 

Plant charges (same as for wearing surface) 0.580 

Labor (same as for wearing surface) ' 4.889 

Grand total $6,703 

Table XV shows the output and cost by months: 

Cost of Bitulithic and Asphalt Pavements and Repairs, Toronto.* 

Mr. C. H. Rust. City Engineer of Toronto, is authority for the 
following : 

Most of the streets in Toronto are of a uniform width of 66 ft., 
and the width of the roadway has been fixed as follows: In busi- 



*Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 17, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



419 



cii ■ 



2.S 



-I M rH "-I N <M I 



n 3 «0 rH (J3 ■* CO •* 00 
.3 -^CKMCOeOIMCO 



tn CO lO in M< ■* lO -«< 






o 

Oh 



KiCL 



aXi '-''-IOU^OILStJI 

^ 5i COOCOrHOOOO 

"g COC-lcOTfOlCOOS 
^ CQ rH r-Tr-TrH rH 



i> U5000000 
■g . NOOOOIOIO 

P &J t-^<OO5C0«>I>t-; 

^H B ^ CD m CD O CO tH 

Eh'" C0OC005l0l0i-l 

i-ir-T THrHrH 

as- 



e 

Si 

Si 

o 
o 

01 



m O t>- O CO C5 m 
t^ O ^ Tj< c?^ 00 t^ 

*^ u fOoioioincCM 

JO Oc^rHCOinC. CO 
tU^ 00 ,-1 ^ Ol CO 03 00 



CO COCQ COC^C^f 



t^ O LTi t^ O t- 00 

• CO O t* 00 to 00 {J5 

CO ■* -* C<J CO CD O M 

(H^ OrHCOiniOt-io 

jS jj 0_rHOO_U5-*0> 

"^ iHT-ToaNNlHrH 



w S «^ £ c 



3 3 3 &0 O « 
l-3l-5<lJcfiOfeO 



bo 
> 



420 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ness districts, where the trafflc is fairly heavy, or where a double 
line of street car tracks exist, the width between curbs is 42 f t. • 
on residential streets the rule is to have the streets 24 ft. between 
curbs, and in a few cases this has been reduced to 18 ft., but the 
writer is not in favor of this. By reducing the width of these 
streets to the above dimensions, a considerable saving has been 
effected to the property owners, and also a very large saving in the 
general city taxes by reducing the maintenance, street cleaning, 
watering, etc. 

Asphalt pavements have been in use in Toronto for the past 20 
years, and have given general satisfaction. The first pavement 
laid was of Trinidad Pitch Lake, and several streets constructed of 
this material have been in use 16 or 17 years before the surface 
required to be renewed. A few years ago California asphalt was 
introduced and the pavements constructed of it have shown splen- 
did wearing qualities, and may be expected to give as good satis- 
faction as the earlier pavements. Texas asphalt has only been 
used in Toronto for the last two years. The analysis, however, 
shows up as well as that of any other type of asphalt and may 
be expected to stand the wear and tear of general traffic equally 
as well as the other's. 

This class of pavement is easily cleaned, quickly laid and re- 
paired, and at the present prices is the most economical and satis- 
factory pavement which can be laid. 

Formerly two types were used, namely light and heavy, but ex- 
perience has led to dividing this into three classes, light, medium 
and heavy. The light calls for 4 ins. of concrete with 2 ins. of 
asphalt ; medium for 5 ins. of concrete, 1 in. binder and 2 ins. sur- 
face, the heavy having 6 ins. of concrete, 1 in. binder and 2 ins. 
of surface. The price at the present time for light asphalt is $1.45 
per sq. yd. ; medium, $1.75 per sq. yd., and heavy, $2.00 per 
sq. yd. 

In 1907 the city pui'chased an asphalt plant with a capacity of 
1,500 sq. yds. per day of 8 hrs., and since then not only have some 
streets been constructed, but all the repairs have been made to 
pavements which are out of guarantee. 

The cost of material and wages in paving work are as follows : 

Material: 

Asphalt, per net ton, f. o. b. Toronto $21.95 

Screened gravel, per cu. yd., delivered on street 1.60 

Pit gravel, per cu. yd., delivered on street 1.05 

Sand for asphalt, per cu. yd., at plant 84 

Cement, per bbl., carload lots 1.29 

Crushed limestone, per ton, on cars 1.28 

Limestone rubble, per ton, on cars 1.10 

Crushed granite, per ton, on cars 1.60 

Limestone dust for asphalt mixture, per ton, in bags of 90 

lbs., on cars 5.60 

Granite blocks, per 1,000 67.00 

Paving blocks (brick), per 1,000 24.50 

Paving bricks, per 1,000 18.00 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 421 

Wages: 

Laborers, per day of 9 hrs $ 2.00 

Pavers, per hr 25 to .27% 

Concrete finishers, per hr 25 to .35 

Asphalt rakers, per hr 25 

Carters (single team), per hr 35 

Teamsters (double team), per hr 55 5-9 

Roller engineer, per hr 25 

Foremen, per day $3.00 to 4.00 

The cost of cement curbs and sidewalks at Toronto is not re- 
printed here, but may be found in Engineering-Contracttng, Nov. 17, 
1909. 

Plant Burden. — The charges for the plant during the year 1909 
were as follows : 

Sinking Fund on Investment : 

Cost of plant, $33,522, at 7% (rate for 20 yrs.) $ 2.346.54 

Rental of site, one-half of $1,000 500.00 

Taxes 309.00 

Miscellaneous Services: 

Phone 15.50 

Railway siding 60.17 

Insurance (fire) 84 2.00 

Depreciation — (a) building, (b) machinery, 5% of $33,522 1,676.10 

Fuel: 

18,000 batches at this year's average cost, .06 cts. for fuel 1,080.00 

Heat and light in winter 40.00 

Management : 

% of salary of chemist 300.00 

Fixed Charges: 

Foreman 1,014.00 

Watchman, summer and winter 608.30 

Timekeeper 315.00 

Engineer 577.50 

Roller 255.00 

Repairs 500.00 

Total $10,439.11 

Note. — At full capacity the plant develops 38,000 batches in the 
season of 150 days. An estimate of 18,000 batches as safe, which 
gives a cost of 58 cts. per batch, burden. If binder is used as well 
as surface, it makes the cost per batch 75 cts. There are 6 sq. 
yds. of 2-in. surface to the batch, hence the plant burden is nearly 
10 cts. per sq. yd. of 2-in. surface coat. 

Cost of Repairs. — The following was the cost of resurfacing 
8,117 sq. yds. during the month of June, 1909, with a 2-in. surface 
coat: 

Materials : Per sq. yd. 

0.18 batch asphalt mixture, at $2.12 $0,380 

0.18 batch plant burden (as above), at $0.58... 0.104 

0.2 lbs. stone dust, at $0.30 per cwt | 

0.17 lbs. asphalt cement, at $1.25 }- 0.006 

0.006 cords wood, at $5.11 J 

Total materials $0,490 

Labor on Street: 

Laying $0,082 

Carting 0.044 

Rolling, 0.023 hrs, at $1.40 0.032 

Total labor on street $0,158 



422 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Miscellaneous Charges: 

Office expense $0,005 

Engineering, 3 % 0.020 

Tools, 1 % 0.007 

Total miscellaneous $0,032 

Grand total $0,680 

Note that the item "Labor" includes only street lahor, and that 
"asphalt mixture" and "plant burden" includes materials and labor 
at the plant. 

Cost of a Light Asphalt Pavement. — A light asphalt pavement, 
18 ft. wide and 544 ft. long, was laid on Broadway. It was begun 
May 27 and completed June 19, 1909. The 2-in. asphalt surface 
occupied 950 sq. yds. (after deducting the cement gutter area). The 
cost was as follows: 

Persq. yd. 
Grading $0,359 

Concrete Foundation (4-in.) 0.577 

Asphalt Surface: 

0.158 batch asphalt mixture, at $2.70 0.427 

Stone dust, asp. cement and wood 0.004 

Carting asphalt mixture 0.033 

Labor on street 017 

Rolling, 0.005 hrs., at $1.40 0.007 

Total asphalt surface $0,488 

Miscellaneous charges $0,100 

Grand total $1,524 

The labor on the concrete foundation, exclusive of carting the 

materials, was only 9 cts. per sq. yd. 

Note that the $2.70 per batch of "asphalt mixture" includes labor 

at the plant and plant burden, as well as materials. 

Cost of Medium Asphalt Pavement. — An asphalt pavement (1,651 

sq. yds.) consisting of a 5-in. concrete base, 1-in. binder, and 2-in. 

surface was laid on Sackville St., at the following cost: 

Per sq. yd. 
Grading: 

Labor $0,176 

Rolling, at $1.40 per hr 0.027 

Total grading $0,203 

Concrete Foundation $0,666 

Asphalt: 

0.095 batch binder, at $1.98 ' $0,182 

0.17 batch asphalt top, at $2.70 0.450 

Stone dust, cement and wood '. . . 0.005 

Carting 0.037 

Labor on street 0.043 

Rolling, 0.011 hrs., at $1.40 0.015 

Total asphalt $0,732 

Miscellaneous $0,090 

Grand total $1,610 

The labor on the concrete cost 8 cts. per sq. yd., exclusive of 
carting. 
Cost of Bitulithic Pavement. — On Alhambra Ave., for a distance 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 423 

of 304 ft., a bitulithic pavement was laid on 4-in. concrete, 719 sq. 
yds., at the following cost : 

Per sq. yd. 

Grading $0,252 

Concrete Foundation 0.592 

Bitulithic Surface: 

Bitulithic materials $1,150 

Carting 0.093 

Labor on street 0.050 

Rolling 0.015 

Total bitulithic $1,308 

Miscellaneous Charges $0,170 

Grand total $2,322 

Cost of Repairs to Asphalt Pavements, Syracuse, N. Y.* — ^Valu- 
able data on the amount and cost of repairs of asphalt pavements 
at Syracuse, N. Y., are given in his annual report by City Engineer 
H. C. Allen. In addition to the data on life and cost, the report 
presents a plan, which will interest city engineers, for determining 
when repairs should cease and the pavement be resurfaced. We 
quote Mr. Allen's report as follows : 

The first asphalt pavements in Syracuse, N. Y., were laid in 1889, 
20 years ago. Since that time more or less of this kind of pavement 
has been laid each year, excepting 1891 and 1892, until at present 
there are about 625,000 sq. yds., outside of the railroad strip and 
exclusive of asphaltina. In 1902, the Department of Public Works 
commenced to repair systematically all asphalt pavements out of 
guarantee and to make a record of the amount of work done and its 
cost. 

Following is a table showing the total number of square yards 
of asphalt pavement out of guarantee, and the total cost of repairs 
each year' from 1902 to 1908, both inclusive. 

Total 
Year. Sq. Yds. 

1902 154,498 

1903 241,125 

1904 381,180 

1905 396,814 

1906 450,427 

1907 457,152 

1908 494,391 

Totals 69,402 $97,714.36 

The total amount of asphalt pavement required was 69,402 sq. 
yds., and the cost $97,714.36, or $1.41 per sq. yd. of patching. Be- 
sides this, there has been a large amount of asphaltina pavement 
repaired. The laying of asphaltina ceased in 1899 and it has al- 
ways been kept in repair with asphalt. 

During the past two or three years it has been observed that the 
older asphalt pavements, those laid in 1895 and previous thereto, 
were fast reaching a condition impracticable to repair, and a time 
when a new surface must be laid. It was also noticeable that the 



Repairs 


Total 


Sq. Yds. 


Cost. 


1,414 


$ 2,656.40 


2,710 


4,586.46 


5,617 


9,628.37 


9,308 


13,275.43 


14,958 


19,447.43 


17,574 


24,092.24 


17,821 


24,028.03 



^Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 3, 1909. 



424 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

greater part of the cost of repairs was upon these old pavements. 
Because of these observed facts, and the constantly increasing an- 
nual charge for repairs, a study and analysis of the records were 
undertaken with a view to recommending a policy on the part of 
the Department of Public Works with ' reference to the mainten- 
ance of this class of pavements. According to the provisions of 
tlie Charter, the cost of paving streets has been paid by the owners 
of abutting property and, after the expiration of the guaranty period, 
the Department of Public "Works has made the necessary repairs. 
The analysis above referred to show that the cost per square yard 
per year for repairs to asphalt increases in an increasing ratio. 
This ratio has been estimated from experience with the pavements 
in tliis city as follows : 

Cost Per Sq. Yd. Total Cost to 

Year of the Per Yr. at $1.41 Date Each Yr. 

Pavement Life. Per Sq. Yd. Sq. Yd. 

6th $0,003 ?0.003 

7th .011 .014 

8th .014 .028 

9th .028 .056 

10th .035 .091 

11th .056 .147 

12th .085 .232 

13th .127 .359 

14th .169 .528 

It is apparent from these figures as well as from the contempla- 
tion of the increasing actual cost from year to year, that the re- 
pairs to asphalt pavements by the Department of Public Works 
can not go on indefinitely without involving the resurfacing of en- 
tire pavements. 

The Charter provides that the resurfacing of street pavements 
shall be done at the expense of the owners of abutting property, 
and the problem here to be solved is the determination of the time 
at which the Department of Public Works shall cease making re- 
pairs, and leave the pavement to be resurfaced in the manner pro- 
vided by law. Several suggestions have been made, one that a 
pavement having once been laid, the city shall keep it in repair for 
a certain period of years, say, until it is 15 years old ; another that 
a pavement shall be kept in repair by the city until a certain per- 
centage of its area shall have been repaired. 

Objection is found to the first proposition in that the lives of pave- 
ments vary with their location and the volume of traffic to which 
they are subjected. Some of the asphalt pavements are found to 
have had as low as 1 per cent of the total surface repaired and to 
be still in fair condition at the end of 12 years, while others not 
so favorably located and sustaining heavy traffic have had more 
than 50 per cent of the total surface repaired in the same perioa, 
and are not capable of further repairs. It is evident that a hard 
and fast rule that all asphalt pavements must be resurfaced at the 
end of 15 years of life will not operate in an equitable auj con- 
sistent manner, for the reason that in some cases the condition of 
the pavement, due principally to its use, will require resurfacing at 
an earlier period, and in others the rule will require the destruc- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 425 

tion and replacement of a pavement which still has in it the ability 
to render service for a longer period. 

The proposition that the city keep an asphalt pavement in repair 
until such a time as a certain percentage of its total area has been 
repaired seems to meet the requirements of the situation in a more 
practical and equitable manner. 

The study of the information contained in the record of repairs 
shows that after the tenth year of life, the amount of repairs per 
square yard per year increases at a much more rapid rate than in 
previous years. The results obtained by taking the mean or aver- 
age of the quantity of repairs to pavements wliich have reached the 
age considered is as follows : 

Year. Amount of Repairs. Sq. Yds. 

11th Year — Per Sq. Yd., Per Year 04 

12th Year — Per Sq. Yd., Per Year 06 

13th Year — Per Sq. Yd., Per Year 09 

14th Year — Per Sq. Yd., Per Year 12 

Total repairs 0.31 

Average from 6th to 10th year inclusive 0.065 

Total for 14 years 0.375 

It is also to be observed that in the majority of pavements the 
general condition at the time repairs to the extent of 37i^ per cent 
have been made is such as to render furtker repairs impracticable, 
and resurfacing necessary. 

Taking the average of all pavements of this kind, it is found that 
at the end of the 14 years of life the percentage of 37 Vi per cent of 
the total area has been repaired, the extremes being such streets 
as North and South SalJna, which reach the limit in 11 years, and 
others such as Davis and Fitch streets which have not required 5 
per cent repairs in 12 or 13 years. 

It is therefore recommended that it be the policy of the De- 
partment of Public Works to keep up the repairs to asphalt pave- 
ments until such time as the total repairs thereon have reached 
371/2 per cent of the total area; that having made repairs to that 
extent upon any pavement it be abandoned for further repairs, and 
reported to the Common Council as a proper object for resurfacing. 
It should be noted in connection with this discussion and the gen- 
eral one of the participation by the city at large in the cost of 
pavements, that by paying the cost of repairs until the time the 
percentage of total surface above commended has been reached, the 
city at large participates in the cost of the pavement during the 
period of its life to the extent of about 53 cts. per square yard or 
about 30 per cent of the total cost of the perishable portion of the 
pavement. 

[For a correct mathematical discussion of problems of this 
nature, consult Section I of this book.] 

If it is thought to be advisable that the general scheme of paving 
assessment now in force should be changed by Charter amend- 
ment, so that the city at large is made to participate in a portion of 
the original cost of a pavement, it is suggested that it would be an 
equitable arrangement in making such assessments to consider that 



426 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the streets crossed by any proposed pavement are city property 
fronting the improvement, and to charge the cost of the pave- 
ment to this property at the same rate per foot front as other 
property along the line is called upon to pay. 

Cost of Repairs and Life of Asphalt^ Wasliington, D. C. — Capt. 

H. C. Newcomer gives the following: On July 1, 1903, there were 
2,886,786 sq. yds. of sheet asphalt pavements, on 2,425,732 sq. yds. 
of which the 5 yr. guarantee had expired. The following is the 
number of sq. yds. of given age above 5 yrs. : 

Age, Years. Sq. Yds. 

19 60,967 

20 108,385 

21 95,762 

22 106,439 

23 126,657 

24 66,949 

25 35,417 

26 21,869 

27 15,041 

28 30,682 

29 1,642 

30 23,254 

31 7,330 



!, Years. 


Sq. Yds 


5 


97,642 


6 


99,967 


7 


81,497 


8 


109,128 


9 


105,693 


10 


101,296 


11 


130,745 


12 


209,632 


13 


202,134 


14 


165,746 


15 


59,668 


16 


97.607 


17 


70,841 


18 


45,154 



Total 2,277,144 

The average age of the above is 14.8 years. The average age of 
the areas patched during the fiscal year ending July 1, 1903, was 
21 years. The patching is done by contract, and is not paid for by 
the sq. yd., but by the cubic foot of mixed materials measured in 
the cart, the price being as follows : 

Per cu. ft. 

Asphalt surface $0.49 

Asphalt binder 0.25 

The standard pavement has a 6-in. concrete base, a 1%-in. binder 
course and a 1%-in. wearing surface — total 3 ins. of asphalt meas- 
ured after rolling. 

The contract price for a standard asphalt pavement is $1.59 per 
sq. yd., the pavement having a 6-in. base (1 part Portland cement, 
4 parts sand, 5 parts gravel and 5 parts broken stone), on which 
Is laid 2 ins. of binder and 2% ins. of asphalt surface, both meas- 
ured before compression. 

The cost of repairs during the year of 1903 was 2.8 cts. per sq. 
yd. for pavement of all ages, being distributed thus: 

Age of 
Pavements, Cost Repairs 

Years. Per Sq. Yd. 

5 to 10 1.65 cts. 

10 to 15 3.37 cts. 

15 to 20 3.78 cts. 

20 to 25 2.8 cts. 

This relates only to patching and does not include any entire 
renewals of worn out pavements. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 427 

Cost of Repairing Asphalt Pavement in Various American 
Cities.* — The committee appointed by the Municipal Engineers of 
the City of New York to investigate the cost of repairing asplialt 
pavement has submitted a report of their woric, from which we take 
the following data. A blank prepared by the committee was sent 
to 20 of the leading cities in the country which have the largest 
amount of asphalt pavements, with the request that it be filled out 
in detail. The object was not only to ascertain the actual cost and 
method of repairing asphalt pavements, but if possible to deter- 
mine the cost of repairs according to the age of the pavements. 
Only eight of the cities replying have kept their records in such 
shape that this could be obtained and the results are embodied in 
the accompanying table. The figures in Table XVI are all for the 
year 1905 except Washington, which is for the year ending June 
30, 1905. Although not being able to furnish just what was desired, 
the following cities gave information regarding their methods : 

In Philadelphia there are about 25 miles of asphalt out of guar- 
antee and it is stated they all required resurfacing entire. The 
prices for resurfacing in patches of 100 sq. yds. or less for 1906 
are $1.19 per sq. yd., patches between 100 and 500 sq. yds. $1.17 per 
sq. yd., for surfaces from 500 to 1,000 sq. yds., $1.11 per sq. yd., for 
over 1,000 sq. yds. $1.07 per sq. yd. It is said the amount expended 
per year depended upon the annual appropriation rather than the 
need of the streets. 

In Minneapolis the area repaired last year was wholly in streets 
under guarantee where the contractor had failed to live up to his 
agreement. They were made at a cost of $1.65 per sq. yd. The to- 
tal yardage laid under this agreement was 4,525 sq. yds., but no 
statement was made as to the total area of the streets as repaired. 

In Omaha the repairs are made by a municipal asphalt plant, 
and while no statement was made of the cost by the age of the 
pavements, the total of 5.8% of the entire yardage repaired was re- 
laid. This would mean at a cost of 82 cts. per sq. yd., an average 
of 4% cts. over the entire area. 

In Kansas City the method of repairs is such that the following 
quotation is made from a letter of the Engineer: 

"We have repaired since 1903, when the first repairing of asphalt 
pavements out of maintenance was begun, 41 miles of streets, 
amounting to 88,000 sq. yds., costing $124,277.65. The cost of this 
work has been $1.50 per square yard until within the last year, when 
the Economic Asphalt Repair Co. came into the field with their 
Surface Heater. Since then the price has been cut to 90 cts. per 
square yard. Previous to this time all repairing work was done 
by the Barber Asphalt Paving Co., and the method used was to cut 
out all worn asphalt and replace by new. This latter method was 
very unsatisfactory, leaving the street in a lumpy condition, and in 
a short while after this work was done a bad place or hole was 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 19, 1906. 



428 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



H 

w 

o 
Z 

M 
U 


P 

U 
CQ 

o 



.S O'" 



• ro ■M IM 

■ ooo 

• ooo 



'Or-lrtOr-i?lrC^>-'i-'— ^j CMtM 
'OOOOOOOOOO 5 U 

O't'Ococ-cqiMoocoomtOTfi-Hcrj.S 11 3 *:;<u 



3 od- 

o 
o 






• PO O CO O C". -^ C'l 

• -^ 1-t -^ O O -t^ O'S 
•Oi-iOrMOOO 



o:> 1-H CO CO t^ <:r: O 

C^ t^LO t- CI l-^ 
T^ CO -^ t-- O C-1 o 



•OO COIA 

• m O t^ i-H 

• O it: OO 






0(ID^CO 



t3 






Ph 
►J 

w 





n-a 




n, >1 


0) 




<D 


s^ 


^ 


D 


U 




o 




PJ 





d -^-' ^ 

rt O M 



coTOOcociooooinoi-H*^—: 
L'^Mmc^comco&c-*-c:L^<x>^ 
:i 1 ^ o ooicir: t^ir. -f tc CO ^ 
oooooooococo • 

i? 

to 



•O-fC0l0C000c0t~-'*C>1C0*M Q^ 

• oc-r'omLO'rt-c comcoco *^ 

• OCOOrHlItlOmCOT-ICO-^^^OO 



• oocscot-co 
■ ^i-HdCl-r-l- 

• T-H d T-H O tH CI 

• oooooo 



C- 03 

oo 



ooo 
oo 



O'^CSCO 

0:5 — ,^ [- 1 1 'O 

-r C-. c-1 CO " >. 

ooi-HO to . 

• • • -^CT 






•C-1C£) 
• COC-q 



rf :£>t— m 



00 C5 

o -II- 



C^IO 

coo 
coco 



in en c- 00 e X 

C-ICO T-^CO 



-a 
2ft 



t^o^j :o ^H^co 



CIO 
CV5CO 



occ 

cr>^ 

C^(M 



O l>.COCO IBt-I 



(X) t— 



^ee^c^i 



89- 



S'5' 03 

C ^-oocor-iTt-c-jci-rocicooincot-jl- CJ 
>, -g S^ O^O^X^OOOOOOi-^rHOO p^ 10 • 
•go tOOCQ. 

O ^ ^I'^d II ti 

il, >Ht--*mt-coi:~coc;ooo:ci^moo.S,,^!_^ 

l-n .^35coi:-.-icomooorti^cD-3-oc-^'r^||-'a;r] 

" CyrQ ■*f2C^-*^Ot-lt-Tt'(MO-*mC-TT}- oj "-''O ^ 

M2 j>, e^f'M''THsrar-i'''rt''cot— m'cr"c-^o' co'^ o fe ^ 3 
oqcocqooo-*i^coc>i mcoc-j ISaJornQ. 

iH TTr-toj J2vi_t*WJ3 

„.e MmtfimmcoKimaiwwKimma! t-M ,. 

gjOJ >>>>>.>.>.>>>>>>>.>.>> >-.>>>>>> ^p^ u 

"^ C3 COt^OOOiOi-HClCOi^LOCC't-OOCiO 
P, rt rt tH i-H rH rH iH tH i-H rt M 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 429 

likely to develop alongside the place repaired. It is also very diffi- 
cult under this metliod to get a good joint. These repair contracts 
are for two years — tliey agreeing to keep the street in condition 
during the two years of their contract and tax bills being issued for 
the work done on the street at the middle and end of the period of 
their contract. This has resulted in the work being in a state of 
continual repair, tax bills being issued at the end of each year, at 
the end of the period of the contract the street being in a little bet- 
ter condition than wlien started." 

In New York City, Borough of Manhattan, it is reported, in 1904, 
265,000 sq. yds. were maintained at a cost of $201,167.38, or prac- 
tically an average of 76 cts. per sq. yd. ; in 1905, 460,882 sq. yds., 
at a cost of $161,800.90, or an average of 34 cts. per sq. yd. ; in 1906 
there will be maintained 760,091 sq. yds., at an estimated cost of 
$216,235, or 28% cts. per sq. yd. The figures of Manliattan are very 
much more than for any other city. This is probably due, it is con- 
sidered, to the heavy traffic of the Manhattan streets and the fact 
that many streets have been paved with asphalt where that ma- 
terial does not make an economic pavement. 

[I do not concur with this conclusion at all. The City of New 
York is one of the most extravagant cities in the world, as well as 
one that has suffered most from "graft."] 

Specific Gravity of Bitulithic and Asphalt Pavements. — Mr. J. W. 

Howard states that the specific gravity of a sample of bitulithic 
pavement in Baltimore was 2.69, as compared with 2.96, which was 
the specific gravity of the broken stone used in its construction, the 
pavement being only 9% less dense than the stone. He states that 
asphalt pavements have a specific gravity of 1.90 to 2.24, as com- 
pared with 2.60 or 2.70, which is the density of tlie sand and lime- 
stone dust used in their construction, indicating tliat tlie pave- 
ment averages about 20% less dense than the minerals of which it 
is made. 

Cost of Asphalt Cross Walks. — Mr. H. B. R. Craig gives the data 
upon which the following is based : 

In Kingston, Canada, tlie crossing of macadam streets are made 
of asphalt, which lias been found to have a life of 10 to 20 years. 
A small plant, costing only $100, is used. It consists of a 40-gal. 
asphalt boiler, a sand heater (100 sq. ft. of surface), and a mixing 
board of the same size. The sand heater is a %-in. sheet iron plate 
resting on four brick walls 2 ft. high and 1 ft. thick, enclosing an 
oven. The fuel (wood) is fed through a hole in the wall. 

The following is the gang : 

Per day. 
3 men heating asphalt and sand and mixing, at $1.50 $ 4.50 

1 cart hauling to the street 2.25 

2 men laying and finishing the asphalt surface 3.00 

Total, 300 sq. ft., at 3.25 cts $ 9.75 

2 men preparing the foundation, at $1.50 3.00 

Grand total, 300 sq. ft., at 4.25 cts $12.75 



430 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following was the cost of 15,000 sq. ft. of asphalt crossings 
laid in 1905 : 

Per sq. f t. 

Materials: Cts. 

Stone 0.267 

Asphalt, at 1.57 cts. per lb 3.690 

Cement, at $1.70 per bbl 0.080 

Tarred gravel, at 75 cts. per cu. yd 0.510 

Sand, at 90 cts. per cu. yd 0.630 

Fuel (very cheap) 0.110 

Hardware 0.015 

Total materials 5.302 

Labor: 

Boiling asphalt, heating sand, etc 1.250 

Carting 1.088 

Laying and finishing surface 0.917 

Preparing foundation 1.020 

Total labor 4.275 

Grand total 9.577 

The fuel was old wood and its cost was merely the cost of 
hauling it. 

The method of construction is as follows : The macadam is 
shaped to the desired cross-section, and a load or two of tarred 
gravel is spread across the street. The asphalt mixture is laid on 
this foundation to a thickness of 2 ins. It is well tamped along the 
edges and rolled with a 2-man roller. The tamper and roller must 
be oiled to prevent the mixture from adhering. A thin coating of 
cement is sprinkled over the surface and wetted down, about 1 lb. 
of cement for every 10 sq. ft. 

The surface mixture is made by heating 270 lbs. of Acme asphalt 
to 300° F. and maintaining that temperature for 2 hrs., constantly 
stirring. Twenty bushels of medium coarse sand (screened through 
%-in. screen) are heated to drive off moisture. The asphalt and 
sand are mixed by hand on a mixing board. 

Asphalt walks are similarly constructed on a base of 4 ins. of 
tarred gravel laid on rammed cinders. 

Cost of Mixing Concrete Base By Hand. — The ordinary labor cost 
of concrete foundations is 0.4 to 0.5 of a 10-hr. day's wages per cubic 
yard of concrete, although occasionally it may be as low as 0.3 of a 
day where two mixing gangs are worked side by side under separate 
foremen, and under an exacting contractor. In such a case, the 
rivalry between the two mixing gangs where the progress of the 
work can be seen at a glance, as in laying pavement foundations, 
will insure a saving of at least 25% in the labor item. The follow- 
ing, taken from my note-books and time-books, indicates the ordi- 
nary cost of cohcrete mixing and laying: 

Case I. Laying 6 -in. pavement foundation. Stone delivered and 
dumped upon 2-in. plank laid to receive it. If dumped directly upon 
the ground it costs half as much again to shovel it up. Sand and 
stone were dumped along the street, so that the haul in wheelbar- 
rows to mixing board was about 40 ft. Two gangs of men worked 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 431 

under separate foremen, and each gang averaged 4.5 cu. yds. con- 
crete per hour. 

The labor cost was as follows for 45 cu. yds. per gang: 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

4 men filling barrows with stone and sand ready 

for the mixers, wages 15 cts. per hr $ 6.00 $0.13 

10 men, wheeling, mixing and shoveling to place 

(3 or 4 steps), wages 15 cts. per hr 15.00 0.33 

2 men ramming, wages 15 cts. per hr 3.00 0.07 

1 foreman at 30 cts. per hr. and 1 water boy, 

5 cts 3.50 0.08 

Total $27.50 $0.61 

Case II. Sometimes it is desirable to know every minute detail 
of cost, for which purpose I give the following: 

— Per cu. yd. — 

Day's labor. Cost. 

3 men loading stones into barrows .06 $0.09 

1 man loading sand into barrows .02 0.03 

2 men ramming .04 0.06 

1 foreman and 1 water boy equivalent to .035 0.05 

[wheeling sand and cement to mix. board .02 0.03 

[wheeling stone to mixing board .026 0.04 

9 men < mixing mortar .013 0.02 

mixing stone and mortar .049 , 0.07 

[placing concrete (walking 15 ft.) .072 0.11 

Total 335 $0.50 

In one respect this is not a perfectly fair example (although it 
represents ordinary practice), for the mortar was only turned over 
once in mixing instead of three times, and the stone was turned only 
twice instead of three or four times. Water was used in great 
abundance, and by its puddling action probably secured a very fair 
mixture of cement and sand, and in that way secured a better mix- 
ture than would be expected from the small amount of labor ex- 
pended in actual mixing. About 9 cts. more per cu. yd. spent in 
mixing would have secured a perfect concrete without trusting to 
the water. 

Case III, Two gangs (34 men) working under separate foremen 
averaged 600 sq. yds., or 100 cu. yds. of concrete per 10-hr. day for 
a season. This is equivalent to 3 cu. yds. per man per day. The 
stone and sand were wheeled to the mixing board in barrows, mixed 
and shoveled to place. Each gang was organized as follows: 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

4 men loading barrows $ 6.00 $0.12 

9 men mixing and placing 13.50 0.27 

2 men tamping 3.00 0.06 

1 foreman 2.50 0.05 

Total $25.00 $0.50 

These men worked with great rapidity. The above cost of 50 cts. 
per cu. yd. is about as low as any contractor can reasonably expect 
to mix and place concrete by hand in pavement work. 

Case lY. Two gangs of men, 34 in all, working side by side on 



432 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

separate mixing boards, averaged 720 sq. yds., or 120 cu. yds., per 
10-hr. day. Bach gang was oiganized as follows: 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

6 men loading and wheeling $ 9.00 $0.15 

8 men mixing and placing 12.00 0.20 

2 men tamping 3.00 0.05 

1 foreman 3.00 0.05 

Total $27.00 $0.45 

Instead of shoveling the concrete from the mixing board into 
place, the mixers loaded it into barrows and wheeled it to place. 
The men worked with great rapidity. 

Case V. Mr. Alfred F. Harley is authority for the following : 
In laying concrete foundations for street pavement in New Orleans, 
a day's work, in running three mixing boards, covering the full 
width of the street, averaged 900 sq. yds., 6 ins. thick, or 150 cu. yds. 
with a gang of 40 men. With wages assumed to be 15cts. per hr. the 
labor cost was: 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

6 men wheeling broken stone 6 

3 men wheeling sand 3 

1 man wheeling cement 1 

2 men opening cement 2 

7 men dry mixing 7 

8 men taking concrete off 8 

3 men tamping 3 

3 men grading concrete 3 

1 man attending run planks 1 

3 water boys 1 

2 extra men and 1 foreman 4 

Total labor cost 39 cts. 

Case VI. The following cost of a concrete base for pavements 
at Toronto has been abstracted from a report (1892) of the City 
Engineer, Mr. Granville C. Cunningham. The concrete was 
1:2%: 7% Portland; 2,430 cu. yds. were laid, the thickness being 
6 ins. ; at the following cost per cu. yd. : 

0.77 bbl. cement, at $2.78 $2.14 

0.76 cu. yd. stone, at $1.91 1.45 

0.27 cu. yd. sand and gravel, at $0.80 0.22 

Labor (15 cts. per hour) 1.03 

Total $4.84 

Judging by the low percentage of stone in so lean a mixture as 
the above, the concrete was not fully 6 ins. thick as assumed by 
Mr. Cunningham. Note that the labor cost was 1% to 2 times what 
it would have been under a good contractor. 

It is also noteworthy that Portland cement was used. Until quite 
recently natural cement has been used almost exclusively in pave- 
ment foundations in America. A natural cement concrete is usually 
made 1:2:5, the cement being measured loose, so that about 1.15 
bbls. of cement are required per cubic yard of concrete. A suffi- 
ciently good Portland cement concrete can be made with % bbl. 
cement per cubic yard ; and, if the mixing is well done in a me- 
chanical mixer, it is safe to make concrete for pavement founda- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 433 

tions 6 ins. thick using not more than 14 bbl. of Portland cement 
per cubic yard. 

Case VII. Mr. Cliarles Apple gives the following data on the cost 
of a G-in. concrete foundation for a brick pavement at Champaign, 
111. The concrete was 1:3:3, natural cement, mixed by hand. The 
material was brought to the steel mixing plate from piles 30 to 60 ft. 
avi^ay. 

'' Cost per cu. yd. 

1.2 bbls. cement, at ?0.50 $0,600 

0.6 cu. yd. sand and gravel, at $1 0.600 

0.6 cu. yd. broken stone, at $1.40 0.840 

6 men turning with sliovels, at $2 0.080 

4 men throwing into place, at $2 0.053 

2 men handling cement, at $1.75 0.023 

1 man wetting with hose, at $1.75 0.012 

2 men tamping, at $1.75 0.023 

1 man leveling, at $1.75 0.012 

6 men wheeling stone, at $1.75 0.070 

4 men wlieeling gravel, at $1.75 0.047 

1 foreman, at $4 0.027 

Total per cu. yd $2,387 

The cost of mixing and placing this concrete was only 35 cts. per 
cu. yd., a gang of 26 men and 1 foreman placing 150 cu. yds., or 900 
sq. yds., per day. I do not believe these figures of Mr. Apple to be 
trustworthy, for reasons given on page 360. 

Cost of Machine Mixing and Wagon Hauling. — Mr. G. D. Fisher. 
Asst. Engr., The Laclede Gas Light Co., St. Louis, has given the 
following data on the mixing, delivering and placing of Portland 
cement concrete for a pavement base 6 ins. thick. 

The gravel was dumped from wagons into a large hopper, raised 
by a bucket elevator into bins, and drawn off through gates into 
receiving hoppers on the charging platform where the cement was 
added. The receiving hoppers discharged into the mixers, which 
discharged the mixed concrete into a loading car that dumped into 
wagons, which delivered it on the street where wanted. The long- 
est haul in wagons was 30 mins., but careful tests showed that the 
concrete had hardened well. The wagons were patent dump wagons 
of the drop-bottom type. 

Mr. Fisher says : 

"You may consider the following figures a fair average of the 
plant referred to, working to its capacity. To these amounts, how- 
ever, must be added the interest on the investment, the cost of 
wrecking the plant and the depreciation of the same, superintend- 
ence, and the pay roll that must be maintained in wet weather. I 
am assuming the street as already brought to grade and rolled. 

"With labor at $1.75 per day of 10 hrs., teams at $4, engineer and 
foremen at $3, and engine at $5 per day, concrete mixed and put in 
place by the above method costs : 

Per cu. yd. 

To mix $0.12 to $0.15 

To deliver to street 0.10 to 0.14 

To spread and tamp in place O.OS to 0.11 

Total $0.30 to $0.40 



434 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

"The mixers are No. 2% Smith, sold by the Contractors' Supply 
and Equipment Co., Chicago, 111., and a %-yd. Cube, sold by Munici- 
pal Engineering & Contracting Co., Chicago. 

"The Smith mixer will deliver 40 thoroughly mixed batches per 
hour under favorable conditions. 

"The above figures are on the basis of a batch every 2 minutes, 
which is easily maintained by using the loading car, as by this 
means there will be no delay in the operation of the plant owing to 
the irregularity of the arrival of the teams. 

"My experience leads me to believe that a better efficiency can be 
obtained by using mixers of 1 cu. yd. capacity." 

Cost of Mixing Concrete for a Pavement Base Using a Contin- 
uous Mixer.* — Of all the concrete annually laid as the base for 
pavements, only a small percentage is mixed with mechanical mix- 
ers. But this condition of affairs will disappear with great rapidity 
as contractors learn what a very large saving is possible where 
machinery of the proper type is used. 

In the work about to be described a Foote mixer was used. This 
mixer is manufactured by the Poote Mfg. Co., Nunda, N. Y., and 
sold by the W. H. Wilcox Co., Binghamton, N. T., and is of the con- 
tinuous type. It is provided with an automatic measuring device, 
by means of which any desired proportion of cement, sand and stone 
is delivered to the mixing trough. The mixer is mounted on trucks, 
and the hoppers that receive the sand and stone are comparatively 
low down. The sand is wheeled in barrows up a run plank and 
dumped into a hopper on one side of the mixer, and in like manner 
the gravel or broken stone is delivered into a hopper on the other 
side. The cement is delivered in bags or buckets to a man who 
dumps it into a cement hopper directly over the mixer. 

As above stated, the measuring of the materials is done auto- 
matically and in a very simple manner by the machine itself, so that 
all the operator needs attend to is to see that the men keep the hop- 
pers comparatively full. 

On one job visited by a member of our editorial staff, the sand 
was delivered from the stock pile by a team hitched to a drag 
scraper, and was dumped alongside the mixer where two men shov- 
eled it into the hopper. On the same job the concrete was hauled 
away from the mixer in Brigg's concrete carts, made by the J. E. 
Briggs Co., of "Waterloo, la. The contractor was very enthusiastic 
about these carts. He said that with a gang of 30 men and 2 to 4 
horses hauling concrete in Briggs' carts, he averaged 1,200 sq. yds. 
or 600 cu. yds. per day of 10 hrs. With wages of laborers at 15 cts. 
per hour, and a single horse at the same rate, the cost of labor was 
26 cts. per cu. yd., or less than 4% cts. per sq. yd. of concrete base 
6 ins. thick. The coal was a nominal item, and did not add 1 ct. 
per cu. yd. to the cost. In this case the mixer was set up on a side 
street, and the concrete was hauled in the carts for a distance of a 
block each way from the mixer. At first, 4 carts were used, but as 



^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 10, 1906. 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 435 

the concrete approached the mixer, less hauling was required, and 
finally only 2 carts were used. 

The Briggs cart is provided with an ingenious dumping device 
that is operated by tlie driver, who does not leave the horse's head 
to dump the cart. As is customary with all one-horse carts on 
short haul work, the driver leads the horse. The cart dumps from 
the bottom and spreads the load in a layer about 8 or 9 ins. thick, 
so that no greater amount of spreading with shovels is necessary 
than where the concrete is delivered in wheelbarrows. Another 
feature about the cart that is worthy of mention is the fact that 
no appreciable amount of the material leaks out, even when the con- 
crete is mixed very wet. It takes about 20 seconds for a cart to 
back up and get its load and about 5 seconds to dump and spread 
the load. 

On another job where wheelbarrows were used for conveying the 
concrete, the gang was organized as follows : 
8 men loading and wheeling gravel in barrows. 

2 men assisting in loading gravel into barrows. 
1 man dumping barrows into hopper. 

3 men loading and wheeling sand. 

1 man dumping barrows into hopper. 
7 men wheeling concrete in barrows. 
3 men spreading concrete. 

2 men tamping concrete. 

1 man opening cement and filling buckets. 

1 man pouring cement into hopper. 

1 man operating mixer. 

1 man shoveling up concrete spilled at outlet of mixer in loading 

barrows. 
1 engineman. 

32 Total. 

In dumping the wheelbarrows into the hopper, one man assisted 
the barrow men at each of the two side hoppers. The wheelbarrow 
loads of concrete were very small, probably not more than 1 cu. ft. 
and were wheeled only a short distance over the dirt. The mixer 
was moved forward at frequent intervals, the stock piles of sand and 
gravel being continuous piles dumped in advance along the street, 
sand on one side, gravel on the other side of the street. 

Portland cement concrete was used in the proportion of 1:3:6. 

The average day's output of this gang was 150 cu. yds., or 900 
sq. yds., in 8 hrs. ; but on the best day's work the output was 200 
cu. yds., or 1,200 sq. yds., in 8 hrs., which is a remarkable record 
for 32 men and a mixer working only 8 hrs. 

When one remembers that an excellent day's work is 3 cu. yds. 
of concrete per man, where no mixer is used, and that 2 to 2% 
cu. yds. is a more common record for hand work on streets, we 
realize that concrete mixers are bound to become universally used 
on street work in the very near future, for a mixer practically 
doubles the output of every man, if the work is properly handled 
With a mixer adapted to the purpose. 

Cost of Concrete Pavement, Windsor, Ont.* — Concrete pavement 



*Engineering-Contracting , Nov. 20, 1907. 



436 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

is constructed in all essential respects like cement sidewalk. The 
subsoil is crowned and rolled hard, then drains are placed under the 
curbs ; if necessary to secure good drainage a subbase of gravel, 
cinders or broken stone 4 to 8 ins. thick is laid and compacted by 
rolling. The foundation being thus prepared a base of concrete 
4 to 5 ins. thick is laid and on this a wearing surface 2 to 3 ins 
thick. 

In constructing concrete pavemient at Windsor, Ont., the street is 
first excavated to the proper grade and crown and rolled with a 
15-ton roller. Tile drains are then placed directly under the curb 
line and a 6 x 16-in. curb is constructed, using 1:2:4 concrete faced 
with 1 : 2 mortar. Including the 3-in. tile drain this curb costs the 
city by contract 38 cts. per lin. ft. The pavement is then con- 
structed between finished curbs. 

The fine profile of the subgrade is obtained by stretching strings 
from curb to curb, measuring down the required depth and trim- 
ming off the excess material. The concrete base is then laid 4 ins. 
thick. A 1:3:7 Portland cement concrete is used, the broken stone 
ranging from % in. to 3 ins. in size, and it is well tamped. This 
concrete is mixed by hand and as each batch is placed the wear- 
ing surface is put on and finished. The two layers are placed within 
10 mins. of each other, the purpose being to secure a monolithic or 
one-piece slab. The top layer consists of 2 ins. of 1:2:4 Portland 
cement and screened gravel, % in. to 1 in., concrete. This layer is 
put on rather wet, floated with a wooden float and troweled with a 
steel trowel while still wet. Some 20,500 sq. yds. of this construc- 
tion have been used and cost the city by contract : 

Per sq. yd. 

Bottom 4-in. layer 1:3:7 concrete $0.57 

Top 2-in. layer 1:2:4 concrete 0.32 

Excavation 0.10 

Total , $0.99 

This construction was varied on other streets for the purpose of 
experiment. In one caae a 4-in. base of 1:3:7 stone concrete was 
covered with 2 ins. of 1:2:2 gravel concrete. In other cases the 
construction was: 4-in. base of 1:3:7 stone concrete; 1%-in. 
middle layer of 1:2:4 gravel concrete and i^-in. top layer of 1 : 2 
sand mortar. All these constructions have been satisfactory ; the 
pavement is not slippery. The cost to the city by contract for the 
three-layer construction has in two cases been as follows : 

Church St., 8,000 sq. yds. : Per sq. yd. 

4-in. base 1:3:7 concrete $0.57 

IVa-in. 1:2:4 and i/a-in. 1 : 2 mixture 0.32 

Excavation 0.10 

Total $0.99 

Albert and "Wyandotte Sts., 400 sq. yds. : Per sq. yd. 

4-in. base 1:3:7 concrete $0.66 

iy2-in. 1:2:4 and y2-in. 1:2 mixture 0.39 

Excavation 0.10 

Total $1.15 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 437 

The cost of materials and rates of wages were about as follows : 

Portland cement f. o. b. cars Windsor, per bbl $2.05 

River sand, excellent quality, per cu. yd 1.15 

River gravel, screened, per cu. yd 1.25 

Crushed limestone, 14 to 3 ins., per ton 1.15 

Labor, per day $1.75 to 2.00 

At these prevailing prices the contractor got a fair profit at the 
contract price of $1.15 ; at 99 cts., any profit is questionable, ac- 
cording to City Engineer George S. Hanes, who gives us the above 
records. Expansion joints are located from 20 to 80 ft. apart and 
are filled with tar. Mr. Hanes writes that a large amount of this 
pavement will be built during 1908. 

Cost of Excavating Concrete Base (Street Railway) and Laying 
New Concrete.* — In the spring of 1906 the United Railways Com- 
pany, of St. Louis, Mo., undertook the reconstruction of six miles of 
its tracks on Olive St., in St. Louis. The reconstruction of these 
tracks is described by Mr. Richard McCuUoch as follows: 

Excavating Old Concrete Foundation. — In order to build the track 
it was necessary to make an excavation 21 ins. in depth in a con- 
crete which had been setting for 18 years, and which experience 
in whatever excavations had been made had shown to be extremely 
hard. The method adopted for excavating the concrete was by 
blasting with small charges of dynamite, the object being to make 
these charges strong enough to shatter the concrete so that it could 
be taken out in large pieces, but not heavy enough to do other 
damage. Holes were drilled 7 to 8 ins. deep in the concrete, 10 ins. 
from the center of each rail, and 24 ins. apart, four holes coming 
between each pair of yokes. (The Olive St. line was at one time 
a cable road, a double cable track having been built for a dis- 
tance of 3 14 miles. In this construction a girder rail was laid on 
cast-iron yokes weighing 300 lbs. each, set in concrete 4 ft. apart. 
These yokes were 48 ins. in depth and inclosed a conduit for the 
cable 38 ins. in depth. In subsequent reconstructions when the road 
was converted into an electric line these yokes were left in place 
and the electric cars operated over the cable roadbed without 
change. ) The hole was so located that the bottom of the hole was 
a little below the center of gravity of the section of concrete to be 
removed. 

For drilling the holes there were used No. 2 Little Jap drills made 
by the Ingersoll-Rand Co., operated by compressed air at 90 lbs. 
pressure. This tool drills a 1.25-in. hole. A dry hole was drilled, 
the exhaust air from the hollow drill steel blowing the dust from 
the hole and keeping it clean. Common labor was used to run the 
drills and very little mechanical trouble was experienced. Three 
cars were fitted up, one for each gang, each car being equipped with 
a motor-driven air compressor, water for cooling the compressors 
being obtained from the fire plugs along the route. The air compres- 
sors were taken temporarily from those in use in the repair sliops, 
no special machines being bought for the purpose. Electricity for 



*Engineering-Contracting , Dec. 5, 1906. 



4m HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

operating the air compressor motors was taken from the trolley 
wire over the tracks. The car was moved along as the holes were 
drilled, air being conveyed from the car to the drills through a 
flexible hose. Two drills were operated normally from each car. 
One of the air compressors was exceptionally large and at times 
operated four drills. 

The total number of holes drilled in the reconstruction of the track 
was 31,000. The total feet of hole drilled was 20,700 ft. The fol- 
lowing figures give the average performance of the best one of the 
drilling outfits, which operated from two to three drills : 

Depth of hole 8 ins. 

Number of holes per hour per drill 30 

Feet of hole drilled per hour per drill 20.3 

Labor cost per foot of hole drilled $0,027 

Labor cost of drilling per cu. yd. blasted $0,085 

Drilling cost per lin. ft. of track $0,017 

Drilling cost per mile of track $89.76 

In these figures there is no charge for electric power or for de- 
preciation of machinery. 

For blasting, a 0.1-lb. charge of 40 per cent dynamite was used in 
each hole. A fulminating cap was used to explode the charge, and 12 
holes were shot at one time by an electric firing machine. The 
dynamite was furnished from the factory in 0.1-lb. packages, and 
all the preparation necessary on the work was to insert the ful- 
minating cap in the dynamite, tamp the charge into the hole and 
connect wires to the firing machine. In order to prevent any dam- 
age being done by flying rocks at the time of the explosion, each 
blasting gang was supplied with a cover car, which was merely 
a flat car with a heavy bottom and side boards. When a charge was 
to be fired, this car was run over the 12 holes and the side boards let 
down, so that the charge was entirely covered. This work was re- 
markably free from accidents. There were no personal accident 
claims whatever, and the total amount paid out for property dam- 
ages for the whole six miles of construction was $685. Most of this 
was for glass broken by the shock of explosion. There was no glass 
broken by flying particles. The men doing this work, few of whom 
had ever done blasting before, soon became very expeditious in 
handling the dynamite, and the work advanced rapidly. The report 
made by the firing of the 12 holes was no greater than that made 
by giant firecrackers. 

For the drilling and blasting the old rail had been left in place 
to carry the aim compressor car and the cover car. -After the 
blasting, this rail was removed and the concrete excavated to the 
required depth. In most cases the cable yokes had been broken 
by the force of the blast. Where these yokes had not been broken, 
they were knocked out by blows from pieces of rail. The efficacy of 
the blasting depended largely upon the proper location of the hole. 
Where the holes had been drilled close to the middle of the concrete 
block, so that the dynamite charge was exploded a little below the 
center of gravity of the section, the concrete was well shattered 
and could be picked out in large pieces. Where the hole had been 
located too close to either side of the concrete block, however, the 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS 439 

charge would blow out at one side and a large mass of solid con- 
crete would be left intact on the other side. The total estimated 
quantity of concrete blasted was 6,558 cu. yds., or 0.2 cu. yds. of 
concrete per lineal foot of track. The cost of the dynamite deliv- 
ered in 0.1-lb. packages was 13 cts. per lb. The exploders cost 
$0.0255 each. 

The following data represent the average work of the three gangs 
working on the westbound track between 14th St. and Boyle Ave. : 

Cost of dynamite charge per hole $0,013 

Cost of exploder per hole $0.0255 

Four holes blasted in each 4 ft. of track; 

Lin. ft. of track blasted per hour 138 

Cu. yds. of concrete blasted per hour 27.6 

Cu yds. of concrete blasted per lb of dynamite .... 2 

Labor cost per cu. yd. blasted $0,076 

Cost dynamite and exploders per cu. yd. blasted... $0,192 

Cost labor and material per cu. yd. blasted $0,268 

Cost blasting per lin. ft. of track $0,054 

Cost blasting per mile of track $285.12 

Cost drilling and blasting per cu. yd $0,353 

Cost drilling and blasting per lin. ft. of track $0,071 

Cost drilling and blasting per mile of track $374.88 

When the excavation was completed, the ties were placed in the 
trench, the rail spiked down, the tie rods pulled up to gage and 
temporary fishplates put on the joints. Work trains were then run 
on this track and the excavated material hauled away. The exca- 
vated material in this job amounted to 11.410 cu. yds., or 0.348 cu. 
yd. per lineal foot of track. The United Railways Company pur- 
chased a sink hole and completely filled it with excavated material. 
All excavated material and all new material with the exception of 
the cement used in this work was handled on cars, no teams being 
used at all. It would have been impossible to do the work in the 
time occupied had wagons and teams been depended upon. 

The ties were of hewn cypress, 6 ins. x 8 ins., in sections, and 
7 ft. long, and were spaced 2 ft. between centers. Tie plates were 
used under the rail, each alternate tie plate being a brace plate. 
The rail used weighed 112 lbs. per yard and was furnished in 60-ft. 
lengths. 

Mixing and Placing New Concrete. — After the excavated ma- 
terial had been hauled away and the street cleaned up, the track 
was lined and surfaced by means of wooden blocks and wedges 
placed beneath the ties. Concrete was then tamped beneath and 
around the ties, the concrete being deposited in the track from a 
concrete mixing machine running on the rails. The concrete used 
was composed of a mixture by volume of 1 part of Portland 
cement, 2% parts of river sand and 6% parts of crushed limestone 
rock. The cost (delivered) of the materials composing this concrete 
was as follows : 
Crushed rock $2.85 per square 



Sand $2.50 per square 

Portland cement $1.70 per barrel 

For the track work, 7.36 cu. ft., or 0.273 cu. yd., were required per 



r= $0.0285 
= 0.77 


per 


cu. ft. 


per 


cu. yd. 


= 0.025 
= 0.675 


per 


cu. ft. 


per 


cu. yd. 


- 0.425 


per 


sack. 



440 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

lineal foot of track, 1% sacks of cement per lineal foot of track, or 
1,650 bbls. of cement per mile of track, were used in this work. 

The value of the cement, rock and sand used was $0,108 per cu. ft. 
of concrete, or $2.92 per cu. yd. of concrete. 

The material for the concrete was distributed on the street beside 
the tracks in advance of the machine, the sand being first deposited, 
then the crushed rock piled on that, and finally the cement sacks 
emptied on top of this pile. The materials were shoveled from this 
pile into the concrete mixing machine without any attempt at hand 
mixing on the street. Great care was taken in the delivery of 
materials on the street to have exactly the proper quantity of sand, 
rock and cement, so that there would be enough for the ballasting 
of the track to the proper height and that none would be left over. 
Each car was marked with its capacity in cubic feet, and each 
receiver was furnished with a table by which he could easily esti- 
mate the number of lineal feet of track over which the load should 
be distributed. 

The concrete mixing machines were designed and built in the 
shops of the United Rys. Co. Three machines were used in this 
work, one for each gang. The machine is composed of a Drake 
continuous worm mixer, fed by a chain dragging in a cast-iron 
trough. The trough is 36 ft. long, so that there is room for fourteen 
men to shovel into it. Water is sprayed into the worm after the 
materials are mixed dry. This water was obtained from the fire 
plugs along the route. In the first machine built, the Drake mixer 
was 8 ft. long. In the two newer machines the mixer was 10 ft. 
long. Both the conveyor and the mixer were motor driven, current 
being obtained for this purpose from the trolley wire overhead. 
Two types of machines were used, one in which the conveyor 
trough was straight and 45 in. above the rail, and the other in which 
the conveyor trough was lowered back of the mixer, being 25 in. 
above the rail. The latter type had the advantage of not requiring 
such a lift in shoveling, but the trough is so low that a motor truck 
cannot be placed underneath it. In the high machine the mixer is 
moved forward by a standard motor truck under the conveyor. In the 
low machine the mixer is moved by a ratchet and gear on the truck 
underneath the mixer. A crew of 27 men is required to work each 
machine, and under average conditions concrete for 80 lin. ft. of 
single track, amounting to 22 cu. yds., can be discharged per hour. 
The following figures give the average performance of the three 
machines in concreting the westbound track from 14th St. to Boyle 
Ave. : 

Number men employed at machine 27 

Number men shoveling into machine 14 

Lin. ft. track concreted per hour 80.95 

Cu. ft. concrete discharged per hour 595.79 

Cu. yd. concrete discharged per hour 22.06 

Labor cost concrete per lin. ft. of track $0,071 

Labor cost concrete per cu. yd $0.26 

Cost of materials composing concrete per lin. ft. 

of track $0,791 

Cost of materials composing concrete per cu. yd.. . . $2.92 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 441 

Total cost of concrete (labor and material) per 

lin. ft. of track $0,862 

Total cost of concrete (labor and material) per 

cu. yd $3.18 

Total cost of concrete (labor and materia.l) per mile 

of single track $4,551.36 

In these figures there is no charge for electric power or for de~ 
preciation. 

The section between 14th St. and Boyle Ave. (5.51 miles long) 
was divided into three sections, and three foremen, with independent 
gangs, were put on each .section. Work was carried on day and 
night. The Olive St. line is a double-track road, and during con- 
struction one track was kept open for traffic in one direction. Cars 
going in the opposite direction were sent by another route. 

The work was begun April 30, 1906, and the cars were turned 
back on the street, exactly six weeks having elapsed since ground 
was broken. Of this time two weeks were allowed for the setting 
of the concrete, so that the entire work, with the exception of pav- 
ing, was done in four weeks, an average of 1,040 lin. ft. of single 
track per day. The cost of this 5% miles of track was about $170,- 
500. For the entire work, after allowing for scrap material from the 
old track, the average cost per mile was about $27,000. 

Cost of Excavating an Asphalt Pavement and Its Concrete Base.* 

— In relaying a street car track it was necessary to excavate the 
pavement between the rails, and for two feet outside the rails. 
The pavement was asphalt 2iA ins. thick laid on a concrete base 9 
ins. thick. The concrete was made with natural cement and was 
consequently by no means as difficult to excavate as' it would have 
been if Portland cement had been used. 

In taking up the asphalt between the tracks it was found that 
the progress depended very much upon the temperature of the day. 
On cool days when the asphalt was brittle and the men worked 
rapidly, it was possible for three men to excavate 4,800 sq. ft. be- 
tween the tracks in 10 hours. This is equivalent to nearly 180 sq. 
yds. per man per day. Of course, it was not necessary to cut the 
asphalt loose from the rails on each side, so the work consisted 
merely in prying up the asphalt with crow bars and breaking it 
with a sledge. Two men pried the asphalt up, while a third man 
used the sledge, and cast the pieces aside ready to be hauled away. 

During most of the time, however, the asphalt was hot enough 
not to be brittle, and had to be cut up with a grub ax. In that 
case two men would pry up the asphalt, using picks, while the third 
man would cut off a strip li/4 ft. wide and as long as the distance 
between the tracks. Then he would cut this strip in two pieces with 
the grub ax. In the meantime the two men with the picks would 
be prying up some more of the asphalt. These three men worked 
very deliberately and averaged 1,700 sq. ft. per day. This is 

*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 19, 1906. 



442 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

equivalent to 63 sq. yds., or 4% cu. yds. per man per day. Wages 
were $1.75, hence the cost of excavating the asphalt was 2% cts. 
per sq. yd., or 40 cts. per cu. yd. This does not include the cost 
of loading and hauling it away. 

In excavating the strip 1 ft. wide outside the rails, it was, of 
course, necessary to cut through the asphalt along a line parallel 
with the rail and 1 ft. away. To do this cutting a chisel having a 
bit 3 ins. wide and provided with a handle, was held by one man 
while a second man struck it with a sledge. These two men, when 
working rapidly, would cut 1,200 lin. ft. in 10 hours; hence one man 
cut 600 lin. ft., thus loosening 600 sq. ft. of asphalt ready to be 
pried up. A third man would pry up the asphalt with a pick and 
cut it off in sections, and he averaged 600 sq. ft. a day, working 
very deliberately. Hence the average output of each of the three 
men was 300 sq. ft., or 33 sq. yds., per man per day, cut out, pried 
up, and cast aside. This is equivalent to a little more than 2% 
cu. yds. per man per day, and the cost was 75 cts. per cu. yd., or 
5% cts. per sq. yd. 

As above stated, the concrete was 9 ins. thick and was made with 
natural cement. It was loosened with picks, usually without great 
difficulty, and was shoveled aside ready to be hauled away. Each 
laborer averaged 3 cu. yds., or 12 sq. yds. per day. Hence the cost 
was practically 60 cts. per cu. yd., or 15 cts. per sq. yd. To this 
should be added the cost of loading into wagons, which was 16 cts. 
per cu. yd., or 4 cts. per sq. yd. The cost of hauling depends upon 
distance to be hauled, and can be easily estimated for any given 
conditions. 

Amount of Materials Required for Cement Sidewalk Construction.* 

— The great majority of cement sidewalks come within the range 
of 3 ins. to 7 ins. in thickness ; the most common base mixtures are 
1:2:5 and 1:3:6 and the most common finishing mixtures are 
1:1, 1:1% and 1 : 2. The accompanying tables have been com- 
puted to give by simple arithmetic, the volume of concrete, and the 
quantities of cement, sand and stone required per 100 sq. ft. of side- 
walk, ranging from 3 ins. to 7 ins. thick and constructed of the 
above named mixtures. Table XVII gives separately the volume 
of base concrete and of surfacing mortar in 100 sq. ft. of walk of 
the different thicknesses ; Table XVIII gives for each of the thick- 
nesses and mixtures named the amount of cement, sand and stone 
required pe.r 100 sq. ft. 

The tables have been calculated on the assumption that — the 
cement being measured loose as is usual in sidewalk work — a bar- 
rel of cement measures 4.4 cu. ft. For finishing mortar the voids 
in the sand amount to 45 per cent ; for base concrete the voids are 
assumed to be 40 per cent for sand and 45 per cent for broken stone. 
On these assumptions according to the theory of proportioning and 
the tables of mortar given in the section on Concrete, the 



*Engineering-ContracUng , Nov. 4, 1908, and Jan. 13, 1909. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



443 



,"5 '^ 


w 


(js a:i CO f- 00 b- CD 


1 d" -a 


CO O t- -fl^ i-H CX) lO 


tH d (M CO -^ •**< IC 


tn 


1 ^ "^ ' 

CM TO 


o o o o o © o 


S § 


..cc g 




o S 


1-1 . 




. aj 


1 S^' 


ITS t- O N Tj^ !>• a> 


f^ o 


■^ CD 05 rH CO lO t- 


^1 




O O O i-H T-H iH iH 


dO 


1 Cl >> 




OD 


Tt< CD t- 00 ■(-( CO "^ 


^ <* 


<M 00 Tt< 0> t-- CO OJ 


2 o 


tH rH 03 CO CO -^ ^ 


o 
'-' in 


^-S 


O O O o o o o 


gg 


Til 


W f CO OS lA tH O 


M O 


U5 t- O CQ lO 00 O 


1 o -^ 


d O tH iH iH tH <?^ 


K Bj 






M O 








1 1 "^ 


CO OS Irt C^^ 00 LTD tH 


OS CO 00 CO Ir- (M tr^ 




O 1-f rH Cq cq CO CO 




d d d d d d c> 


tH - 




O H 


1 HS" 


rH tH N Cq CO CO CO 




CD Oi iH U3 00 O CO 

d d i-H j-5 r-4 C^i (M* 


&fi 


1 




H 


f-G ,/■ , • 






B^t 


;:^;^ ;^;:?;53« 


^ ID .3 


rH iH r-l iH ffq 


W 


(D 'O 




Q ra 


1 M " 


00 <M in oj eq «o T)« 


!5 S 


«5 CO 03 o iM eo CO 


< S 


O o O 1-! iH rH 1-! 


Q fe 


5D 






««■ «' -a 


^ »M t- in >-i 00 eq 


M Tfi T(< m OS CJ5 00 


o o o o o o o 


f3 CC 


a' 2' 


05 -^ t^ cq in OS 00 




<!J ^ 


CO 00 en th c<i CO m 


O ^ 


O O O r-3 tH r-H rH 


antities op c: 
Base and fo: 
OF Walk. 


§ >? 

1 m 3 

in 

.. . !« 

N '2 "O 


CO 00 IM 00 (M t- 00 


t- OO O tH CO -^ t^ 
O O iH r-J r-H IH f! 

ci in tH t-- CO o^ T-( 


•• § ^ 


eq CO TjH -* in in t- 
o o o o o o o 


p M 


(3S 


05 00 m CO IH o t- 


g '^ « 


OO O <M -Ji CO t- l-H 


O rH tH r-i 1-1 iH e<5 


" >^ § 
fe J M 

g H O 
2 E-i '-' 


o >> 


in 00 iH -^ b- o t- 


CD t- CT) O T-H CO in 


4- m g 


O O O T-i i-i r-i tH 


W < W 




' • _j 




1 «2 g 


ca 0i in c<i 00 in 00 




CO CO "^ in in CD i>- 
o o o o o o o 


►> W H 


s"^ 


o o o th o cq in 


^^fe 


O C^ Tji to 00 o ■* 


0) fO 


r-! i-< rH r-J l-i N eq 


a^o 


i^.-^ 




1 


2 "^ 


;^ ;?! ;?3 

eg CO CO ■* -w in CO 


c^ 





444 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

amount of materials per cubic yard of mortar and of concrete are 
as follows : 

Mortar proportions: 1:1 1:1% 1:2 

Barrels of cement 3.94 3.34 2.90 

Cubic yards of sand 0.6 0.8 0.9 

Concrete proportions : 1:2:5 1:3:6 

Barrels cement 1.16 0.90 

Cubic yards sand .• 0.38 0.44 

Cubic yards stone 0.95 0.88 

Table XVIII has been computed from the above quantities and 
those given in Table XVII ; thus for a 3-in. base (Table XVII) 
0.93 cu. yd. of concrete is required per 100 sq. ft. ; if the base be a 
1:2:5 mixture, then the 
Cement =0.93 cu. yd. X 1.16 bbl. = 1.08 bbl. 
Sand = 0.93 cu. yd. X 0.38 cu. yd. = 0.35 cu. yd. 
Stone = 0.93 cu. yd. X 0.95 cu yd. = 0.88 cu. yd. 

The final results are the quantities given in Table XVIII, and the 
other quantities given in this table are obtained in a similar manner. 

Table XVII. — Showing Volume of Concrete Base and Mortar 

Wearing Surface per 100 Sq. Ft. of Cement Walk 

OF Various Thicknesses. 

— Concrete Base. — — Mortar Wearing Surface. — • 

Thickness, Volume, Thickness, Volume, 

ins. cu. yds. ins. cu. yds. 

21/2 0.77 1/2 0.155 

3 0.93 % 0.232 
3% 1.08 1 0.309 

4 1.24 1% 0.386 
4% 1.39 11/2 0.464 

5 1.55 1% 0.541 

6 1.87 2 0.618 
Note. — 100 sq. ft. of walk 1 in. thick has a volume of 0.309 cu. yd. 

To get the volume in a walk of any thickness, multiply 0.309 by the 
thickness of the walk in inches, e. g., 0.309 cu. yd. X 6 ins. =: 1.87 
cu. yd. 

Table XVIIT is used in estimating as follows: 

Problem : Find the amount of cement, sand and stone required 
for 1,000 ft. of sidewalk, 5 ft. wide; base 4 ins. thick of 1 : 2 : 5 
concrete ; wearing surface 1 in. thick of 1 : 1 % mortar. 

From Table XVIII we have: 

Cement. Sand. Stone. 

Per 100 sq. ft. bbls. cu. yds. cu. yds. 

Base, 4 ins 1.43 0.47 1.18 

Wearing surface 1 in 1.03 0.247 

Total per 100 sq. ft 2.46 0.717 1.18 

50* 5'0 50 

Total per 5,000 sq. ft 123.00 35.850 59.00 

*1,000 X 5 = 5,000 -h 100 = 50. 
Cost of Cement Walks. — The cost of cement walks is commonly 
estimated in cents per square foot, including the necessary excava- 
tion and the cinder or gravel foundation. The excavation usually 
costs about 13 cts. per cu. yd., and if the earth is loaded into 
wagons the loading costs another 10 cts. per cu. yd., wages being 
15 cts. per hr. The cost of carting depends upon the length of haul, 
and may be estimated from data given on page 121. If the total 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 445 

cost of excavation is 27 cts. per cu. yd., and if the excavation is 12 
ins. deep we have a cost of 1 ct. per sq. ft. for excavation alone. 
Usually the excavation is not so deep, and often the earth from 
the excavation can be sold for filling lots. 

The base of the walk is often made 3 ins. thick, of 1 : 3 : 6 con- 
crete, and the top wearing coat is often made 1 in. thick of 1 : 1 Mj 
mortar. The cement is invariably Portland. 

Such a walk is frequently laid on a foundation of gravel or cin- 
ders 4 ins. thick. 

And by using the table on page 443, we can estimate the quan- 
tity of cement required for any given mixture. 

As the average of a number of small jobs, my records show the 
following costs per sq. ft. of 4-in. walk such as just described : 

Cts. per sq. ft. 

Excavating 8 ins. deep 0.65 

Gravel for 4-in. foundation, at $1.00 per cu. yJ 1.20 

0.018 bbl. cement, at ?2.00 3.60 

0.009 cu. yd. broken stone, at ?1.50 1.35 

0.006 cu. yd. sand, at $1.00 0.60 

Labor making walk 1.60 

Total 9.00 

This is 9 cts. per sq. ft. of finished walk. The gangs that built 
the walk were usually 2 masons at ?2.50 each per 10-hr. day with 2 
laborers at ?1.50 each. Such a gang averaged 500 sq. ft. of walk 
per day. 

Cost of Cement Walk.* — The following notes, based on actual ex- 
perience, relative to the cost of a walk, are taken from a pamphlet 
prepared by Mr. C. W. Boynton and published by the Universal 
Portland Cement Co. Experience has shown that a gang of six men 
can lay between 600 and 800 sq. ft. of walk in a day of 10 hrs. and 
700 sq. ft. is considered as a day's work in arriving at the figures 
given below. This estimate is based on a 6-ft. walk having a 4-in. 
base, consisting of 1 part cement, 2 % parts sand and 5 parts crushed 
stone, covered with a %-in. top of 1 part cement and 1% parts sand. 
The stone ranged in size from i/4-in. to %-in. and contained 48% 
voids. A good grade of lake sand passing a %-in. screen was used. 
The sand contained 36% voids. The mixing was done by hand, and 
the cost of materials includes delivery on the work. The costs were 
as follows : 

Labor: 

One finisher at ?5 per day $ 5.00 

Five laborers at ?2 per day 10.00 

Total, 700 sq. ft. at 2.14 cts $15.00 

ilaterials: 

Cement, 2.5 bbls. at $2.00 $ 5.00 

Stone, 1.11 cu. yds. at $1.50 1.66 

Sand, .77 cu. yds. at $1.00 77 

Cinders, 2.7 cu. yds. at 50c 1.35 

Total cost materials for 100 sq. ft. at 8.78 

cts $ 8.78 

Total labor and materials, per sq. ft, 10.92 cts. 

* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 26, 1908. 



446 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

It should be noted that this estimate provides for a walk where 
an excavation for the sub-base was necessary. 

Cost of Cement Walks in Iowa. — Mr. L. L. Bingham sent out 
letters to a large number of sidewalk contractors in Iowa asking for 
data of cost. The following was the average cost per square foot as 
given in the replies: 

Cts. per sq. ft. 

Cement, at ?2 per bbl 3.6 

Sand and gravel 1.5 

Labor, at $2.30 per day (average) 2.2 

Incidentals, estimated 0.7 

Total per sq. ft 8.0 

This applies to a walk 4 ins. thick, and includes grading in some 
cases, while in other cases it does not. Mr. Bingham writes me that 
in this respect the replies were unsatisfactory. He also says that the 
average wages paid were $2.30 per man per day. It will be noted 
that a barrel of cement makes 55% sq. ft. of walk, or it takes 1.8 
bbls. per 100 sq. ft. 

The average contract price for a 4-in. walk was 11% cts. per 
sq. ft. 

Cost of Cement Walk, San Francisco. — Mr. George P. Wetmore. 
of the contracting firm of Gushing & Wetmore, San Francisco, gives 
the following: 

The foundations of cement walks in the residence district of San 
Francisco are 2 % ins. thick, made of 1:2:6 concrete, the stone 
not exceeding 1 in. in size. The wearing coat is % in. thick, made 
of 1 part cement to 1 part screened beach gravel. The cement is 
measured loose, 4.7 cu. ft. per bbl. The foundation is usually laid in 
sections 10 ft. long; the width of sidewalks is usually 15 ft. The 
top coat is placed immediately, leveled with a straight edge and 
gone over with trowels till fairly smooth. After the initial set and 
first troweling, it is left until quite stiff, when it is troweled again 
and polished — a process called "hard finishing." The hard finisii 
makes the surface less slippery. The surface is then covered with 
sand, and watered each day for 8 or 10 days. The contract price 
is 9 to 10 cts. per sq. ft. for a 3-in. walk ; 12 to 14 cts. for a 4-in. 
walk having a wearing coat % to 1 in. thick. A gang of 3 or 4 men 
averages 150 to 175 sq. ft. per man per day of 9 hrs. Prices and 
wages are as follows : 

Cement, per bbl $2.50 

Crushed rock, per cu. yd 1.75 

Gravel and sand for foundation, per cu. yd 1.40 

Gravel for top finish, per cu. yd 1.75 

Finisher wages, best, per hr 0.40 

Finisher helper, best, per hr 0.25 

Laborer, best, per hr 0.20 

Cost of Cement Sidewalks, Toronto, Ont.* — A considerable part of 
the public improvement work of Toronto, Ont., is done by day labor 
under the supervision of the city engineer. In the following article 
is given the actual unit costs of the construction of 4% -in. con- 
crete sidewalks, 4 ft. and 6 ft. wide, built by day labor. 

*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 29, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 447 

The sidewalks have a 4 -In. foundation of coarse gravel or soft coal 
cinders, thoroughly consolidated by pounding or rolling, upon Which 
is placed a 3 Ms -in. layer of concrete, composed of 1 part Portland 
cement, 2 parts of clean, sharp, coarse sand, and 5 parts of approved 
furnace slag, broken stone or screened gravel. The wearing surface 
is 1 in. thick and is composed of 1 part Portland cement, 1 part of 
clean, sharp, coarse sand and 3 parts of screened pea gravel, crushed 
granite, quartzite or suitable hard limestone. 

Cost of 6-ft. sidewalk. 

Per sq. ft. 

Labor 5.59 cts. 

0.016 bbls. cement, at $1.54 2.49 cts. 

0.027 cu. yds. gravel, at $0.80 2.21 cts. 

0.0046 cu. yds. sand, at $0.80 0.37 cts. 

Water 0.05 cts. 

Total 10.71 cts. 

Cost of 4 -ft Sidewalk. 

Per sq. ft. 

Labor 6.73 cts. 

0.0204 bbls. cement, at $1.54 3.15 cts. 

0.0206 cu. yds. gravel, at $0.80 1.65 cts. 

0.0049 cu. yds. sand, at $0.80 0.39 cts. 

Water 0.07 cts. 

Total 11.93 cts. 

The rates of wages and the number of men employed were as 
follows : 

1 foreman $3.50 per day. 

1 finisher 0.30 per hour. 

1 helper 0.22 per hour. 

15 laborers 0.20 per hour. 

We are indebted to Mr. C. H. Rust, City Engineer of Toronto, Ont., 
for the above information. 

Note how these labor costs are double what it costs a capable con- 
tractor to do the same class of work. 

Cost of a Cement Walk, Forbes Hill Reservoir. — Mr. C. M. Saville, 
M. Am. Soc. C. B., gives the following data relating to 6,250 sq. ft. 
of cement walk built by contract : 

Per Per 
Stone foundation cu. yd. sq. ft. 

Broken stone for 12-in. foundation $0.40 $0,015 

Labor placing same, 15 cts. per hr 1.50 0.056 

Total $1.90 $0,071 

Concrete base (4i/> ins. thick). 

1.22 bbls. cement per cu. yd., at $1.53.. $1.87 $0,026 

0.50 cu. yd. sand per cu. yd., at $1.02.. 0.51 0.007 

0.84 cu. yd. stone per cu. yd., at $1.57.. 1.32 0.019 

Labor (6 laborers and 1 team) 3.48 0.050 

Total (for 90 cu. yds.) $7.18 $0,102 

Top finish (1 in. thick). 

4 bbls. per cu. yd., at $1.53 $6.12 $0,019 

0.8 cu. yd. sand, at $1.00 0.80 O.O02 

Lampblack 0.29 0.001 

Labor (2 walk masons and 1 helper)... 6.36 0.016 

Total $13.57 $0,038 

Grand total $0,211 



448 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This walk was 6 ft. wide laid on a 12 -in. foundation of broken 
stone. On top of this foundation was the concrete base, 5 ins. thick 
in the middle and 4 ins. thick at the sides. This base was surfaced 
with a top granolithic finish about 1 in. thick. 

It is difficult to account for the high labor cost ($1.50) of placing 
the 12 -in. stone foundation except on the supposition that the stones 
were broken by hand. 

The work on the concrete base was unusually expensive, for no 
apparent reason except inefficiency of the men. 

The two masons received |2.25 each per day, and their helper 
$1.50, and they averaged 360 sq. ft. per day, or 60 lin. ft. of walk 
6 ft. wide, which is equivalent to 1% cts. per sq. ft. 

Atlas cement was used, and in measuring was assumed to be 3.7 
cu. ft. per bbl. 

It is perhaps useless to comment on the extravagantly large 
amount of stone used in the foundation. 

Cost of Acid Finish on Cement Walk.* — In making 86,650 sq. ft. 
of cement walks (25 ft. wide), the South Park Commission of Chi- 
cago did the work by day labor (in 1908) at the following cost: 

Per sq. ft. 
Cts. 

Cement, at $1.35 per bbl 3.46 

Sand and broken stone 4.70 

Forms 0.39 

Labor 3.70 

Superintendence and tools (10% of above) 1.22 

Total 13.47 

Grading and filling with cinders 4.73 

Finishing surface with acid 1.67 

Grand total 20.17 

The cement walk was 5 ins. thick (a 4-in. base of 1:2:4 concrete 
and a 1-in. surface of 1:2%), resting on 12 ins. of cinders. In spite 
of the fact that a machine mixer was used, the labor and super- 
intendence on the cement work cost the very high sum of 4.92 cts. 
per sq. ft., which did not include the labor on the acid finish nor on 
the grading and cinders. This furnishes another example of an ill- 
advised attempt to "save the contractor's profits." 

The cost of finishing 29,395 sq. ft. of the surface by acid was as 
follows : 

Per sq. ft. 
Total. Cts. 

10,800 lbs. (60 carboys) muriatic acid, 

at 114 cts $135.00 0.46 

36 deck brushes, at 50 cts 18.00 0.06 

Labor 290.00 1.00 

Add 10% for superintendence 44.00 0.15 

Total $487.00 1.67 



*Engineermg-(Jontracting, Dec. 9, 1908. 



ROADS, PAJ'EMENTS, WALKS. 449 

Cost of Cement Curb and Sidewalks, Gary, lnd.*^Mr. E. M. 
Scheflow gives the following: 

The improvement of Madison St. at Gary, Ind., from the south line 
of the Wiibash R. R. to the north line of the Pittsburg, Ft. Wayne 
& Chicago R. R., a distance of 3,800 ft., has been recently com- 
pleted. The improvement consisted of brick pavement (see page 
364 for cost), concrete curbs 5 ins. x 18 ins., with 5 ft. radii at 
street intersections and cement sidewalk 5% ft. wide. The grading 
was all done during the winter while the ground was frozen and all 
the material was hauled at that time. These costs do not include 
grading. 

Cost of Placing Curb. — The mixture for curbs was 1:3:5 Port- 
land cement, torpedo sand and broken limestone, with a facing 1 V2 
ins. thick composed of 1 : 1 : S of Portland cement, sand and granu- 
lated granite. The concrete was mixed dry by hand and then mixed 
wet in a worm screw mixer operated by a gasoline engine. Wooden 
forms were used. 

The labor cost was as follows : ...... 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers, mixing, 128 days, at $2.00 $256.00 $0.0351 

Laborers, wheeling and tamping, 127 days, at $2 254.00 0.0348 

Finishers, 51 days, at $5.50 280.50 0.0383 

Form setters, 80 days, at $3 240.00 0.0330 

Total, 7,268 lin. ft $1,030.50 $0.1412 

Labor Cost of Laying Sidewalks. — The sidewalk was laid with a 
concrete foundation 3% ins. thick of the same proportions as that 
given for curbs and a wearing surface % in. thick composed of five 
parts of Portland cement to seven parts of sand. The labor cost was 
as follows, the same method of mixing the concrete being used as for 
curbs : 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Laborer-s, mixing, 117 days, at $2 $234.00 $0.0060 

Laborers, wheeling, spreading and tamping, 142 

days, at $2 284.00 0.0073 

Finishers, 47 days, at $5.50 258.50 0.0066 

Form setters, 37 days, at $3 111.00 0.0029 

Total, 38,930 sq. ft $887.50 $0.0228 

Cost of Cement Curb, lowa.f — Data were given by Mr. M. G. Hall, 
in "Engineering News," April 2, 1908, relating to cement curb work. 
We have rearranged and analyzed the costs as follows. (For com- 
ments on the brick paving laid at the same time and place, see 
page 361.) 

The cement curb material' was mixed, 1 of cement to 3 of sand, in 
a i/^-cu. yd. Smith mixer. The average cost of the three jobs, A, B 
and C, reduced to the same rates of wages, is given below. Job A 
was 2,000 lin. ft. ; B was 10,000 lin. ft. ; C was 20,000 lin. ft. The 



*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 14, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, June 23, 1909. 



450 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



curb measured 5x18 ins. and was backed with cinders as 
Fig. 13. The following costs are in cents per lin. ft. : 

A 

Trenchmen, 20c per hr 3.44 

Form setters,, 35c per hr 2.74 

Filling cinders, 20c per hr 0.47 

Wheelers, 20c per hr 0.58 

Shovelers (concrete) , 20c per lir 

Tampers, 20c per hr 0.24 

Finishers, 35c per hr 0.42 

Men on mixer, 22c per hr 0.99 

Removing forms, 20c per hr 0.48 

Backfilling, 20c per hr 0.78 

Miscellaneous, 20c per hr 0.72 

Water boy, 10c per hr 0.33 

Team and driver, 40c per hr 3.86 

Concrete wagon, 40c per hr 

Foreman, 35c per hr 2.28 



rs as 
Toh 


shown in 


B 


C 


3.50 


1.70 


4.03 


1.63 


0.62 


0.50 


0.68» 


0.50 


• 1 • • 


0.50 


0.37 


0.40 


0.70 


0.56 


1.34 


0.44 


0.24 


0.30 


0.64 


0.80 


1.00 


0.05 


0.31 


0.20 


3.71 


0.50 


^ 


1.20 


1.50 


1.13 



Total labor 17.33 

Cement, at $1.40 bbl 7.65 

Sand, at $1.05 ton 3.45 

Cinders 2.00 



Total materials 13.10 

Grand total 30.43 



18.62 
7.76 
3.51 
2.00 

13.28 
31.89 



10.41 
7.73 
3.50 
1.00 

12.23 
22.64 



Since it takes 43 lin. ft. of 5 x 18-in. curb to make 1 cu. yd., the 
above items must be multiplied by 43 to reduce to a cubic yard 
basis. Omitting the items of trenching, backfilling and handling 



yy 



Cmde/s: 




fi^g.- Co/?^. 



Fig. 13. Cement Curb. 



cinders, we see that the labor on Job C cost 7.4 cts. -per lin. ft., 
which is equivalent to $3.18 per cu. yd. of cement curb. The other 
two jobs were considerably more expensive, particularly in the items 
trenching and teaming. 

None of the three was economically handled, as may be seen by 
comparison with the costs given on page 451, where the labor cost 
about half as much per cubic yard as on Job C, and far less than 
half as much as on Jobs A and B. 

I would call attention to the fact that curbs often differ consider- 
ably in cross-section, and the labor of mixing and placing the con- 
crete therefore differs materially when compared in terme of the 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 



451 



lineal foot as the unit. Hence all costs should also be reduced to 
the cubic yard basis also. When this is done, a contractor will fre- 
quently find that his work is not being handled with the expedition 
that it should be ; for comparison with the cubic yard cost of otlier 
jobs of similar character may disclose to the contractor a weakness 
of management or laziness of men on his own job. This is well 
exemplified in the above costs recorded by Mr. Hall. 

Cost of Cement Curb.* — The concrete curb shown in Fig. 14 was 
built at an average labor cost of 6 cts. per lin. ft. The labor force 
employed on the work was as follows: 

Per day. 

8 laborers, at $1.75 $14.00 

1 finisher, at $3.00 3.00 

1 working foreman, at $4.00 4.00 

Total, 350 lin. ft, at 6 cts $21.00 

This force averaged 350 lin. ft. of curb per day of 10 hrs. For the 
body of the curb, 1 % yds. gravel and 7 sacks of Portland cement in 



S'O" 



i^'iit-, 



z'oUd^sf 






Enc^rContn 



Fig. 14. Cement Curb. 



a batch would make 60 lin. ft. of curb. For the outside finish a 
batch was made of 18 pails of screened gravel mixed with 4 sacks 
(12 pails) of Portland cement 

The cost of the materials was as follows, not including the out- 
side cement finish : 

Per lin. ft. 

0.03 cu. yd. gravel, at $1.25 $0.0375 

0.03 bbl. cement, at $2.40 0.0720 

Total $0.1075 

For the above information we are indebted to Mr. A. "W. Saunders, 
of Johnstown, Pa. 

Cost of Cement Curb and Gutter. — The following costs were re- 
corded by Mr. Charles Apple, and relate to work done at Champaign, 
111., in 1903. The work was done by contract, at 45 cts. per lin. ft. 
of the curb and gutter shown in Fig. 15. 

The concrete curb and gutter was built in a trench as shown in the 
cut. The earth was removed from this trench with pick and shovel 
at a rate of 1 cu. yd. per man per hour. The concrete work was 
built in alternate sections, 7 ft. in length. A continuous line of 
planks was set on edge to form the front and back of the concrete 



*Engineering-Contracting, June 10, 1908. 



452 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



curb and gutter ; and wood partitions, stalled into place, were used 
The cost of the work was as follows : 



Cost of Curb and Gutter. 



Opening trench, 18 x 30-in 2 



Placing and tampin§ 
Setting forms : 

Boss setter 

Assistant setter . 

Laborer 



cinders . 



No. of Lin. ft. 
men. per day. 

144 



Total setting forms 3 

Mixing and placing concrete : 

Clamp man 1 

Wheelers 3 

Mixing concrete 4 



350 



400 



Total Cost per 

wages. 100 ft. 

$3.50 $2.43 

3.50 1.00 

3.00 
2.00 
1.75 



Mixing finishing coat. 
Tampers 

Finishing : 

Foreman and boss finisher. 
Assistant finisher 



Water boy 1 

Total making concrete 14 

Total for labor per 100 ft 

Materials for 100 lin. ft: Quantity. 

Portland cement 8% bbls. 

Cinders 7.5 yds. 

Gravel 2.5 yds. 

Broken stone 2.5 yds. 

Sand 1.0 yds. 



?6.75 

$1.75 
6.25 
7.00 
3.50 
1.75 

4.00 

3.00 

.50 



?1.69 

$0.50 
1.50 
2.00 
1.00 
0.50 

1.14 
0.88 
1.14 



350 $26.75 $ 7.64 
$12.76 



Price. 

$1.85 

.50 

1.00 

1.40 

1.00 



Total for material per 100 ft 

Total for material and labor per 100 ft. 



$15.42 
3.75 
2.50 
3.50 
1.00 

$26.17 
$38.93 




, p Mortor ■ . . 










Fig. 15. Cement Curb and Gutter. 



This is the to1»al cost, exclusive of lumber, tools, interest, profits, 
etc., and it is practically 40 cts. per lin. ft. 

In 100 lin. ft. of curb and gutter there were 4.6 cu. yds. of con- 
crete and mortar facing, 4 cu. yds. of which were concrete ; hence the 
9 men in the concrete gang laid 14 cu. yds. of concrete per day, 
whereas the 4 men mixing and placing the mortar finishing laid 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 453 

only 21^ cu. yds. of mortar per day, assuming that the mortar fin- 
ishing averaged just 1 in. tliiclt. Since tliese 4 men (2 mixers and 2 
finisliers) received $10.50 a day, it cost more than $4 per cu. yd. to 
mix and place the 1: 2 mortar, as compared witli $1.41 per cu. yd. 
for mixing and placing the concrete. The concrete was built in 
alternate sections 7 ft. long. The 3 men placing forms averaged 400 
lin. ft. a day, so that the cost of placing the forms was $1 per cu. yd. 
of concrete. The 2 men placing and tamping cinders averaged 16 
cu. yds. of cinders per day, or S cu. yds. per man. This curb and 
gutter was built by contract at 45 cts. per lin. ft. 

For several jobs, in which a curb and gutter essentially the same 
as shown in Fig. 15 was built, my records show a general corre- 
spondence with the above given data of Mr. Apple. Our work was 
done with smaller gangs, 1 mason and 2 laborers being the ordi- 
nary gang. Such a gang would lay SO to 100 lin. ft. of curb and 
gutter per 10-hr. d.a.y, at the following cost: 

1 mason, at .?2.50 $2.50 

2 laborers, at $1.50 3.00 

Total $5.50 

This made a cost of 5 '{. to 7 cts. per lin. ft. for labor, and it did 
not include the cc^t of digging a trench to receive the curb and gut- 
ter. 

Cost of Cement Curb, Baltimore, Md. — I give the following 
abstract from an article in Engineering-Contracting , Sept. 22, 1909, 
merely to show hjw high the cost of a cement curb may be when 
built by day labor instead of by contract. This work was done in 
Baltimore, in 1008, by city forces, at the following cost: 

Per lin. ft. 

0.037 cu. vd. crushed stone, at $1.75 $0,065 

0.02 cu. yd. sand, at $0.80 0.015 

0.05 bbl. cement, at $1.29 0.064 

Total concrete materials $0,144 

"Wainwriglit iron bar 0.150 

Frogs 0.010 

Total materials $0,304 

Labor 0.506 

Grand total $0,810 

The gang engaged in making this curb was as follows per 8-hr. 

day : 

Per day. 

1 foreman $ 4.00 

1 finisher 2.50 

3 laborers, at $1.66% 5.00 

1 cart, horse and driver 2.50 

Total, 28 lin. ft., at 50 cts $14.00 

The curb measured 6 ins. thick by 24 ins. high, or 1 cu. ft. per 
lin. ft., and the concrete was mixed 1 : 214 : 3. Since the labor cost 
50 cts. per lin ft., this is equivalent to $13.50 per cu. yd. ! So far as 
I know, this breaks all records for high cost of cement curb work. 
■Of course the "contractors' profits" were saved. 



454 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Cement Curb and Gutter, Ottawa, Ont.* — The method 
and cost of constructing 1,326 ft. of cement curb and gutter at Ot- 
tawa, Ont., are given in some detail by Mr. G. H. Richardson, As- 
sistant City Engineer. We have remodeled the description and re- 
arranged the figures of cost in the following paragraphs. 

The concrete curb was built before doing any work on the road- 
way, and the first task was the excavation of a trench 2% ft. wide 
and averaging 1 ft. 8 ins. in depth through light red sand. On the 
bottom of thia trench there was placed a foundation of stone spalls 
8 ins. thick ; in width this foundation reached from 3 ins. back of the 
curb to 6 ins. beyond the front of the water table. The curb was 
made 5 ins. thick and ran from 10 ins. to 5l^ ins. in height, and 
the water table was 14 ins. wide and 4 ins. thick, with a fall of 1^4 
ins. from front to back. The concrete used was a mixture of 1 of 
Portland cement, 3 of sand, 3 of %-in. screened limestone, and 4 
of 2-in. stone. It was deposited in forms and tamped to bring the 
water to the face and then smoothed with a light troweling of stiff 
mortar. 

The forms were constructed by first setting pickets and nailing to 
them a back board 2 ins. thick and 12 ins. wide and a front board 
2 ins. thick and 6 ins. wide. The concrete for the water table was 
deposited in this form in sections and brought to surface by straight 
edge riding on wooden strips nailed across the form and properly set 
to slope, etc. After the water table had been troweled down and 
brushed a 1 x 10-in. board was set to mold the front face of the 
curb. This board was sustained by small "knee frames" made of 
three pieces of 1 x 2-in. stuff, one conforming to the slope of the 
water table and long enough to extend beyond the front of the 2x6- 
in. front board, a second standing plumb and bearing against the 
1 X 10-in. face board, and the third forming a small corner brace 
between the two former to hold them in their proper relative posi- 
tions. The 1 X 10-in. face board, etc., was separated from the 2x12- 
In, back board by a 5-in. block at each end, and then braced by the 
knee frames every 3 or 4 ft. In this way it was possible to bring 
this 1 X 10-in. board into perfect line by moving the knee braces in 
or out, and when correct nailing them to the 2 x 6-in. front board. 
The 1 x 10-in. face board being in position and braced and lined, 
the curb material was thoroughly tamped in, and when ready was 
troweled and brushed on the top, a small round being worked onto 
the top front corner with the trowel. 

Expansion joints were provided for by building into the curb 
every 12 ft., a piece of %-in. boiler plate, which was afterward 
withdrawn and the joint filled with sand and faced over. As soon 
as the concrete had set sufficiently the face board was taken down 
and face of curb finished and brushed, the fillet between curb and 
water table being finished to 2% ins. radius. Circular curb and 
gutter of same construction was built at each corner, %-in. bass- 
wood being used for forms, instead of 2 x 1-in. lumber. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 13, 1907. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 455 

In addition to the actual construction of curb and gutter the cost 
given below includes the cleaning up of the street, spreading or re- 
moval of all surplus material from excavation, and the extension 
of all sidewalks out to the curbs at the corners. It was also neces- 
sary to maintain a watchman on this work, which duty, under ordi- 
nary circumstances, would be done by the general watchman. The 
total length built was 1,326 ft., of which 1,209 ft. is straight and 
117 ft. curved to a 12 -ft. radius. 

The rates of wages paid were $2 for horse and cart, $1.65 for 
watchman, and an average of $1.90 per day for labor, including 
foreman ; all for nine hours' work per day. The working force con- 
sisted of 1 foreman, 1 finisher, 1 handy man, 4 concrete men, and 
3 laborers, total 10 men. 

The labor cost of the work was as follows : 

Per lin. ft. 
Labor: Total. Cts. 

Excavation and setting boards $8.8.90 0.7 

Laying stone foundation 45.30 3.3 

Concreting 61.30 4.6 

Finishing 45.15 3.4 

Carting 9.85 0.76 

Watchman 25.00 1.89 

Clearing up 13.60 1.04 

Extras (sidewalk extensions) 17.23 1.31 



Total ?304.33 23.00 

The cost of materials for curb and foundation were as follows: 

Per lin. ft. 

Materials: Total. Cts. 

171.112 tons spalls $102.93 7.76 

42 tons 2-in. stone 41.16 3.09 

30.8 tons %-in. stone 42.57 3.21 

33,000 lbs. cement 161.70 12.19 

24 cu. yds. sand 19.20 1.45 



Total $367.56 27.70 

The cost of supplies and tools was as follows: 

Supplies, Etc.: Total. 

1,000 ft. B. M. 2 X 12 boards charged off ? 9.25 

500 ft. B. M. 2x6 boards charged off 4.12 

1,000 ft. B. M. 1 X 10 boards charged off 14.25 

%-in. basswood 4.30 

% keg 3-in. nails 1.42 

% keg 4-in. nails 1.43 

Pickets 3.25 

Tools charged off 3.15 

Total $41.17 

This total, when divided by 1,326 lin. ft. of curb, gives the cost per 
lineal foot as about 3 cts. We can now summarize as follows : 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. P. C. of total. 

Labor $304.33 $0.23 43 

Material 367.56 .28 51 

Supplies 41.17 .03 6 



Total $713.06 $0.54 100 

As indicated above, on more extensive work the costs of carting. 
Watchman, cleaning up, and extras would be avoided. They cost 



456 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

on this work 5 cts. and the work could therefore be done for 49 cts. 
if no such charges were included. On such work also the charge for 
supplies would be lower per foot and on any future work the labor 
cost could be materially lowered, this curb having been somewhat 
of an experiment as to method of construction. It is thought that 
with no charges for carting, cleaning, watchman, and extras, and 
with the experience obtained, this curb could be built for about 46 
cts. The proportions adopted and the method of construction fol- 
lowed, produce a very strong, dense, homogeneous curb and gutter. 
Cost of Setting Stone Curbs. — After the trench has been dug 
and foundation prepared, a mason and a helper will set 225 lin. ft. 
of stone curb in 10 hrs. If the mason receives 35 cts. per hr., and 
his helper receives 20 cts. per hr., the placing of the curb costs 2i/^ 
cts. per lin. ft. This cost is based upon the work of laying several 
thousand feet of dressed Medina sandstone curb, 24 ins. deep, and 
does not Include any dressing of the stone. The men were not very 
efficient. 

Cost of Cutting and Setting Granite Curb, N. Y.* — The work 
was done by a contractor on a New York City street, and involved 
the dressing and setting of 1,560 lin. ft. of granite curb. Each curb 
cutter cut 28 1/^ lin. ft. of curb per day, and each curb setter set 184 
lin. ft. per day. The labor cost was as follows : 

Per lin. ft. 

0.0352 day curb cutter, at $4.00 $0,141 

0.0058 day curb setter, at $4.00 0.023 

0.0120 day curb setter's helper, at $2.00 0.024 

Total $0,188 

These men were very inefficient or poorly manage!. 
Cost of Resetting Curb, N. Y.f — On Broadway, between 110th 
and 119th street, 2,253 lin. ft. of stone curb was set in 1904. Of 
this only 500 ft. was new curb, the rest being old curb that was 
taken up, dressed and reset. The work was done by a contractor, 
whose men worked an 8-hr. day, and the actual costs were as fol- 
lows : 

Excavation: Rate per day. Per lin. ft. 

Foreman $3.75 $0,004 

Laborers 1.50 .020 

Total per lin. ft $0,024 

Concrete: Rate per day. Per lin. ft. 

Foreman $3.75 $0,004 

Laborers 1.50 -.026 

Total per lin. ft $0.03 

Setting and Dressing Curbs: Rate per day. Per lin. ft. 

Stonecutters $5.00 $0.12 

Curb setters 4.00 .022 

Curb setters' help 2.50 .025 

Total per lin. ft $0,167 



* Engineering-Contracting, June 20, 1906. 
'iEngineering-Contracting , May 16, 1906. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 457 

It should be noted that in the table the excavation under curb is 
for the taking up of the old curb and malting excavation for new 
curb. 

The concrete for the curb foundation required twenty-nine loads 
of stone costing $72, sixteen loads of sand at a total cost of $35, and 
160 bags of cement at a total cost of $64. The total cost of the ma- 
terial for the curb foundation amounted to $171. 

Recording Cost of Street Sprinkling — No record of the cost of 
street sprinkling is entirely satisfactory unless it shows : 

1. The average daily wage of team and driver on the sprinkling 
wagon. 

2. Number of miles of street of given width kept sprinkled each 
day by each sprinkling wagon. 

3. Number of gallons of water averaged per day per square yard 
of street, of given kind of pavement, during the sprinkling season 
(usually Apr. 1 to Oct. 31 in the North). 

4. Number of days that sprinkling was done during the year. 

5. Cost per sq. yd. for the year for (a) water and (b) team 
time sprinkling it. , 

Contracts have often been let on the basis of a given price per 
1,000 sq. yds. for sprinkling during the dry season. This form of 
contract is objectionable in that disputes are very apt to arise over 
the inspection of the work. What seems stifflcient sprinkling to the 
contractor may seem quite insufficient to the inspector. I am strong- 
ly in favor of doing all sprinkling by contract, but the contract 
should be based, not upon the number of square yards sxjrinkled a 
stated number of times daily for a stated number of days, but upon 
the number of gallons sprinkled from, a nozzle of specified hind. This 
involves metering the sources of water supply, which, however, is an 
expense of slight consequence. 

The cost of sprinkling depends primarily upon the amount of water 
loaded into the tank, hauled and spread upon the street ; hence the 
gallon is the proper unit of cost. Obviously, however, the kind of 
sprinkler or nozzle from which the water flows should be specified, 
so that too much water will not be put upon the street at one time 
and place. 

Such a contract is flexible as to the number of sprinklings — de- 
pending on the weather — and is exact as to its payment in pro- 
portion to work done. Nor can it fail to be far cheaper, in the long 
run, than any attempt to do the sprinkling by day labor forces work- 
ing for the city. 

Cost of Street Sprinkling, Washington, D. C* — About 40 miles 
of streets and roads in the District of Columbia are sprinkled each 
day upon which weather conditions were such as to render it neces- 
sary. The District owns its own sprinklers and teams and hires the 
drivers. In all 19 sprinklers are used, four on the heavily traveled 



* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 4, 1907. 



458 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

car- track paved streets, and 15 on macadam and dirt streets or 
roads. 

Each sprinkler is required to cover two miles of territory from 8 a. 
m. to 5 p. m., at least three times each day. The sprinklers are 
2 -horse wagons, and have a capacity of 450 gallons each. On the 
average, it is necessary to fill the tanks about every 3% squares, 
or a distance in one direction of 1,750 ft. 

The dimension of the spray nozzle on the inside is 4% ins. in di- 
ameter, and the holes through which the water flows vary from 2/32 
ins. to 4/32 ins. and cover a diameter of 2% ins. 

The water is supplied free of charge, and drivers are paid $1.75 
per day, in addition to which it is estimated that the cost of main- 
taining the 2 horses, repairs, etc., is about $1.25 per day, or a total 
of $3.00 for each day per wagon for each day upon which work 
is performed. 

The cost of the sprinkling for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1907, was as follows: 

Drivers $ 4,621.27 

Forage, pro rata 4,863.77 

Horseshoes and nails, pro rata 218.55 

Incidental expenses, pro rata 419.13 

Miscellaneous expenses, pro rata 830.46 

Wages of extra laborers 1,289.13 

Total, 40 miles, at $306 $12,242.31 

The total number of days worked was 195. 

The cost of maintaining and operating each sprinkler for the 
fiscal year was about $644, or $3.30 per sprinkler per day worked. 
Since each sprinkler covered 2 miles of street, or about 37,500 sq. 
yds. daily, the total cost of sprinkling (exclusive of the cost of the 
water) was $644 -=- 87,500 sq. yds. = 1.72 cts. per sq. yd. per season 
(of 195 days), for sprinkling three times daily. 

Cost of Sprinkling Streets and Roads. — Mr. J. J. R. Croes says 
that to keep down the dust in Central Park, N. T., from April 1 to 
Oct. 31 (7 mos. ), about 100 cu. ft. (750 gals.) of water were used 
daily per 1,000 sq. yds. of macadam, the greatest amount on any 
one day being 157 cu. ft. per 1,000 sq. yds. Carts holding 41 cu. ft. 
of water were used. From the above it appears that about 160 gals, 
of water were used per sq. yd. of macadam during the 7 mos. 

Mr. E. P. North states that to keep down the dust on an earth 
road, water applied twice daily, there were 143 cu. ft. (1,070 gals.) 
of water used daily per 1,000 sq. yds. A sprinkling cart holding 60 
cu. ft. covered 850 sq. yds., or about % gal. per sq. yd. 

Mr. E. W. Howe gives the cost of sprinkling park (macadam) 
roads. The road was sprinkled 10 times daily to keep the dust 
down, a sprinkler with fine holes being used. 

Per mile 
per year. 

1,170,000 gals, water, at 16 cts. per 1,000 gals $187 

Teams 533 

Total .• $720 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 459 

Unfortunately the width of these park roads is not given, so tliat 
it is impossible to arrive at the amount of water or cost per sq. yd. 

Amount of Water for Sprinkling Streets, Indianapolis and 
Minneapolis. — Mr. F. A. W. Davis gives the following. In Indian- 
apolis, during the year of 1892, from Apr. 1 to Oct. 31 (7 mos.), 
14,900,000 sq. ft. of streets were sprinkled, using 7.1 gals, per sq. ft., 
or 64 gals, per sq. yd., for the season. The water was metered and 
paid for at 8 cts. per 1,000 gals, (or $80 per 1,000,000 gals.). Hence 
the water cost $0,005, or % ct. per sq. yd., or about % mill per sq. 
ft. The sprinkling was done by contract, the prices ranging from 
$38 to $48 per 10,000 sq. ft, which is equivalent to 3.4 ct. to 4.3 
ct. per sq. yd., for the season. The streets were sprinkled 3 to 4 
times daily. Hence these contract pric^es were high. 

During 1893 there were 8 gals, used per sq. ft., or 72 gals, per 
sq. yd. 

It is stated that in Minneapolis, during 1893, each team on a 
sprinkling cart averaged 7,100 lin. ft. of street sprinkled per day, 
which is nearly 1.4 miles of street, there being 1.50 carts employed in 
sprinkling 207 miles of street. During two of the driest months of 
summer, 10,000,000 gals, were used per day, which is nearly 50,000 
gals, per mile per day. The width of streets is not stated, but if 
they averaged 32 ft., there were 2.67 gals, of water per sq. yd. per 
day, during the two driest months. 

Sprinkling Car Tracks. — The cost of sprinkling the street car 
tracks of the Detroit United Railway of Detroit, Mich., amounts to 
$4,123 per season; the company has eight sprinkling cars in opera- 
tion, the cost for each car per year thus being $511. Two of the 
cars have tanks of a capacity of 3,670 gallons each, and six cars 
have a tank capacity of 3,702 gallons each. A car having a tank 
capacity of 3,702 gallons sprinkles at one filling 3.3 miles of track 
to a width of 8 ft. The rate per hour is 10% miles. 

Recording Cost of Street Sweeping. — ^Very rarely does an annual 
report on municipal street sweeping contain the data in form that 
admits of comparison with other cities. Sweeping cost data should 
be so compiled as to show the following : 

1. The organization of the workmen, the numbers in each class, 
and their respective daily wages. 

2. The average daily wage. 

3. The number of days worked by the average workman during 
the fiscal year. 

4. If possible, the average number of times all streets were 
swept during the year. 

5. The cost of this sweeping per sq. yd. of street per year. 

6. The cost per 1,000 sq. yds. for one sweeping. 

7. The number of loads and cu. yds. of sweepings removed. 

It is further desirable, where there are several different kinds of 
pavements, to give the unit costs of sweeping each class. 



460 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Where machines are used, their kind and number, as well as the 
methods of doing the work should be stated. 

A common cost of sweeping is about 20 cts. per 1,000 sq. yds. 
swept once. Hence if a street is swept 3 times a week, or 156 times 
a year, the cost is 3.12 cts. per sq. yd. per year for sweeping. 

It is commonly believed that street cleaning can not be well done 
by contract, due to the difficulty of specifying exactly what is 
wanted and of determining by inspection whether the contract is be- 
ing lived up to. This is undoubtedly true where the attempt is made 
to contract at a given price per sq. yd. of street per year. On the 
other hand, it has been demonstrated in Washington, D. C, and 
elsewhere, that much of the difficulty vanishes when a contract is 
made on the basis of 1,000 sq. yds. swept once. Then, if, say, 3 
sweepings a week does not give satisfactory cleanliness, the number 
of sweepings can be increased and paid for at the contract price of, 
say, 20 cts. per 1,000 sq. yds. swept once. 

Under such a contract, the contractor should be required to work 
his men in fairly large gangs, and under the general direction of the 
city's representative. Under the "patrol system" of sweeping, each 
street cleaner is assigned a certain length of street to keep clean. 
This is a fairly satisfactory metliod where work is done by day labor 
by the city ; but it is not an economic method, nor one to be gen- 
erally used. The German method of having men work in large 
gangs is far more economic. It possesses the very important advan- 
tage of enabling one to know exactly how many times each street 
has been actually swept over each week, and thus makes it possible 
to determine what it has cost per 1,000 sq. yds. for each sweeping. 
As this is the only unit of cost of sweeping that admits of a rational 
comparison of the cost in different cities, or of the cost in different 
sections of the same city, it is obviously of the utmost importance 
to adopt the "gang system" and abandon the "patrol system" of 
sweeping. 

Cost of Street Sweeping in 35 Cities. — In January, 1900, Mr. 
Andrew Rosewater, City Engineer of Omaha, Neb., collected the 
data shown in Table XIX. It will be noted that he secured the 
actual costs for the year 1898 ; and that the costs for 1899 were 
estimated, but probably close to actual. It is unfortunate that the 
data were not secured to show how many times the .average street 
was swept in each city, for then we could have determined what it 
cost per 1,000 sq. yds. swept once. 

Excluding New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and Pittsbui'g, the 
31 remaining cities have 3,670 miles of paved streets witli an area of 
71,439,091 sq. yds. Hence the average width of pavement is 33i4 
ft., which is equivalent to 3.7 sq. yds. per lin. ft. of street, or 19,500 
sq. yds. per mile. The estimated cost of cleaning these 31 cities in 
1899 was $2,305,895 (including Newark and Minneapolis on the basis 
of 1898). This is equivalent to 3.23 cts. per sq. yd. of pavement 
for the year, or $32.30 per 1,000 sq. yds. 

Assuming that the pavements of Chicago, Philadelphia and Pitts- 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 461 

burg also averaged 33i/4 ft. wide, the cost of cleaning the four large 
cities was : 

Per sq yd. 
Cts 

New York 18.6 

Chicago 2.8 

Philaaelphia 3.1 

Pittsburg 3.8 

The shameful record of New York is well seen by this contrast. 
There has been no improvement in New York since 1899. In fact 
the unit costs of cleaning have risen. In 1906 the boroughs of Man- 
hattan and the Bronx, had 635 miles of paved streets, 12,366,000 sq. 
yds. and a population of 2,516,502. The cost of street sweeping 
alone was $1,566,4 82, or 12.7 cts. per sq. yd. The cost of carting all 
the refuse, ashes, garbage, and street sweepings, was ?1, 211, 899. 
This material was carried away in scows and deposited in dumps at 
a cost of $775,249, making a total of nearly $2,000,000, of which 
at least 17% should be charged against the street sweepings, or 
$340,000, as that was their relative number of cart loads. This is 
equivalent to 2.8 cts. per sq. yd. of pavement. Administration ex- 
penses added 6%, or another 1.0 ct. per sq. yd., making a total of 
16.5 cts., without any allowance for interest and depr-eciation on the 
plant (horses, carts, etc.), or for rents and miscellanies, which were 
fully 2 cts. more per sq. yd. The city accounts are so kept that 
complete unit costs are almost impossible to secure from the annual 
reports. Political misrule is written all over these New York City 
cost records. 

Cost of Street Cleaning, Washington, D. C* — The street cleaning 
work of Washington covers an area of 7,686,936 sq. yds. Of this 
amount 1,745,452 sq. yds. of paved streets are cleaned by hand 
patrol work; 3,245,297 sq. yds. of paved streets are cleaned by 
machine sweeping; 1,734,400 sq. yds. are unpaved streets; and 
961,737 sq. yds. are public alleys, paved and unpaved. 

The hand "patrol work Is done by municipal forces, a summary of 
the work done by them during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1907, 
being as follows : 

Number of days worked 281 

Number of men employed IS') to 215 

Area cleaned, sq. yds 497,811,216 

Area cleaned, miles 22,330 

Debris removed, cu. yds 39,952 

Bags of paper removed 56,292 

From this it is evident that since 1,745,452 sq. yds. of street 
involved sweeping an area of 497,811,216 sq. yds., these streets must 
have been swept 285 times during the year, or not quite once every 
day. 

The cost of the work was as follows for each sweeping : 

Per 1,000 
Total. sq. yds. 

Labor -. $82,336.91 $0,165 

Materials, etc 8,338.14 .017 

Total $90,675.05 $0,182 

* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 27, 1907. 



462 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



H 
t "» 



»H :OOflQOOQQOOOpOOpppQ 



• lO irt M <^ o o .ooooo •'^oooo 
* t-* CM iH o tra lo .toia"^o 'Ooooo 

I C^ CO rt^ '^ CO CO |COCO CO ! ^ CO CO CO CO 

• lacOO^^LOLOt^lrt^Hl^-CO^lrtt-OUi 



O m <^ ' * W CO cq tH !>■ to . CD CO O t* O C^ O t* Irt !>. 

Orrt '^ • ^ ^- Ol CD O O cq • CO t> "* Tt< '^ lO O CD rt* lO 

rH {>j Ci * . '^ r4 LO "* CD Oi * i— I OO l> CD 00 OS -^ rH c4 05 

. t- ; • CD CO CO C^ T-H cq ; CO U5 iH (M i-i Cq CO rH U3 



H 

M 

O 

< 

M 



a 

M 

<! 

g 

Eh 



OS 



l-l 



73 

o.S 



■t-;o5 
dm 

S2 



• nocooooooiOth 

•C^lOOOOOOOC^Ot^ 

* o u3 urTo o lo "<^ c »c CO 



OOOOOCD 
OOOOOr-( 
OlOOOCOt- 



I 01 



rt 00 

tjoo 

<1^ 



C-Oi-HOOO-^tOOOi-IOCOi-lrHOC-OOOCq 
OOmiOMtOC-OOCqOIMiHOOOUSOCTlO'^ 
t>-O'*0005O05OO00OC<llO50Oe0OOOrH 
od"o LO o"cru:3"l>ro o"t^C^OO t-^r-ToO cq O TH"ir5 CO 
USC^*^C<JCOrHCOiOCOCvOC-OSCO'^(MlOCv3COC<IW 
NtOinNCOCOrH^T-ltHrH 



irt (0 m «000O(MC00SOO0002C0m(MOJOIMmO05M 

$ "jr m CTi ^ lo cq 00 c- M c- «3 rH o t- o en O 00 Tj< t- rH 00 

> J,^ M CO 00 Tf e<3 ■* CO rH N Cvl(M tH i-( iH 



.so, 
iS s ( 

^d < 

aj<H < 

O ( 



•OOlOOOrH(MO -tOOOOaCOCROOOCO 

• coioc^ioffqo ■t~oort<coiMooo>-( 

•-<:}< l>- 00 '^ CO O • O O 0> ?£) CO CD O <3 O -Tji 

I COOTHt-^CvTo" ■C0 0l0^''c0«0croo'"a<' 

.ooiffloo-*iMT)< _(Mtoiot-cnoooocom 

, t™ t— O^ CO -^ i35 . <:£> C^ iH u:5 1^ t- o o »^ ^ 



COtHOOCOCO-^ 



■<a<iHIMr-(rHiHTHCO 



, oooooooooooooooooooo 

J oooooooooooooooooooo 

^ — • oooooooooooooooooooo 

_0 orHooooooc-or-oomooinio ir5,o 

girl ii5inmcooooo-d<oooooiomiHOc-t-«ou5 

P U5 CO CO CO CO in -^Tjt CO 05(MC<1 CO eg cq CO rHrtrHiH 



a 






g^-g 



^^^ 



^:S 



>;2^ 



^OfeajMpqcqoPCMFJ^, 






o 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 



463 



UOqyuROOOOOOB'- 


JW 


-a 


•iS 








o 






d 


-J-> 






<o 


a> 


Oo .OOo -OOOlrt -o 


•o 


'o 


Q 


ou5 .oioo -ooint- -o 


•o 


<0 


-+J 


Mco ;coe<5T); ;c<iNeoe<i .'■* 


!co 




in a) 






•*-> 


D t- 


OoOOOusOOlOOOOO 


•U5 . 


o 


W-M 


ininininot-Loirat-iomom 


|t-; 


o 


o 


'-ir-JrH'HW^r^^i-ir-ii-iNr-i 


*»-! 


""2 









C^ (N U3 Tj* O M CD Tt* OO^^CCIO 



"9<li500e<5Tt<OOTt<000000 

c<iooooio-^ooooooooo-^ 

©•^OOOl-^iraOCOOOMOOrf 
&Nl0-*C-^T-r5D,-HO'o'"03<D05l0l0 
tH t^ CO CD C<1 tH U^ T^ (M M Oi 



OOCOt-CO •OrHO'*mOOOOffl> 

to^-co^q .010000000000 

■^t-lM33 •OiHOCOOOCOOOOi 

C500il>- * rH 00 iH O rH as 10 0^10 CO 

■^IM(M . iH «J< -"i* N C<5 t- 



(MOOOOOt}*0100 00>tHCOtH 
C?5 00 COO 100 -^O (Moot— cot- 
(rqOO'*OTfOU3>OOOOOIMlOt- 

CO CO o o"o c- o oi CO as o 10 t-h 00 1- 
OS at o coco CO uotH coo lot- 00000 
00 1- to T-i 10 irq CO -* CO c- 05 COCD^ 



000000000000000 
000000000000000 
000000000000000 






cd to 

TO 



.•^£ 









o 

to J 

s 



ft 



a; 
o 

-a 
c 

o 
c 






dp.- 

OflO) >> 



dx! 



m (1) 

o 

x; 

cop, 



53 •- tn 



.. OJ bo 

K c^ <^ S 

O (B ^ 

■2.5 "rt 

t-c (U in 
^ to C 

ni '^ » 

OrQ in 

'3 5 2 fe 

tao' 03 

*= c-y 2 

D* *^ 
3 oj bJ).G 

TO .- +-» 



o 

rQ d 



to to 
"be 

to C 

■« o 

aalJ 

-JJ ^ 
d >> 

pC r; 



<M t< r 

««- _ 2 

73X1 

to c d 

e§5 - 
« C++S 

d 5 

(0 4i 



!>>o 

"Ib.'S 



Xt (L) r- 



H fe OJ rj 

|ajHQ 

.« ■-■»-> 

+j t^ ft 

o tt> 

(Da o 

^d^< 
+jX; (u 



464 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The Item materials, etc., included the following : 

Bamboo, bass and blocks $1,268.47 

Bags 1,920.00 

Corn brooms 108.00 

Horse shoes and nails, pro rata 141.85 

Forage, pro rata 3,157.18 

Incidental expenses, pro rata 279.12 

Miscellaneous •. 1,415.52 

Rent of tool house 48.00 

Total $8,338.14 

The cost of hand cleaning per cubic yard of debris removed, ex- 
clusive of waste paper, was $2,269, as against $2,091 in 1906, the 
increase being due to the longer haul. 

The average width of the streets cleaned was 38 ft, and the cost 
per mile of cleaning was $4.06. A total area of 1,745,452 sq. yds. 
was gone over each day. The wage paid laborers was $1.50 per 
8-hr. day, and each laborer had an average street service area of 
between 9,000 and 10,000 sq. yds. 

The cost of this hand sweeping was 5.2 cts. per sq. yd. of pave- 
ment per year, which is just twice what the machine sweeping cost, 
due principally to the fact that the machine swept streets were 
only swept 115 times during the year. 

A total of 56,292 large sacks of paper was gathered in the hand 
cleaning district alone, an average of 200.3 sacks per working day. 
Only a small proportion of this amount was taken from the waste 
paper boxes placed at different points throughout the business dis- 
trict. In order to keep the streets and sidewalks within the hand 
cleaning territory free of paper during the daytime an average of 
two hours out of the eight was devoted by the laborers to picking it 
up. For this purpose the men were required to go over their 
respective sections four times per day — the first thing in the morn- 
ing, before lunch, after lunch, and toward the end of the working 
day. 

The machine sweeping of paved streets (3,245,297 sq. yds.) v/as 
done by contract, a summary of the work accomplished for the 
fiscal year 1907 being as follows: 

Number of days worked 241% 

Area cleaned, sq. yds 373, 02'^. 844 

Area cleaned, miles 16,733 

Debris removed, cu. yds - 86,814 ■ 

Contract price per 1,000 sq. yds. per 

sweeping $0.22% 

Cost per mile per sweeping $5.07 

The area covered by machine sweeping was as follows: 

Area, sq. yds 3,245,297 

Cost per sq. yd. per year 2.62 cts. 

Area, miles ■'•'^^"o 

Average width of paved street, ft 38 

Area cleaned per day, sq. yds 1,991,465 

Area cleaned 6 times per week, sq. yds 737,633 

Area cleaned 3 times per week, sq. yds 1,253,832 

Average number of times streets were swept. . 115 

A summary of the work of cleaning the unimproved streets 



ROADS. PAVEMENTS WALKS. 465 

(1,734,440 sq. yds.), consisting of rough cobblestone, maca'.aniizeJ, 

gravel and dirt roads and streets is as follows : 

Number of days worked 276 

Area cleaned, sq. yds 31,007,41!) 

Aroa cleaned, miles 1,652 

Debris removed, cu. yds 20,235 

Contract price per day for full force $73.80 

Cost per 1,000 sq. yds. per sweeping $0,586 

Cost per mile per sweeping $11 

Average number of times streets were swept 18 

The total area of unpaved streets was 1,734,44 sq. yds., the 
average width being 32 ft. A total area of 214,195 sq. yds. wa.s 
cleaned each day. 

The cleaning of public alleys (961,737 sq. yds. paved and un- 
paved) was done by contract, a summary of the work done being as 
follows : 

Number of days worked 250 

Area cleaned, sq. yds 44,131,505 

Area cleaned, miles 6,269 

Average width of alleys, ft 12 

Debris removed, cu. yds 12,286 

Contract price per 1,000 yds. per sweeping. . $0.40 

Cost per mile per sweeping $2,816 

Average number of times swept 46 

Cost of Sweeping Streets Washington, D. C. — Mr. Warner Stutler 
gives the following : 

During the year, July 1, 1901-02, 1,565,809 sq. yds. asphalt were 
swept daily by hand. There were 200 men, at $1.25, and 9 teams. 
The total area cleaned was 413,765,028 sq. yds., at a cost of 18.6 
cts. per 1,000 sq. yds. for each sweeping. 

The number of times swept during the year was 413,765,028 -^ 
1,565,809 = 264. Hence the cost per sq. yd. of pavement per year, 
for sweeping, was 4.9 cts. 

Then a "pick-up" sweeper ("The Peerless," made by Barron & 
Cole, of New York City) was adopted, with which a laborer could 
clean 33% more area daily than with hand brooms and do better 
work. 

Cost of Sweeping With a "Pickup" Sweeper.* — During the sum- 
mer of 1907 Mayor Geo. B. McClellan appointed Mr. H. de B. Par- 
sons, Dr. Rudolph Hering and Mr. Samuel Whinery a commission 
to repoi't on an improved and more effective system of street clean- 
ing and waste disposal than is now in operation in New York City. 
At the end of the year this commission made its report, which has 
since been printed by the city. 

The report covers nearly 250 pages, and has in It much Valuable 
information on street cleaning and waste disposal. The commission 
has made a study of many features of this kind of work, and 
has collected a large amount of data on the subject. 

The report discusses at some length the various methods used 



*Engineering-Contracthig , May 6, 1908. 



466 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in street cleaning, and gives an estimated cost for each method de- 
scribed, thus allowing a comparison of each with the other. The 
estimate on hand sweeping by the "patrol method" is as follows : 
Cost of one outfit : 

One hand cart $10.00 

Five cans for sweepings, at $2.50 12.50 

Four hand brooms, at 65 cts 2.60 

One shovel 0.75 

Two steel scrapers, at ?2 4.00 

Total $29.85 

Annual charges: 

Interest on outfit at 4% $ 1.19 

Repairs and depreciation at 60% 17.01 

Total annual charges $19.10 

Or for 310 days, per day $0,062 

Cost of operation per day, 1 man sweeping 2.190 

Total cost per day $2,252 

On the basis that one sweeper will clean satisfactorily 8,000 sq. 
yds. of pavement per day the cost per 1,000 sq. yds. will be 28.1 cts. 

In closing their remarks on hand sweeping the commissioners 
said: 

"A modified method of hand sweeping in use in a number of 
American and foreign cities consists in substituting for the ordinary 
push broom a small machine with a revolving broom. This machine 
is generally similar to the large machine sweeper, except that it is 
designed to pick up its own sweepings and deposit them in an 
attached receptacle, which is emptied when necessary. This small 
machine is pushed over the street by the street sweeper and does 
its work quite well when the street is dry. It is extensively used 
in Washington, where it is well liked. One objection is that on 
heavy traveled streets there is difficulty in working it among horses 
and vehicles. Upon the whole, this hand sweeping machine is not 
in general favor in American cities." 

It is to be very much regretted that this commission of eminent 
engineers did not make a thorough investigation of this sweeping 
machine and report their findings on it. This type of machine 
seems to us to solve some of the problems of street cleaning, and in 
this article we give some data that we have collected. We realize 
that their can be some objection to any method, but on good pave- 
ments these machines can effect a saving over the, patrol hand 
sweeping, and at the same time do much more efficient work. 

This style of machine has been used in Washington, D. C, since 
the summer of 1901, and, as the commission states, "it is well liked." 
The name of the machine used in Washington is the "Peerless," sold 
by Barron & Cole, of New York City. 

Prior to the installation of these machines in Washington a patrol 
sweeper swept daily 7,456 sq. yds., and with the pick-up machine 
the same man covered 9,145 sq. yds., an increased area of more than 
22 per cent. In order to compare this with the costs given above the 
same wages will be applied. Thus we have : 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 467 

Cost of one outfit: 

One Peerless hand sweeper $75.00 

Forty bags 4.00 

Four upright brooms at 35 cts 1.40 

One shovel 75 

One steel loosener 40 

Total $81.55 

Annual charges: 

Int. on outfit at 4% $ 3.26 

Four new brooms at $4 16.00 

Depreciation at 20% 16.31 

Total annual charges $35.57 

Or, for 310 days, per day $0,114 

One man , 2.190 

Total cost per day $2,304 

With the area of 9,145 sq. yds. swept per day this gives a cost per 
1,000 sq. yds. of 25.1 cts., or just 3 cts. less than the estimated cost 
of the patrol sweeping. 

The working day in Washington, like New York, is 8 hrs., but the 
machines are only operated 6 hrs. each day, as the men spend 2 hrs. 
each day in picking up paper. For this purpose the men are re- 
quired to go over their respective sections four times per day — 
the first thing in the morning, before lunch, after lunch, and towards 
the end of the working day. It would seem possible that this paper 
could be cared for in some other way. With ordinances properly 
enforced the greater part of it should be put into boxes on the side- 
Walks by the users of the street, thus preventing the paper from 
being scattered in the street. With the waste paper eliminated and 
the men employed on the machines operating them 8 hrs., the area 
covered per day would be between 11,000 and 12,000 sq. yds. at a 
cost of about 20 cts. per 1,000 sq. yds. The style of box for de- 
positing waste paper should be somewhat similar to the package 
mail boxes used by the government, as the self-closing lids prevent 
the paper from being blown out of the boxes by the wind. 

Burlap bags should likewise be used for collecting the street 
sweepings, instead of cans. The bags are cheaper and better adapted 
to the work. The dirt receptacle on a sweeper ordinarily holds the 
sweepings of about 800 sq. yds. When the dirt is dumped from the 
sweeper it can be shoveled into a bag, the bag being held open on 
hooks made for the purpose on the handle of the machine. The bag 
can be tied up and placed on the sidewalk for the pick-up wagon 
to carry away. With a bag it is not possible, either, for the wind 
or some boy to scatter the dirt as with an open top can. With the 
machine carrying a bag on the hooks on the handle paper can also 
be picked up by the operator as he passes a piece and placed in the 
bag. With bags a larger load, without chance of spilling any dirt, 
can be carried on the pick-up wagon or cart. 

Upright brooms are cheaper than push brooms, and can be used 
with this machine, as brooms are only .needed to sweep the dirt 
away from curbs or in taking up the sweepings after the machines 
have been emptied. 

The steel loosener has a long handle and is used to loosen any 



468 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

materials that have become stuck to the pavement, the length of the 
handle admitting of this being done without the operator leaving his 
position behind the machine. 

The machine uses up four brooms a year, and these have been 
charged in the annual expenses. The life of a machine is from 
8 to 10 years, hence a depreciation of 20 per cent per year is more 
than ample to allow, and this will also cover renewals, as we are 
Informed by the manufacturer that for about 200 machines used by 
the city of Washington the repair parts ordered during the past two 
years have not amounted to quite $200, or a yearly expense of less 
than 50 cts. for each machine. 

The great problem in street cleaning is the removing of the finer 
particles and the dust. The commission, in its report, dwells at some 
length on this. The coarser particles, they state, are easily cleaned 
up, but even when a street has been swept there still remains the 
dust, which is a "serious menace to health and a destructive and dis- 
comforting element of city life." The hand pick-up sweeper does not 
take up all of this dust, but it does take up the greater part of it, 
as is evident v/hen one walks along Pennsylvania Ave. in Wash- 
ington on a windy day, for it is possible to keep one's eyes open 
without having them filled with dust. In New York a puff of wind 
means a cloud of dust. On this point the superintendent of the 
street cleaning department of Washington, in his report dated 
June 30, 1902, in commenting on the work of these machines, said: 

"The daily area cleaned, therefore, was not only enlarged and the 
expenses reduced, but the streets were kept cleaner than ever 
before." 

Estimated Cost of Machine Sweeping. — In the Parsons-Hering- 
Whinery report, above mentioned, the cost of sweeping with horse- 
drawn machines (having revolving brooms) is estimated as follows: 
Cost of one outfit: 

1 sweeping machine ? 275.00 

J/o of 1 one-horse sprinkling cart 104.00 

12 hand brooms at $0.65 7.80 

6 shovels at $0.75 4.50 

2 horses for sweeper 600.00 

1/2 horse for 1/2 sprinkler 150.00 

21/2 sets of harness at $25 62.50 

Total outfit $1,203.80 

Annual plant charges: 

Interest on $1,203.80 at 4% $ 48.15 

Repairs and depreciation on tools, at 20%.... 90.76 
Depreciation on horses, at 15% 112.50 

Total, 310 days at $0.81 $ 251.41 

Operating expenses: Per day. 

Maintenance of 2% horses at $1.35 $ 3.38 

Rent, storage of sweeper 0.20 

Wages, 1 sweeper driver 2.19 

Wages, % sprinkler driver 1-09 

Wages, 6 gutter sweepers, at $2.19 ■'■^4? 

Plant charges 0.81 

15,000 gals, water at $90 per million 1.35 

Total, 70,000 sq. yds. at 31.7 cts. per 1,000 

sq. yds ? 22.16 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 469 

This is estimated for an 8-hr. day in New York City, and for 
an asphalt pavement. It does not include loading the swaepinga 
into carts and carting away. 

Estimated Cost of Flushing Streets. — In the Parsons-Hering- 
Whincry report, above mentioned, the cost of flushing New York 
streets with a horse and with a machine are estimated as follows : 

Using a 2^^-in. fire hose with a li/4-in. nozzle, under a pressure 
of 40 lbs. per sq. in., 235 gals, per min. are discharged, and 4,000 
to 10,000 sq. yds. are washed per hour. Assuming an average of 
6,000 sq. yds. per hr., and that the water jet is operating 80% of the 
time, there would be 1.88 gals, used per sq. yd. 
The cost of one outfit is: 
100 ft. of 2M!-in. hose at $1.10 $110.00 

1 fire nozzle 12.50 

6 brooms 3.90 

$126.40 
Annual plant charges: 

Interest on $126.40 at 4% $ 5.06 

Repairs smd depreciation 150% 189.60 

Total, 310 days at $0.63 $194.66 

Operating expense: Per day. 

3 men at $2.19 $ 6.57 

90,000 gals, water at $90 per million 8.10 

Plant charges 0.63 

Total, 48,000 sq. yds. at 31.9 cts. per M $15.30 

It was estimated that as rapid and as thorough work could prob- 
ably be secured with a 1-in. special nozzle (on a 2-in. hose), throw- 
ing a fan-shaped jet, and with 30 lbs. per sq. in. pressure. Under 
such conditions, the cost of flushing was estimated thus : 

Per day. 

2 men at $2.19 $ 4.38 

57,600 gals, of water at $90 per million 5.18 

Plant charges 0.48 

Total, 40,000 sq. yds. at 25.1 cts. per M $10.04 

Street flushing with special wagons was estimated as follows. 
The wagon has a tank with two airtight compartments, one holding 
water (600 gals.) and the other holding compressed air, the two 
being connected above the water line. When the water tank is filled 
with a hose, air is compressed in the air compartment. In flushing 
the water is forced out at a pressure of about 35 lbs. per sq. in. 
through a special nozzle. 

Cost of one outfit: 

One flushing wagon $1,000.00 

6 hand brooms at $0.65 3.90 

3 shovels at $0.75 ■ 2.25 

2 horses at $300 600.00 

2 sets harness at $25 50.00 

Total $1,656.15 

Annual plant charges: 

Interest on $1,656.15 at 4% $ 66.25 

Repairs and depreciation on tools at 14% 147.86 

Depreciation on horses at 15% 90.00 

Total, 310 days at $0.98 $ 304.11 



470 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Operating expenses: Per day. 

1 driver $ 2.19 

% day helper 1.09 

Maintenance 2 horses at $1.35 2.70 

4 men collecting dirt in gutters at $2.00 8.00 

Rent, storage of plant 0.20 

Plant charges 0.98 

56,000 gals, water at $90 per million 5.04 

Total 28,000 sq. yds. at 72.1 cts. per M...? 20.20 

Cost of Street Sweeping, Minneapolis.* — The asphalt pavement of 
the city of Minneapolis, Minn., is swept by hand, using the Ross 
scraper according to the block system. Bach man has from two to 
five blocks to keep clean. The sweepings are deposited in galvanized 
iron cans placed at street corners, from which they are removed by 
teams. The asphalt pavement is also swept by machine at night, 
and flushed whenever necessary. 

The wages paid per day are as follows: Teams, $4; men, $1.50 
to $2. 

According to the annual report of the city engineer, the cost of 
hand sweeping for 1906, 21 men being employed, was ?16,049, or 8.69 
cts. per sq. yd. per year. 

The cost of cleaning, machine sweeping and washing was $9,276, 
or 5.02 cts. per sq. yd. per year. 

A total of 11.65 miles of 27-ft. roadway cost per mile per year for 
cleaning, $796; for sweeping, $1,378, or a total of $2,174. 

In all 184,528 sq. yds. of asphalt pavement were cleaned and 
swept. 

The cost of cleaning and sweeping the other paved (not asphalt) 
streets was $43,014, or 3.33 cts. per sq. yd. This cost is for a 
yardage of 1,290,930 sq. yds., and does not include macadam and 
asphalt pavement. The cost of cleaning was 1.47 cts. per sq. yd., 
and the cost of sweeping was 1.86 cts. per sq. yd. 

During 1899 there were 200,000 sq. yds. of asphalt pavement 
cleaned by hand by the block system. The sweepings were put into 
cans, from which they were collected by teams. The gang was 31 
men at $1.75 and 5 teams at $3.50. The cost was: 

Per sq. yd. 
Per year. 
• Cts. 

Machine sweeping and washing 1.45 

Hand sweeping 5,74 

Total 7.19 

Cost of Street Sweeping, Wililamsport, Pa.f — Mr. James P. 
Fisher, City Engineer of "Wililamsport, Pa., in his report for 1907, 
gives the cost of sweeping the streets by machines. 

The work is done by emploj'es of city engineer's department, the 
force used and the wages paid being as follows : 



^Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 29, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908. 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS WALKS. 471 

One team on sprinkler $ 4.50 

One team on sweeper 4.50 

Two one horse pick up wagons 5.50 

Four men 10 hrs. at $1.65 6.60 

Total for one day $21.10 

Int. and depreciation of outfit 1.00 

$22.10 

The one dollar added covers interest at 6% per annum and de- 
preciation of the plant at 20% per year, divided by 200 working 
days, which is the length of the season in "Williamsport. 

Each day this force sweeps parts of seven streets aggregating 
62,000 sq. yds. This gives a cost per 1,000 sq. yds. for cleaning by 
machine sweeping of 35.6 cts. The city has 206,875 sq. yds. of im- 
proved pavements, which would cost $73.65 to clean daily, or $14,730 
for a season of 200 working days, which is equivalent to 7.1 cts. per 
sq. yd. per year. This enormously high cost shows the usual low 
efficiency of men working by the day for a city. 

Cost of Sweeping, Rochester, N. Y. — Mr. Edwin A. Fisher gives 
the following cost of sweeping for Rochester, N. Y., in 1901 : 

No. times Per sq. yd. 
swept. for year. 

Asphalt streets 99 3.71 cts. 

Brick 60 2.69 cts. 

Medina stone block 101 5.27 cts. 

It will be noted that, at this rate, each sweeping cost : 

Per 1,000 sq. yds. 

Asphalt streets 37 cts. 

Brick 47 cts. 

Medina stone block 52 cts. 

These high costs show poor efficiency of workmen. 
These streets were sprinkled at a cost of 2.21 cts. per sq. yd., or 
$350 per mile, during the year. 

Cost of Street Sweeping, Albany, N. Y.* — The street cleaning of 
Albany, N. Y., is effected by three methods : Machine sweeping 
of improved streets ; hand cleaning of cobblestone streets and alleys 
and hand cleaning in the business district. All of the work is done 
by city forces, and the city owns the sweeping machines and street 
sprinklers and hiring necessary teams and drivers. 

In the principal business districts the asphalt pavements (173,000 
sq. yds.) are kept cleaned and waste paper picked up. The follow- 
ing regular gang is employed for this work, the wages being $1.75 
per day : 

2 men cleaning granite cross-walks ; $ 3.50 

3 men cleaning asphalt 5.25 

2 men picking up waste paper 3.50 

Total daily expense $12.25 

This is equivalent to an annual expense of $4,100, or nearly 2.4 
cts.- per sq. yd., not including the additional cost of sweeping streets 
with machines. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 4, 1907. 



472 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cobblestone pavements, of which there is a total area of 
229,229 sq. yds., are cleaned by hand hoes or broom, at the follow- 
ing daily expense : 

1 foreman, at ?2.35 $ 2.35 

10 men, at $1.75 17.50 

1 horse and driver for sprinkler, at $3.50 3.50 

Total $24.35 

The pavements are cleaned for a period of eight months at a total 
cost of about $4,800, or 2.1 cts. per sq. yd. per year. 

The principal part of the street cleaning work is effected by 
machine sweeping, the areas and kinds of pavement covered being 
as follows : 

Sq. yds. 

Granite block pavements 560,623 

Vitrified brick pavement ; . . . . 458,733 

Sheet asphalt 173,094 

Asphalt block 14,500 

Total 1,206,950 

This area is swept twice a week during eight months of the year, 
or from about April 1 to December 1. The force engaged in 
machine sweeping consists of four gangs, each under a foreman, and 
made up of 1 street sprinkler, 2 machine sweepers and 12 men. 
Each gang has its regular district to cover day or night as the 
case may be. 

The sweeping is done in the usual manner, the pavements first 
being lightly sprinkled with water to lay the dust and then swept 
with the machines, the dirt being pushed by the latter from the 
center of the street to each of the gutters. The men then sweep the 
dirt into piles along the gutters at intervals of about 25 ft. Ma- 
chine cleaning in the business district is done only at night. 

The daily labor cost of sweeping and collecting the dirt in piles is 
as follows : 

8 teams and drivers for S sweeping machines, at $5 $ 40.00 

4 teams and drivers for 4 sprinklers at $5 20.00 

4 foremen, at $2.35 9.40 

48 men, at $1.75 84.00 

Total daily labor cost $153.40 

The above force is employed about eight months, the total yearly 
expense for labor being about $32,000. The cost of repairs to sweep- 
ing machines and sprinklers, cost of new brooms and refitting old 
brooms and other incidentals amounts to about §4,000 per year, 
making a total cost of sweeping the dirt into piles amount to about 
$36,000. As the total amount of pavement swept over each amounts 
to about 85,000,000 sq. yds., the cost of sweeping the dirt into piles 
is about 42 cts. per 1,000 sq. yds. for each sweeping. This does not 
include the cost of shoveling the dirt from the piles into wagons 
and conveying it to dumps or other places where it is used for filling. 
This work is done by contract, the price for 1907 being $11,500. 

There are 8 public dumps, which receive street dirt, ashes, etc., 



ROADS, PAVEMENTS, WALKS. 473 

and are cared for by 9 men at an expense of $15.75 per day, or about 
$6,000 per year. 

Since the 1,206,950 sq. yds. involve 85,000,000 sq. yds. of sweeping 
yearly, each street is swept about 70 times during the year. 

Summing up we have the following cost of sweeping 1,206,950 sq. 
yds., not including the 229,229 sq. yds. of cobblestone pavement: 

Per sq. yd. 
per year 
Per year. Cts. 

Laborers cleaning business streets $ 4,100 0.34 

Gangs with street sweeping machines 32,000 2.65 

Repairs to sweeping machines, etc ^ 4,000 0.33 

Loading and hauling dirt to dumps (by contract) 11,500 0.95 

Spreading dirt and ashes at dumps 5,000 0.42 

Total $56,600 4.69 

It should be remembered that the first item, "laborers cleaning 
business streets," costs 2.4 cts. per sq. yd. of business street cleaned, 
which becomes 0.34 ct. per sq. yd. of entire area of city streets. 

Since the 8 machine sweepers sweep 85,000,000 sq. yds. in the 
working season (8 mos. ), each machine covers 10,600,000 sq. yds. in 
the 210 working days, or 50,000 sq. yds. per day, at a cost of 38.4 cts. 
per 1,000 sq. yds. swept once. This is for labor alone, and, as will 
be seen from the tabulation of wages above given, more than 50% of 
this cost is for the wages of the laborers who sweep the dirt into 
piles in the gutters ready to haul away, there being 6 such men 
to each machine sweeper. This is an exceedingly high cost, but it 
does not include the excessive cost of repairs, etc., which is $500 
per year for each machine sweeper (plus half a sprinkler), etc., 
or nearly $2.50 per working day, thus adding nearly 5 cts. per 1,000 
sq. yds. swept. 

Summing up we have the following total cost for sweeping 1,000 
sq. yds. each time : 

Per 1,000 sq. yds. 
Cts. 

Gang with street sweeper 36.4 

Repairs to sweeper, etc 4.7 

Loading and hauling dirt (by contract) 13.6 

Spreading din. and ashes 6.0 

Total 60.7 

All of the last item is not properly chargeable to sweeping, since 
it involves spreading ashes also. 

In excuse for these exceedingly high costs it has been said that 
a large part of the pavement is granite blocks and that the Albany 
streets are in many cases very steep, or hilly. This excuse is in- 
adequate, for not half the streets are granite, and far less than half 
are steep. The true excuse is the general inefficiency of men work- 
ing by the day for any municipality. 

Cost of Street Flushing and Sweeping, St. Louis, Mo.* — The 
street cleaning of St. Louis is done by the day labor plan, six day 



* Engineering-Contracting J Jan. 15, 1908. 



474 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

gangs and four night gangs being employed in the work. A gang 
comprises the following: 

5 flushing machines at $6.00 $30.00 

4 dirt wagons at $4-50 18.00 

6 laborers at $1.50 9.00 

1 inspector at $3.00 3.00 

Total $60.00 

J'rom 20 to 35 gals, of water are used for each square (100 sq. ft.) 
of flushing, or 2 to 3 gals, per sq. yd. The average cost to the city 
per great square (10,000 sq. ft.) for one flushing of the pavements 
in the business and residence districts is $1.10, or $1 per 1,000 sq. 
yds. This estimate is based upon the number of squares flushed per 
month, without regard to the paving material, or where the streets 
cleaned are located. It is possible to flush an asphalt pavement 
in the residential district for $0.75 per great square, or $0.70 per 
1,000 sq. yds. ; while the granite block pavements in the bushiess 
district, where the delays are caused by traffic, may cost, $1.35 per 
great square, or $1.22 per 1,000 sq. yds. 

The average cost for machine broom sweeping is about $0.50 per 
great square, or $0.45 per 1,000 sq. yds., these machines being used 
on the brick pavements except where the streets are very dirty. 

The block patrol system of cleaning is also employed. In this, one 
man is given about flve city blocks to clean, the average length of 
block being 300 ft. With wages at $1.50 and the width of road- 
way assumed at 36 ft., 514 great squares are cleaned each day at a 
cost of $0.28 per great square, or $0.25 per 1,000 sq. yds. The sys- 
tem of street sprinkling aids very much the cleaning of streets by 
the block system, as all of the paved streets are sprinkled from one 
to four times per day, the cost thereof being charged as a special 
tax against the property fronting the street sprinkled, the average 
rate for the year amounting to about $0.04 per front foot. 
The total mileage of hard pavements is as follows : 

Miles. 

Asphalt 45.42 

Bituminous macadam 24.46 

Vitrified brick 96.19 

Granite blocks 63.48 

Wood blocks 2.50 

Total ..232.05 

In addition, 134 miles of improved alleys are cleaned from the ap- 
propriation for street cleaning. 

It will be noted that all these costs are exceedingly high. 
Life of Sweeping Machines. — In Berlin the life of horse-drawn 
sweeping machines (rotary brooms) has been about 20 years. A 
rotary broom lasts only 21 days when used every night; a machine 
requires 17 brooms yearly, and works 7 hrs. daily. 



SECTION V. 
STONE MASONRY. 

Definitions. — Consult Section VI, on Concrete, for definitions not 
found in tliis section. 

Abutment. — The foundation or substructure of a bridge. Abut- 
ments are built on the banks of a stream ; piers are built in the 
stream itself. 

Apron. — A covering over the earth or rock below the spillway 
of a dam. 

Arch Culvert. — A culvert with an arched roof. 

Arch Masonry. — That portion of the masonry in the arch ring 
only, or between the intrados and the extrados. 

Ashlar. — First-class squared stone masonry dressed so that its 
joints do not much exceed i/^-in. in thickness. 

Axed. — Dressed so as to cover the surface of a stone with chisel 
marks which are nearly or quite parallel. 

Back. — The rear face of a wall. 

Backing. — The rough backing masonry of a wall faced with a 
higher class of masonry. The earth deposited back of a wall or arch 
is sometimes miscalled backing instead of backfilling or lining. 

Barrel. — The under surface of an arch. See Soffit. 

Bat. — A part of a brick or stone. 

Batter. — The backward slope of the face of a wall. A 1-in. batter 
means that the face of the wall departs from a plumb line at the 
rate of 1 in. in every foot of rise. 

Beds. — Or bed joints, the horizontal joints of masonry. See 
also "Natural bed." 

Belt Course. — A projecting course of masonry immediately under 
the coping ; a belt course is often called a corbel course. Its object 
is to give a better appearance to a wall. 

Bench Wall. — The wall or abutment supporting an arch. 

Blind Header. — A header that extends only a short distance back 
into a wall instead of extending to the full depth specified ; blind 
headers are also called "bob-tails." 

Block Rubble. — Large blocks of building stone as they come from 
the quarry. See Rubble. 

Bond. — The arrangement of stones so as to overlap or "break 
joints." 

Box Culvert. — A culvert having a waterway of rectangular cross- 
section. 

475 



476 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Breast Wall. — A wall built against the face of an excavation to 
prevent its caving down ; also called a face wall. 

Bridge Seat. — See Pedestal. 

Broken Range Masonry. — Masonry in which the bed joints are 
parallel buc not continuous. 

Build. — A vertical joint. 

Bulkhead. — A head wall at the end of a culvert, and perpen- 
dicular to the axis of the culvert. See Head Wall. 

Bush Hammer. — To dress stone with a hammer having a number 
of pyramidal cutting teeth on its striking face. 

Buttress. — A vertical piece of masonry projecting from the face 
of a retaining wall to strengthen it. 

Centers. — The temporary structure that supports an arch during 
its construction. (Also called Centering.) 

Chisel Draft. — A narrow plane surface cut with a pitching chisel 
along the outer edges of the face of an ashlar stone, usually cut the 
width of the chisel. 

Classes. — Different kinds of masonry specified, usually, first, sec- 
ond and third class ; the first class being the most expensive. 
What is "firsc class" according to one engineer may be "second 
class" according to another. 

Closer. — A narrow stone used to finish a course of masonry. 

Coping. — The top course of stones on a wall, usually made of 
large flat stones which are laid so as to project a few inches over 
the face of the wall. A projecting coping relieves the wall of a 
"bobtailed" appearance. 

Course. — A horizontal layer or tier of stones. "Coursed masonry" 
is built up in courses. 

Course Bed. — Stone, brick or other building material in position, 
upon which other material is to be laid. 

Cover-Stones. — The flat stones forming the roof of a box culvert. 

Cramp. — A bar of metal having the two ends bent at right angles 
to the bar for insertion into holes drilled in adjoining blocks of 
stone. 

Crandall. — A stone dressing hammer, consisting of a steel bar with 
a slot in one end holding 10 double-headed points of steel (%-in. 
square x 9 ins. long), producing an effect like fine pointing. 

Crown. — The top of an arch at its highest point. 

Cull. — A rejected stone or brick. 

Culvert. — A waterway under a road, canal or railroad embank- 
ment. 

Cut-Stone. — A stone that is carefully "dressed" or shaped with 
tools. 

Cut-Water. — The upper wedge-shaped end of a bridge pier. 

Cyclopean Masonry.- — Masonry made of huge stones, usually bed- 
ded in concrete. 

Damp-Course. — A waterproofed course or bed joint in a wall, usu- 
ally just above the surface of the ground ; its purpose being to pre- 
vent the rise of water in the pores of the stone and mortar due to 
capillary action. 



STONE MASONRY. 477 

Depth. — The width of a stone measured perpendicularly to the 
face of the wall ; the distance that a face stone extends into the 
wall. 

Dimension Stone. — Stone dressed to exactly specified dimensions. 

Dirt Wall.— See "Mud Wall." 

Dog Holes. — Shallow holes drilled in a stone to afford a bite for 
the "dogs," or hooks, used in lifting the stone with a derrick. 

Dowel. — A short steel pin inserted part way into the adjoining 
faces of two blocks of stone. 

Draft Line. — See "Chisel Draft." 

Drafted Stones. — Stones on which the face is surrounded by a 
draft, the space inside the draft being left rough. 

Dress. — To cut or shape a stone with tools. 

Drove. — Dressed on the face so as to have a series of small paral- 
lel ridges and valleys. 

Dry Wall. — A stone wall built without mortar. 

Efflorescence. — A white crust tliat often forms on the face of ma- 
sonry, due to the leaching of soluble salts out of the mortar ; often 
called "whitewash." 

Expansion Joint. — A vertical joint or space to allow for tempera- 
ture changes. 

Extrados. — TRe curve that bounds the outer extremities of the 
joints between the arch stones, or voussoirs. 

Face. — The front surface of a wall. 

Face Stones. — The stones forming the front of a wall. 

Face Wall. — See "Breast Wall." 

Fine Pointed. — Dressed by fine point to smoother finish than by 
rough point. 

Flush. — (Adj.) Having the surface even or level with an adjacent 
surTace. (Verb.) (1) To fill. (2) To bring to a level. (3) To 
force water to the surface of mortar or concrete by compacting or 
ramming. 

Footing Courses. — The bottom or foundation courses, which usu- 
ally project beyond the "neat work" of an abutment. 

Foundation. — (1) That portion of a structure, usually below the 
surface of the ground, which distributes the pressure upon its sup- 
port. (2) Also applied to the natural support itself; rock, clay, etc. 

Foundation Bed. — The surface on which a structure rests. 

Frost Batter. — A batter occasionally given to the rear of a wall 
near its top to prevent the dislocation of the top course of stones 
upon the formation of frost in the ground. 

Full-Centered. — An arch that is a full semi-circle, or half circle. 

Groin. — The curved intersection of two arches meeting at an 
angle. 

Grout. — A thin waterj' mortar which is poured into the joints 
after the stones have been laid. 

Haunch. — The part of an arch between the crown and the skew- 
back. 

Header. — A stone laid with its longest dimension perpendicular to 
the face of the wall. 



478 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Head Wall. — An end wall, or bulkhead, of a culvert. 

Hollow Quoin. — The vertical semi-circular groove in the masonry 
into which nts the "quoin post," or hinge post, of a canal lock 
gate. 

Intrados. — The inner circle of an arch. 

Joint. — The space between adjacent stones ; sometimes the word 
joint is used to denote the vertical joints only, in distinction from 
the "beds" or bed joints. Joints are usually filled with mortar. 

Keystone — The center stone at the crown of an arch. 

Lagging. — The sheeting plank placed upon the ribs of arch centers. 

Length. — The longest dimension of a stone. 

Leveler. — A small rectangular stone, not less than 4 to 6 ins. thick, 
used in broken range work to complete the bed for a stone in the 
course above and give it proper bond. Sometimes called jumper or 
dutchman. 

Lewis Hole. — A wedge-shaped hole in a biock of stone, made for 
the purpose of lifting the block by the aid of a lewis. 

Lining. — The gravel or broken stone filling back of a slope wall 
or retaining wall, for the purpose of drainage and to protect the 
earth from wash. 

Lock. — Any soecial device or method of construction used to 
secure a bond in the work. 

Mortar. — A mixture of sand with cement (or lime) and water. 
A 1 : 2 (one to two) mortar contains 1 part cement and 2 parts sand. 

Mud-Wall. — A small parapet or retaining wall built on top of a 
bridge abutment to prevent the earth backfill from sliding or wash- 
ing down upon the coping. 

Natural Bed. — A laminated or stratified stone is laid in Its "nat- 
ural bed," or "quarry bed," when its laminations are horizontal or 
are perpendicular to the load that they carry. Granite has no 
"natural bed." 

Neat Mortar. — Mortar made without sand. 

Neat Work. — That part of an abutment above the footing courses, 
which is generally equivalent to saying, that part above the sur- 
face of the ground or water. 

Nigged. — Hewed with a pick. 

Niggerheads. — Rounded cobble stones. 

Parapet. — The "mud-wall" of a bridge abutment ; the "bulkhead" 
of a culvert ; the spandrel wall at each end of an arch bridge or 
culvert, but more properly the extension of the spandrel Wall above 
the crown of the arch ; a low guard wall rising above the surface 
of a roadway or walk to prevent pedestrians or vehicles from leav- 
ing the roadway or walk. 

Patent Hammer. — A double-faced hammer so formed as to hold 
at each face a set of wide thin chisels for giving a finish to a stone 
eurface. 

Paving. — Regularly placed stone or brick forming a floor. 

Pedestals. — Or pedestal blocks, are stone blocks on top of an 
abutment coping ; the pedestal blocks receive the weight of the 
bridge, and are often called "bridge seats" ; the term pedestal is 



STONE MASONRY. 479 

also applied to a small masonry pier upon which the post or sill of 
a trestle rests. 

Perch. — 16 Va cu. ft. In most parts of the United States: in some 
places 22 cu. ft. ; and rarely 24%, which was the old-fashioned 
perch. 

Pier. — A masonry structure built to support a bridge, between 
the abutments ; a column supporting two sequent arclies. See 
"Abutment." 

Pilaster. — A sauare nillar nrojecting from the face of a wall to 
the extent of one-quarter to one-third its breadtli. 

Pinner. — A spall or small stone used to wedge up a stone and 
give it better bearing. 

Pitch-Line. — A well defined, straight line cut along the edge of a 
■quari-y-faced stone, but not as wide as a chisel draft. 

Pitched-Face. — A face roughly dressed with a pitching cliisel. 

Phig and Feathered. — Split with plug and feathers ; the plug being 
a small wedge of steel driven between two pieces of half-round steel, 
called feathers, which bear against the sides of the drill hole. 

Pointing. — A superior class of mortar used to fill the joints in the 
face of a masonry wall for a depth of 1 to 3 ins. 

<^arry Faced. — A rough face of stone, only the larger projections 
having been Icnocked off with a hammer. 

Quoin. — See "Hollow Quoin." 

Raising Stone. — See "Pedestal." 

Ramp Wall. — The wing of an abutment, often called a ramp. 

Random. — Not coursed. 

Range Masonry. — Masonry in which the various courses are laid 
up witli continuous horizontal beds. 

Ranged. — Laid in a course of the same thickness for its full 
length ; broken ranged masonry is laid in courses not of uniform 
tliickness throughout each course. 

Retaining Wall. — A wall that receives the horizontal thrust of 
eartli back of it : on canal work such walls are called "vertical 
walls" to distinguish them from slope walls. 

Ring-Stones. — The voussoirs that form the end faces of an arch, 
as distinguished from the "sheeting stones" that form tlie body of 
the arch. 

Rip-rap. — Large stones thrown in at random to protect earth from 
scour by currents or waves ; occasionally called "random stones." 
The term "hand placed rip-rap" is sometimes used to denote rough 
slope wall, but slope wall is a preferable term. 

Rise. — The thickness (or vertical height) of a stone, measured 
from its lower bed to its upper bed. Do not confuse the "rise" with 
the "denth." The rise of an arch is the vertical distance from the 
spring line to the under face of the keystone. 

Rock-faced. — See "Quarry-faced." 

Rock-fill Dam. — A dam made of dry masonry ; a rubble dam in 
which no mortar is used. 

Riibble. — Masonry made of stones that have not been dressed. 



480 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

or if dressed at all, have been only roughly shaped with a hammer, 
or "scabbied." 

Scabbled. — Hammer dressed. 

Sheeting. — The stones forming an arch. See "Ring-Stones." 

Skew Arch. — An arch the Diane of whose ring-stone faces forms 
an angle of less than 90° with the axis of the barrel. If the sheet- 
ing stones are all cut skewed, the arch is a "true skew" ; but if only 
the faces of the ring-stones are cut on a skew, while all the other 
sheeting stones are cut with end joints perpendicular to the bed 
joints, the arch is called a "false skew." 

Skewhacks.- — The course of stones against which the springer 
stones of an arch abut. 

Slope Wall. — A pavement of scabbled stones laid upon an earth 
slope to protect it from wash. If the stones are not scabbled, the 
terms rip-rap, or hand-laid rip-rap, are more appropriate. 

Soffit. — The under surface of an arch. 

Span. — The siiortest distance between the spring lines of an arch. 

Spandrel. — The triangular area bounded by the extrados of an 
arch, a horizontal line tangent to the extrados at the crown and 
a vertical line through the springing. A spandrel wall is a wall 
built on the extrados and filling the spandrel area ; it is often mis- 
called a parapet wall. Spandrel filling is the earth filling between 
the spandrel walls. 

Spall. — A fragment of stone, or stone chip. 

Springers. — The lowest course of arch stones, the course resting 
on the sivewbacivs. 

Springing. — Or spring line, the inner edge of the skewbacks, or 
the lower edge of the springers. 

Squared-Stone Masonry. — Masonry in which the stones are rough- 
ly squared and roughly dressed on beds and sides. 

Starlings. — The two ends of a pier. 

Stretcher. — A stone laid so that its longest face forms part of the 
face of a wall. 

Voussoir. — An arch stone. 

Wing. — A spur wall at the end of a bridge abutment ; also called 
a ramp. 

Note. — Other definitions will be found at the beginning of the sec- 
tion on Concrete. 

Percentage of Mortar in Stone Masonry. — Published tables giving 
the percentages of mortar in different kinds of masonry have been 
very misleading not only because they have been based upon meager 
data, but because the factors that cause variations in mortar 
percentages have not been discussed. 

There are two ways of estimating the amount of cement required 
per cubic yard of masonry : ( 1 ) By estimating the percentage of 
mortar in the cubic yard of masonry, and then using a mortar table 
like that on page 253. (2) By tabulating the different kinds of 
masonry and giving the fractions of a barrel of cement required for 
a cubic yard of each kind of masonry, when the mortar is a 1:2 
mixture, also when it is a 1 : 3 mixture — these two being the com- 



SrONE MASONRY. 481 

mon mixtures. Each method possesses its advantages, but the lirst 
is the safest because proper allowance can be made for variations 
in the size of cement barrel. 

A great many masonry walls consist of a "facing" of ashlar, or 
squared stone cut to lay close joints, and a "backing" of more or 
less irregular rubble stones. Obviously, if tlie wall is a thin one, the 
percentage of backing is much smaller than if the wall is thick. 
So that it would be desirable always to keep separate records of the 
amount of mortar used for the backing and for the ashlar. In prac- 
tice, however, it is usually impracticable to keep separate records. 
The final record usually gives only the amount of cement per cubic 
yard of the whole wall. However, in making close estimates of 
probable cost it is well to keep the two classes of masonry distinct. 

Knowing the average size of cut stone blocks and the thickness of 
joints specified, we can estimate the per cent of mortar for the face 
stone with considerable accuracy. Suppose the cut stone is to be in 
courses 12 ins. high, and dressed to lay %-in. joints for 12 ins. back 
of the face. We can assume that the length of each face stone will 
not be far from l^^ times its thickness, or 18 ins. in this case. 
Hence each cut stone will contain 1x1x1 1/2, or 1^^ cu. ft. Each 
stone must have one end and one bed mortared to a thickness of 
1/2 in., hence we have: 1 X IVa X (1/2 -=- 12), or 0.04 cu. ft. of mor- 
tar for the end; and 1 X IVa X (y2^12), or 0.06 cu. ft. of mor- 
tar for the bed; making a total of 0.1 cu. ft. of mortar for the end 
and bed of each stone. But as each stone contains 1.5 cu. ft., we 
see that 0.1 -i- 1.5 gives us 7% (nearly) of mortar for the cut stone. 

Obviously the larger the individual stones the less is the per- 
centage of mortar. Stones 18 Ins. high, .30 ins. long, and dressed 
to lay 14 -in. joints for 18 ins. back of tlie face, reauire 4V2% of 
mortar. 

The mortar required for the back of the stone is apparently 
omitted in applying the above method, but it is not omitted in the 
final account, since it is included in the rubble backing to a con- 
sideration of which we now pass. 

Rubble is a term having wide variations in meaning, but in gen- 
eral it may be said to apply to masonry built of undressed stones 
just as they come from the quarry. Now, if the quarry is lime- 
stone or sandstone yielding flat-bedded stones, the rubble may be 
laid with bed joints as close as the joints of well-dressed granite 
ashlar. On the other hand, if the quarry is granite or rock that 
when blasted yields chunks of irregular shape, the rubble becomes a 
sort of giant concrete and requires a large percentage of mortar to 
fill its voids. 

In any kind of rubble the percentage of mortar can be consider- 
ably reduced bj'' packing spalls into the vertical joints between 
adjacent stones. As Portland cement mortar seldom costs less than 
?5 per cu. yd., and as spalls usually cost but a few cents per cu. yd., 
no pains should be spared to use as many spalls as the joints will 
hold. 

If no spalls are used, and if the rubble is made of irregular stones. 



482 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

about 35% of the rubble masonry is mortar. If the rubble is made 
of flat-bedded sandstone or limestone, it may contain as low as 15% 
mortar, but more often will average 20 to 25%. 

The following are records of the actual amounts of mortar used 
in different masonry structures: 

(1) The Medina sandstone retaining walls on the Erie Canal 
averaged about 10 ft. high and were faced with hammer-dressed 
stones and backed with flat-bedded rubble. About 22% of the wall 
was mortar. The mortar was 1 : 2, and it required about 0.63 bbl. 
cement per cu. yd. of wall. A barrel was counted as holding 3.8 
cu. ft. 

C2) Mr. A. J. Wiley states that in the Crow Creek Dam, near 
Cheyenne, Wyo., there are 14,420 cu. yds. of rubble masonry, of 
which 34%% was mortar. About 80% of this mortar was 1 Port- 
land cement to 4 sand ; the rest was 1 to 3. Each barrel was 
counted as 4 cu. ft., and 8.844 bbls. were used, or 0.62 bbl. 
per cu. yd. 

(3) The Cheesman Dam is of rubble, with one ashlar face, and 
is said to contain 28% mortar. 

(4) The Cheat River Bridge, on the B. & O. R. R., near 
Uniontown, Pa., has five piers and two abutments. The masonry is 
a first-class sandstone facing with a rubble backing of heavy stones, 
and the mortar was 1 of Louisville (natural) cement to 2 of sand. 
There were 3.710 cu. yds. of masonry, which required 1,500 bbls. 
of cement (shipped in bags), or 0.4 bbl. per cu. yd. 

(5) The masonry locks on the Great Kanawha River, West 
Virginia, were built of sandstone obtained at Lottes, W. Va. Face 
stones were cut to lay i/a-in. bed- joints and 1-in. vertical joints 
Backing bed-joints were 1 in. The mortar was 1 part Rosendale 
cement (Hoffman brand), to 2 parts sand. It required 0.36 bbl. per 
cu. yd. of masonry. 

(6) A curved masonry dam. 82 ft. high, built at Remscheid, 
Germany, is made of slate having a specific gravity of 2.7. The 
masonry, laid in trass mortar, weighs 4,015 lbs. per cu. yd. Owing 
to the irregular form of the stones the mortar was 38% of the 
masonry. 

(7) The Holyoke Dam, 30 ft. high, is of rubble masonry with 
a cut granite face. The mortar was 1 Portland cement to 2 sand, 
and it is stated that 0.87 bbl. of cement was required per cubic yard 
of rubble masonry. 

(8) Masonry in bridge piers, at Van Buren, Arkansas River, was 
for the most part of white limestone. In 10 piers there were 4,500 
cu. yds. of masonry, which averaged 0.57 bbl. natural cement per 
cu. yd. The beds and joints were 1 : 2 mortar, and a 1 : 1 grout was 
also used. 

(9) The limestone masonry for the Sault Ste. Marie locks (U. 
S. Government) amounted to 80,876 cu. yds., of which 23% was cut 
stone, 60% backing and 17% mortar. The cut stone blocks average 
1.3 cu. yds. each, and were dressed to lay %-in. vertical joints for 
18 ins. back of the face, and the bed joints were dressed to % in. 



STONE MASONRY. 483 

the full depth of the stone. In cutting the stone there was a 
wastage of 26l^% of stone. The mortar was 1: 1, and it required 
0.29 bbl. of Portland cement per cu. yd. of cut stone, 1.21 bbls. of 
natural cement per cu. yd. of backing, and 0.78 bbl. per cu. 
yd. of the wall, including cut stone and backing. The backing stones 
each averaged 8 sq. ft. bed area, and no bed-joint was greater than 
1 in. ; and no vertical joint exceeded 4 ins., the average being 2 
ins. This is remarkably close jointing for backing, and was un- 
questionably very expensive to secure. 

(10) The Lanchensee Dam, Germany, was made of graywacke 
rubble (stones % to 14 cu. yd. each) ; 35% of the dam was mortar. 
A force of 45 masons. 12 helpers, 27 laborers and 4 foremen 
worked on the dam, and 110 men at the quarry. They averaged 120 
cu. yds. of masonry per day. the best day's work being 196 cu. yds. 
Eight locomotive cranes running on trestles took the stone from the 
cars. The work was done by day labor for the German Government. 

(11) The Sweetwater Dam, California, was built of a granitic 
rubble that was Quarried in irregular chunks. Mortar was 1 : 3, 
proportioned by barrels, and it required 0.86 bbl. cement per cu. yd. 
of rubble masonry. 

Cost of Laying Masonry. — According to my experience on numer- 
ous small culvert bulkheads made of limestone or sandstone rubble, 
one mason with a helper to mix mortar and "get stone" will lay 
4 to 5 cu. yds. per 8-hr. day. If mason's wages are $3 and helper's 
$1.50 this makes the cost average $1 per cu. yd. for laying. No 
derrick is used in such work the stone being one-man or two-man 
stone. Moiseover, the stone requires little or no hammer-dressing 
on the part of the mason. 

In laying dry slope-walls (12 or 15 ins. thick) where stone 
of the same kind as the above is used, requiring very little hammer- 
dressing, a si ope- wall mason will lay 5 to 7 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day, 
and I have had a man lay as high as 12 cu. yds. per day. One 
laborer to about 2 or 3 slope-wall masons is required, to furnish 
them with stone. A common laborer will lay about half as many 
yards of slope-wall stone as a skilled mason, so there is little or 
no economy in using unskilled labor in laying the stone that mu«t 
be laid to a line and occasionally dressed with a hammer. 

On a highway arch bridge of 30-ft. span, with a barrel 20 ft. 
long, there were 50 cu. yds. of cut stone sheeting, 30 cu. yds. of cut 
stone facing in the abutments and walls, and 190 cu. yds. of lime- 
stone rubble in the abutments and walls. The masonry was laid 
by a mason and 3 laborers, two of the laborers operating a hand 
power derrick and getting stone for the mason, while the third labor- 
er made mortar and also assisted in getting stone. This gang worked 
without a foreman and were very slow, since they averaged only 
3 cu. yds. per 8-hr. day. "With mason's wages at $3 and laborers' 
at $1.50, the cost of laying the masonry was $2.50 per cu. yd. This 
included the erecting of two small derricks on opposite sides of the 
stream, but did not include erecting the centers for the arch. On 
page 206. the cost of laying the masonry of an arch bridge, similar 



484 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to this one is given in detail; it being $1.35 per cu. yd., which 
shows how easy it is to reduce tlie cost of laying where the men are 
better organized. The common mistake made in organizing forces 
for laying stone with hand operated derricks is in having too many 
laborers to one mason, who is unable to keep them busy. 

If the mason must hammer-dress the stone to a great extent, as 
is often reauired by inspectors on gi'anite rubble arches, the cost 
of laying (including this hammer dressing) may amount to $3.50 
per cu. yd. It is difficult to be definite in the matter of costs of 
hammer-dressed granite rubble, because inspectors vary so ex- 
tremely in their interpretation of specifications. If no hammer- 
dressing is required (and none should be required for backing laid 
in cement mortar), the cost of laying granite rubble need not exceed 
the cost of laying limestone or sandstone rubble, say $1 per cu. yd., 
wages being as above given. 

In tearing down and relaying an old masonry retaining wall (9 
ft. high), the author employed 16 laborers and 2 masons under a 
foreman. A stiff-leg derrick having 30-ft. boom, and operated by 
hand, was used to handle the heaviest stones. Much of the back- 
ing was laid by hand by the laborers. This gang averaged 36 cu. 
yds. of masonry laid per 10-hr. day, at a cost of $30, exclusive of 
foreman's wages, or less than 85 cts. per cu. yd. It cost 75 cts. per 
cu. yd. to tear down the wall before relaying it. 

For laying any considerable quantity of masonry, never use a 
hand-operated derrick. A horse-whim forms cheaper power than two 
men on a winch. But in either case the lost time of swinging, or 
slewing, the boom cannot be avoided. The men (usually two) who 
swing the boom are called "tag men," because they pull the boom 
back and forth with "tag ropes." The wages of these men form 
a surprisingly large part of the cost of laying stone where a derrick 
is used which is not provided with a "bull-wheel" for swinging the 
boom. The engineman controls the swinging of the boom where a 
bull-wheel is used, and can make a swing of 90° in 15 to 20 
seconds. 

To show how rapidly stone may be handled with a 60 -ft. boom 
derrick, the following record will seirve: 

Seconds. 

Hooking on to skip 35 

Swinging boom 90^ 20 

Dumping skip 15 

Swinging back 90° 20 

Total 90 

This is equivalent to 400 skip loads in 10 hrs. ; and, were the 
material supplied and removed fast enough, the derrick could readily 
maintain this output for 10 hrs., handling 1 cu. yd. of rubble in 
each skip load. Obviously in masonry work, where a bull-wheel 
derrick is used, the limiting factor is the amount of stone the masons 
can handle per day. Much of the derrick time is spent in the put- 
tering work necessary in carefully placing large stones in the wall. 
Now, where tag-rope men are used instead of a bull-wheel, prac- 



STONE MASONRY. 485 

tically all their time is wasted, as they spend so little of the day 
doing active work. 

Further data on the cost of laying masonry will be found on sub- 
sequent pages. 

Estimating the Cost of Stone Dressing. — Stone may be divided 
into two classes: (1) Stone stratified in beds of a thickness not 
much exceeding 30 ins. ; and (2) stone that is either unstratifled, or 
occurs in beds of such thickness tliat the blocks must be split with 
plugs and feathers to secure sizes which can be handled with a 
derrick. 

Many sandstones and limestones occur in thin strata or layers, 
and, after the use of a i»ttle black powder to "shake up" the ledge, 
it is possible to quarry blocks witli wedges and bars. These blocks 
will often be as smooth as a floor on the bed-joints, but may be quite 
irregular on tne vertical joints. However, either by hammering, or 
by plug and feathering, the vertical joints can be squared up at 
slight expense ready for further dressing if required by the specifi- 
cations. On the other hand, all granites and many thick-bedded 
limestones and sandstones, break out in such irregular shapes that it 
often happens that every face must be plug and feathered before the 
block is roughly squared up ready to be dressed by the stonecutters. 
Obviously the dressing of the beds of sucli stones is far more ex- 
pensive than the dressing of the beds of smoothly stratified stones. 

Besides differences in hardness, we see that the shape of the 
stones as they come from the quarry is a very important factor in 
the cost of dressing. 

Another factor of scarcely less importance is the size of the 
blocks of stone. It is generally possible to quarry granites in blocks 
of any desired size, the limit being fixed by the strength of the 
derricks and other machinery used. A very common size of granite 
blocks dressed ready to lay in the wall is 18 ins. rise x 40 ins. 
length X 24 to 30 ins. depth. And as every block of granite must be 
plug and feathered to size before dressing, it is just as clieap to 
make coursed ashlar as random range ashlar. On the other hand, 
stratified rocks like sandstone usually occur in layers of different 
thickness, and it may be impossible to secure enough stone for 
courses of a specified rise without wasting a large part of the 
quarry product. An engineer should never specify any given "rise" 
for tlie courses (except in granite), until he has examined the 
quarries and is sure that they will yield the product specified. 
But engineers often fail to do this, and the contractor must be 
careful not to be equally foolish in failing to examine the stone 
available. 

Stone is often so seamy or so urittle that it can be quarried only 
in small chunks. Now it is obvious that the ■ smaller the chunk 
the greater tlie area that must be dressed per cubic yard ; but 
how greatly this factor affects the cost of dressing is seldom consid- 
ered. To illustrate, let us assume that blocks for ashlar are each 
12 ins. rise x 24 ins. long x 18 ins. deep. Each block then contains. 



486 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

3 cu. ft., and has 6 sq. ft. of bed joints and 3 sq. ft. of end joints, 
or 9 sq. ft. of joints to be dressed. Let us now take an ashlar block 
18 ins. rise x 36 ins. long x 24 ins. deep. This block contains 9 
cu. ft., and has 12 sq. ft. of bed joints and 6 sq. ft. of end joints, or 
18 sa. ft. of joints to be dressed. With the smaller block we have 
9x9, or 81 sq. ft. of joints to be dressed for every cubic yard ; 
whereas with the larger block we have 3 x 12, or 36 sq. ft. to be 
dressed for every cubic yard. In other words the cost of dressing 
ashlar of the 3-cu. ft. blocks is more than twice as expensive per 
cubic yard as the cost of dressing the 9-cu. ft. blocks. 

It is apparent, therefore, that all records of the cost of dressing 
stone should be expressed in terms of the square feet actually 
dressed, and then the data can be applied to blocks of any given size 
to obtain the cost of dressing per cubic yard. This method of esti- 
mating costs will often lead a contractor to import his stone a long 
distance by rail rather than attempt to dress the small-sized stones 
from local quarries. 

It is customary among contractors and stonecutters to speak 
of so and so many "square feet" of stone dressed per day, meaning 
not the number of square feet of beds and joints dressed, but the 
square feet of "face." For example a stone is 1% ft. rise x 3 ft. 
long x 2 ft. deep. This stone when laid lengthwise in the face of 
a wall will show a face area of 4% sq. ft., and the stone cutter is 
said to have dressed 4% sq. ft. As a matter of fact he has 
dressed 12 sq. ft. of bed joints, and 6 sq. ft. of end joints, beside 
plugging off or hammering the face of the stone, and cutting the 
drafts if specified. In my early work I was misled by this method 
of estimating stone dressing in terms of the square feet of face. It 
is a method that should be abandoned. 

Data of the actual cost of stone dressing will be given in subse- 
quent pages. 

Data on Stone Sawing. — There is little on this subject in print, 
but in almost any large city stone saws may be seen at work, and 
a rough estimate can be made of the cost of stone sawing. To 
tell how many inches deeo a saw cuts in a day, examine a slab of 
stone newly cut in the yard. It will be noted that there are rust 
lines on the face of the slab. The distance between these lines 
indicates the depth cut in a day, for when the saws are idle at 
night, the rust forms. 

For cutting stone into thin slabs, it is common practice to run two 
"gangs" of saws, of 15 saws in a "gang" driven by a small engine. 
As nearly as I have been able to estimate by observation and in- 
quiry, the daily cost of operating a "two-gang" plant is as follows 
per 9-hr. day in New York City: 

1 gangman % 4.00 

1 helper 3.00 

2 cu. yds. sand, at ?3 6.00 

y2 ton coal, at $6 3.00 

Total per day $16.00 



STONE MASONRY. 487 

Working in Tennessee marble each saw cuts about 6 ins. deep 
per day, therefore, if the bloclc is 6 ft. long, the 30 saws cut 90 
sq. ft. per day of 9 hrs. The cost of sawing slabs, therefore, ap- 
proximates 17 cts. per sq. ft. The saw cuts a kerf %-in. wide. 

I am told that with wages of polisher at ?3.50, slabs can be pol- 
ished by hand at 6 cts. per sq. ft. ; but where the polishing is done 
by machine the cost is about 2% cts. per sq. ft. 

Wages of stone yard men in New York City are about a third 
higher than in most other American cities. 

Mr. R. J. Cooke states that the rates of sawing different kinds of 
stone are as follows : 

Deptli cut in 
.1 10 hrs., ins. 

Granite, Addison, Me. (shot) 10 

Granite, Chester, Mass. (sand) 12 

Granite, Red Beach, Me. (shot) 71/2 

Bluestone, Hudson River (sand) 8 

Marble, Carara, Italy (sand) 15 

Marble, Tennessee (sand) 9 

Marble, Tate, Ga. (sand) 6 

Marble, Tate, Ga. (sand) 12 

Marble, Gouverneur, N. Y. (sand) ; 12 

Marble, W. Rutland, Vt. (sand) 20 

Marble, Proctor, Vt. (sand) 15 

Limestone, New Point, Ind. (sand) 10 

Limestone, New Point, Ind. (sand) 15 

Oolitic limestone, Bedford, Ind. (sand) 40 

Oolitic limestone, Bedford, Ihd. (sand) 70 

Magnesian limestone, Lemont, 111. (sand) 36 

Sandstone, N. Amherst, O. (sand) 40 

Sandstone, Clarksville, O. (sand) 36 

Brownstone, Portland, Conn, (shot) 20 

Brownstone, Hummelston, Pa. (shot) 25 

The Young & Farrell Diamond Stone Sawing Co., of Chicago, 
classifies stone into soft, medium and hard ; soft includes sand- 
stones ; medium includes limestones, and hard includes marbles and 
granites. They say (1890) the cost of sawing per sq. ft. is: Soft, 
8 to 10 cts. ; medium, 13 to 17 cts. ; hard, 25 to 30 cts. ; all on the 
basis of 4-in. sawing or two cuts to the cubic foot. With wages of 
stone cutters at 50 cts. an hour, the cost of hand dressing the same 
classes of stones is given as follows per square foot: Soft, 25 to 
30 cts. ; medium, 40 to 45 cts. ; and hard, 75 to 80 cts. ; all clear face 
work. 

Cost of Stone Dressing. — In addition to the data just given, The 
Syenite Granite Co., of Graniteville, Mo., say (1890) that the cost 
of hand dressing 36,000 cu. ft. of granite to i/^-in. joints was 20 cts. 
per sq. ft., not including blacksmithing, handling, etc., which was 
6 cts. more per sq. ft. This stone was granite cut to lay in 24 to 
30-in. courses for the Merchants' Bridge, St. Louis, and it was 
delivered for ?1.15 per cu. ft. 

The Kankakee Stone & Lime Co. say (1890) that, with wages at 
?3 a day, the cost of dressing limestone (bush-hammered or drove- 
work) is 25 cts. cer so. ft. 

Cost of Cutting Limestone and Sandstone. — In dressing Medina 



488 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

sandstone, a stonecutter will dress enough stone in 9 hrs. to lay 12 
sq. ft. of face in a wall having courses that average 15 ins. rise, 
which is equivalent to about 0.9 cu. yd. of face stone per day, or 
30 sq. ft. of beds and joints cut to lay %-in. joints for at least 
12 ins. back of the face. The face is rock-faced, and is plugged off 
by the stonecutter. 

In dressing limestone for arch sheeting, the author made the mis- 
take of using a quarry whose product was all small and gnarled 
stones. Each stone after dressing averaged only 11 ins. thick, 22 
ins. long, and 18 ins. deep, or about 0.1 cu. yd. per stone, so that 
to secure 1 cu. yd. of this cut-stone required the dressing of 80 sq. 
ft. of beds and joints. Bach stonecutter averaged 36 sq. ft. of 
beds and joints (dressed to lay %-in. ) per 9-hr. day, or 1 cu. yd. in 
2^ days. These cutters received 40 cts. per hour. 

Cost of Sandstone Bridge Piers. — The cost of cutting 246 cu. yds. 
sandstone to %-in. joints for bridge piers was $2.65 per cu. yd. ; 
the cutting of the stones for the nose of the pier cost $3 per cu. yd. 
The wages of cutters were 38 cts. per hr. 

The cost of loading the stone, train service, sand, cement and 
laying the masonry was $3.60 per cu. yd. About % bbl. of Port- 
land cement costing $2.40 per bbl. was used per cu. yd. of masonry. 
The cost of quarrying the stone was $1.65 per cu. yd. The total 
cost of the pier masonry was $9 per cu. yd. For the foregoing data 
I am indebted to Mr. C. R. Nehr. 

Cost of Cutting Granite for a Dam. — In building a dam in the 
northern part of New York state, the author used a granitic rock. 
The face stones were cut to lay in courses with beds and joints 
% in. thick. Bach cut stone was quarry-faced and averaged 1% ft. 
rise X 3 ft. long x 2 ft. deep, or about Vs cu. yd. A stonecutter 
averaged one such stone per 8-hr day, or 18 sq. ft. of beds and end 
joints dressed per day. A blacksmith, at $2.50, and a helper, at 
$1.50, sharpened the points and plug drills for 8 stonecutters. The 
cost of cutting this face stone was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Stone cutters, at $4 per 8 hrs $12.00 

Blacksmithing 1.20 

Labor bankering stones and plugging off faces. . . 1.80 

Sheds and tools 0.80 

Superintendence 1.20 

Total .Tl7.00 

On a small portion of the work the stone was dressed to lay %-in. 
joints, which added $6 per cu. yd. to the cost. 

Cost of Cutting Granite, New York City. — Mr. Wm. W. Maclay 
gives the cost of cutting 2,065 cu. yds. of granite by a force of 40 
stonecutters working for the New York Department of Docks, during 
1873 to 1875. The working day was 8 hrs. The following table 
gives the average day's work of a stonecutter working for the Dock 
Department as compared with work done for contractors in New 
Yorfe: 



STONE MASONRY. 489 

Sq. ft. per 8-hr. day. 
For Dock For Con- 
Cutting Granite. Dept. tractors. 

Dressing beds and joints ( % in.) 13.5 16.0 

Pointed work witli iy2-in. cliisel draft all around 8.5 10.0 

Pean-hammered 6.0 7.25 

6-cut patent hammered 5.25 6.15 

8-cut patent hammered 4.25 5.00 

It will be noted that the men working for tlie Dock Department 
did about 15% less work daily than is said to have been the average 
under contractors. 

In doing this dock work there were 1,524 cu. yds. of dimension 
stones cut into headers and stretchers. The headers averaged 2 ft. 
on the face by 3 ft. deep ; and the stretchers averaged 6 ft. long on 
the face by 3 ft. deep; the rise being 20, 22 and 26 ins. for the dif- 
ferent courses. The stones were cut to lay %-in. beds and joints, 
the faces being pointed work with a 1%-in. chisel draft all around. 
The cost of this cutting was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. Per cent. 

Cutting (4.53 days) $13.22 48 

Labor rolling stones 8.26 30 

Sharpening tools 4.13 15 

Superintendence 1.38 5 

New tools and timber for rolling stones 0.28 1 

Interest on sheds, derrick, and railroad 0.28 1 

Total $27.55 100 

In addition to this work there were 310 cu. yds. of coping cut to 
lay %-in joints, pointed on the face and with a chisel draft, 8-cut 
patent-hammered on the top, and with a round of 3% -in. radius. 
The coping stones were 8 ft. long, 4 ft. wide, and 2% ft. rise. The 
cost of cutting this coping was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. Per cent. 

Cutting (6.26 days) $18.27 48 

Labor rolling stones 11.42 30 

Sharpening tools 5.71 15 

Superintendence 1.90 5 

New tools and timber 0.38 1 

Interest on sheds, etc 0.38 1 

Total $38.06 100 

It would appear from the above that the stonecutters received $3 
for 8 hrs., but Mr. Maclay states that the pay was $4 for 8 hrs. 
If so there is some error in the other items, which I have calculated 
from the percentages given by him. It is difficult to understand 
how the "labor of rolling stones" could have been 30% of the total 
cost of cutting, unless the laborers assisted in plug and feathering 
the stones preparatory to cutting. The cost of tool sharpening 
(15%) was also very high Certainly these two items were much 
higher than they would have been under a contractor. 

Mr. J. J. R. Croes states that in cutting granite for the gate-houses 
of the Croton Reservoir at 86th St.. New York, in 1861-2, the least 
day's work was fixed at 15 sq. ft. of beds and joints. This included 
the cutting of a chisel draft around the face of the stone, the cost of 
which was about one-fourth as much as cutting a square foot of 



490 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

joint, making the actual least day's work equivalent to 17.7 sq. ft. 
of beds and joints cut. With wages of stonecutters assumed at $3 
per day, from the percentages given by Mr. Croes, I have calculated 
the cost of cutting to have been as follows per square foot : 

Per sq. ft. 

Cutting (15 sq. ft. per day) $0,200 

Sharpening tools 0.022 

Labor moving stone in yards 0.020 

Drillers plugging off rough faces 0.008 

Superintendence 0.016 

Sheds and tools 0.014 

Total $0,280 

The cost of all the items other than the wages of stone cutters 
was 40% of the wages of the stonecutters, or 8 cts. per sq. ft. 

Cost of Quarrying, Cutting and Laying Granite. — Mr. J. J. R. 
Croes gives the following data relative to work done on the Boyd's 
Corner Dam, near New York City : 

The stone is a gneiss that is about as difficult to quarry as granite. 
The face stone for the dam average 1.8 ft. rise, 3.6 ft. long and 2.7 
ft. deep, and were cut to lay %-in. joints. In quarrying the dimen- 
sion stone, plug and feathers were used to split the stone to size 
ready for cutting. The cost of quarrying and plug and feathering 
4,000 cu. yds. of dimension stohe ready for cutting was as follows: 

Days (10 hr.) Cost per 
per cu. yd. cu. yd. 

Foreman, at ?3 0.114 $0.34 

Drillers, at $2 0.917 1.84 

Laborers, at $1.50 ... 0.429 0.65 

Blacksmiths, at $2.50 0.102 0.25 

Tool boys, at $0.50 0.108 0.05 

Labor loading teams, at $1.50 0.284 0.42 

Total (not including explosives and teaming) $3.55 
The work was done by contract in 1867-8. The rates of wages 
were not given by Mr. Croes, but Mr. John B. McDonald has been 
kind enough to give me most of the rates of wages as nearly as he 
can remember. The length of haul from quarry to stone yard was 
about a mile, and Mr. McDonald states that oxen were used. The 
cost of "teams" is given by Mr. Croes, as 0.62 team day per cu. yd., 
which indicates that a good deal of stone boat work was done, 
or else that there is an error in this item. 

The cost of quarrying 3,400 cu. yds. of rubble stone for this same 
dam yas as follows: 

Days per ' Cost per 

cu. yd. cu. yd. 

Foremen, at $3 0.041 $0.12 

Drillers at $2 0.339 0.68 

Laborers, at $1.50 0.140 0.21 

Blacksmiths, at $2.50 0.036 0.09 

Tool boy, at $0.50 0.035 0.02 

Labor, loading teams, at $1.50.... 0.077 0.12 

Teams, at $4 0.141 0.56 

Total labor $1.80 

It is presumable that both the dimension stone and the rubble 
stone were measured in the dam. 



STONE MASONRY. 491 

The masonry was called "rubble range'" a term that deceived 
most of the contractors, for the soeciflcations In fact called for 
stones cut to lay in courses with %-in. bed joints. During SVs 
years of work there were 5,200 cu. yds. of this "rubble range" cut, 
requiring the dressing of 6.373 sq. ft. Each stone averaged 1.8 ft. 
rise, 3.6 ft. long, and 2.7 ft. deep, or 0.65 cu. yd. per stone. Each 
stonecutter averaged 18.7 sq. ft. of bed joints dressed per day, so 
that it took 1.57 days to dress each cubic yard of "rubble range" 
stone. 

The ashlar stones were called "dimension cut-stone masonry" 
and were cut to lay %-in. joints both on bed and end joints, and 
the faces were pean liammered. The lowest bid on this ashlar was 
$30 per cu. yd., but another contractor, who had previously done the 
same kind of work, bid $60 per cu. yd. 

It took 9 days' work of a stonecutter to dress each cubic yard of 
this ashlar. 

The coping was laid in two courses; one course of stones 12 -in. 
rise, 30-in. bed, and 3%-ft. length; the other course, 24-in. rise, 
48-in. bed, and 2i/^-ft. length. The top was pean hammered, and the 
face was left rough with a chisel draft around it. The beds and 
joints were cut to lay %-in. It took a stonecutter 6.1 days to dress 
each cubic yard of this ashlar. 

The cost of laying the masonry in the dam was as follows, 
wages being assumed to be approximately what they are now (not 
what they were in 1875) : 

Cost per cu. yd. 

A B C D 

Mason, at $3.00 $0.36 $0.36 $0.25 $0.32 

Laborers, at $1.50 0.28 0.28 0.22 0.23 

Mortar mixers, at $1.50 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.15 

Derrick and carmen, at $1.50 0.49 0.51 0.36 0.39 

Engine, at $4.00 0.18 0.20 

Teams from yard, at $3.50 0.35 0.20 0.20 0.39 

Laborers loading teams, at $1.50 0.28 0.33 0.33 0.13 

Total $1.91 $1.80 $1.65 ?L81 

Columns A and B relate to work done in 1868 and 1869 when the 
stone was hoisted by hand; A was a lift of 5 ft., B was a lift of 
10 to 20 ft. Columns C and D relate to work done in 1869 and 
1870, when the hoisting was done by engines; C being a lift of 20 
to 30 ft. ; D being a lift of 30 to 50 ft. It will be noted that each 
mason laid from 8% to 12% cu. yds. per day. Each engine ap- 
parently served two masons, but it is not stated whether each 
mason had a separate derrick or both worked with one derrick. 

The stones were laid in inclined or sloping courses, which made 
it hard to keep them in place as a rap of a hammer would cause 
sliding. 

It will be noted that the cost of loading and hauling the stone 
from the stone yard to the dam is included in the above costs of 
laying. This cost of loading and hauling is not properly a part of 
the cost of laying. 

The mortar was a 1 : 2 mixture, natural cement, and it required 



49S HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

0.3 bbl. of cement, 0.093 cu. yd. sand, and 0.89 cu. yd. of stone 
per cu. yd. of dam masonry. In other words, only 11% of the 
masonry was mortar. 

Cost of Plug Drilling by Hand. — By timing a number of masons 
at work splitting granite blocks 24 to 30 ins. thick, I found that each 
man drilled each hole (%-in. diam. x 2% ins. deep) in a trifle less 
than 5 mins., by striking about 200 blows. It took about 1 naiin. for 
placing and striking each set of plug and feathers. A block 30 ins. 
long, with four plug holes, was drilled and split with the plugs and 
feathers in 24 mins., on an average. At this rate, a good workman 
can drill and plug 80 holes in 8 hrs., but it is not safe to count upon 
so large an average. 

Cost of Pneumatic Plug Drilling. — For drilling plug holes in gran- 
ite certainly no tool is as economic as the pneumatic plug drill. 
Horizontal as well as vertical holes can be rapidly drilled. The 
ordinary plug drill, according to the manufacturers, consumes 15 
cu. ft. of free air per min. at 70 lbs. pressure. At the Wachusett 
Dam I found that a workman averaged one hole (%-in. diam. x 3 
ins.) drilled in 1^ mins., including the time of shifting from hole 
to hole, but not including the time of driving the plugs. About 250 
plug holes are counted a fair day's work for a plug drill where the 
driller does not drive the plugs himself. 

Cost of Quarrying Granite. — Cost data relating to the quarrying 
of granite dimension stone are extremely hard to secure. I have 
been able to find only one writer, Mr. J. J. R. Croes, who has pub- 
lished anything on the subject. Mr. Croes' records, together with 
mine, will at least form a basis for approximate estimates of cost 
of granite quarrying. My data apply to quarrying three-dimension 
stone in a sheet quarry on the coast of Maine. The total number of 
men engaged was, on the average: 6 enginemen, 6 steam drillers, 
6 drill helpers, 3 blacksmiths, 3 helpers, 5 tool and water boys, 38 
quarrymen, 47 laborers, 2 foremen and 1 superintendent. This force 
quarried and loaded on boats about 1,400 cu. yds. of rough granite 
blocks. The stone was loaded by derricks onto cars from which it 
was unloaded into boats ready for shipment. The following cost 
includes everything except interest and depreciation of plant, and 
development expenses: 

Cost 
per cu yd. 

Enginemen, at $2 a day (of 9 hrs.) $0.20 

Steam drillers, at $2.00 0.20 

Drill helpers, at $1.50 0.15 

Blacksmiths, at $2.75 0.14 

Blacksmiths' helpers, at $1.75 0.09 

Tool and water boys, at $1 0.16 

Quarrymen, at $1.75 1.09 

Laborers, at $1.50 1.15 

Foremen, at $3.00 0.15 

Superintendent, at $8 0.20 

Coal, at $5 ton 0.45 

Explosives 0.25 

Other supplies 0.30 

Total $4.53 



STONE MASONRY. 493 

On the best month's work, when a larger force was being op- 
erated, the cost of all labor, superintendence and supplies, was 
reduced to a little below ?4 per cu. yd., but the above $4.50 per cu. 
yd. may be taken as a fair average of several months' work. To 
this should be added the charges for plant rental, quarry rental (if 
any), stripping (if any), and freight charges to destination. The 
freight rate by boat from Maine to New York is about $1 a ton, 
but as rough granite blocks are always measured on their least 
dimensions, the freight charges when $1 per ton amount to about 
?2.70 per cu. yd. of three-dimension stone in the rough. The ex- 
plosives used were black powder, costing $2.25 a keg (25 lbs.), and 
dynamite for channeling, costing 15 cts. a lb. The sheet from 
which this granite was quarried averaged about 6% ft. thick, and 
was nearly flat. The stone was loosened in long blocks by Knox 
blasting with black powder, and was split up into sizes by plug and 
feathering ; both hand drills and pneumatic plug drills being used 
for this purpose. The stone, as before stated, was three-dimension 
stone. To quarry random stone (not rubble) in this quarry cost 
about $3.50 per cu. yd. 

If granite is blasted out in all shapes and sizes, to be used for 
rubble or for concrete, the cost of quarrying is far less than the 
above and is approximately the same as quarrying trap rock, pro- 
vided the two kinds of rock are equally seamy or jointed. Traps, 
however, are usually much more seamy than granites ; hence the 
drill holes in trap can usually be spaced much farther apart than in 
granite having few seams. 

Cost of a Masonry Arch Bridge. — This arch bridge had a span 
of 30 ft., and its barrel was 60 ft. long. The masonry was lime- 
stone laid in Portland cement mortar. There were 365 cu. yds. of. 
masonry distributed as follows: 

Cu. yds. 

Arch sheeting 112 

Bench walls (or abutments) 165 

Backing above arch 17 

Backing above haunch 38 

Wing walls 21 

Parapet walls 7 

Coping 5 

Total : 365 

The arch sheeting masonry was dressed to lay %-m. joints, and 
the cost of these 112 cu. yds. was as follows: 

Cu. yd. 

Quarrying rough blocks $ 1.00 

Plug and feathering into blocks 0.85 

Hauling and loading onto car 0.75 

Freight 1.05 

Unloading from car and hauling 1 mile 0.70 

Cutting 4.55 

Laying 1.35 

Mortar 1.50 

Centers 2.20 

Total $13.95 



494 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This sheeting was cut to lay an arch 18 ins. thick, each block 
averaging 12x18x28 ins. in size, or about % cu. yd. The blocks 
were small, but the quarry did not yield" large material Quarrymen 
were paid 30 cts. per hr. and helpers 17% cts. per hr. The un- 
loading from cars onto wagons cost 35 cts. per cu. yd., wages being 
15 cts. per hr. ; and the hauling 1 mile cost 35 cts. per cu. yd., 
teams being 40 cts. per hr. 

The stonecutters were paid 35 cts. per hr., and their work cost 
$4.25 per cu. yd. ; the sharpening of cutters' tools cost 15 cts. more 
per cu. yd. ; and the help of laborers occasionally in bunkering a 
stone cost another 15 cts. per cu. yd. ; making a total of $4.55 for 
cutting the stone after it had been plug and feathered roughly into 
blocks. The small size of the blocks made this cost high. 

The stone was laid by a hand-power derrick, the cost of laying 
being in detail as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Masons, at 30 cts. per hr ?0.80 

Helpers, at 15 cts. per hr 0.45 

Team on stone boat, 40 cts. per hr 0.10 

Total cost of laying $1.35 

Each mason had 1% helpers and laid 3 cu. yds. in 8 hrs. This 
was the average of all the 365 cu. yds. of masonry; the cost of lay- 
ing each kind was not kept separately. 

The mortar was 1 : 3 Portland cement, allowing 4.5 cu. ft. per 
bbl. ; it took 2 bbls. of cement and 0.9 cu. yd. sand to make 1 cu. yd. 
mortar; and the cost of these materials was $4-50 per cu. yd. of 
mortar. It took % cu. yd. of mortar for each of the 365 cu. yds. of 
masonry ; no attempt was made to determine the amount of mortar 
for each kind of masonry. 

The cost of the ashlar facing in the abutments and wing walls was 
the same Der cubic yard as the arch sheeting after deducting the 
$2.20 for centers, that is $11.75 per cu. yd. ; and there were about 
50 cu. yds. of this in the bridge. 

The cost of the rubble backing in the abutments, haunch, etc., of 
which there were nearly 200 cu. yds., was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Rubble sandstone delivered at bridge $1.20 

% cu. yd. mortar, at $4.50 1.50 

Laying 1.35 

Total '...$4.05 

This rubble was a local sandstone, but the ashlar was a lime- 
stone imported by rail. 

The foregoing costs do not include foreman's salary and general 
expenses, which amounted to 15% of the total cost of the bridge. In 
addition to the 365 cu. yds. of stone masonry there were 65 cu. yds. 
of concrete foundations laid on a hard clay. There was no coffer- 
damming. 

The cost of the work was higher than It would have been under a 
better foreman. 

Cost of Centers for 30-ft. Arch. — Centers for a masonry arch of 



STONE MASONRY. 495 

30-ft. span and having a barrel 60 ft. long were made of hemlock. 
There were 21 arch ribs or centers soaced 3 ft. anart and lagged 
witla hemlock 2 ins. thick by 6 ins. wide. Each center was made 
of two thicknesses of 2 x 12-in. olank cut in section 6 ft. long and 
spiked together, breaking joints. The ribs were cut to the curve of 
the arch at a saw mill. The following was the bill of timber in each 
center : 

Ft. B. M. 

6 — 2-in. X 12-in. x 12-ft. curved ribs 144 

4 — 2-in. X 6-in. x 16-ft. ties 64 

1 — 2-in. X 6-in. x 10-ft. splices 10 

1 — 2-in. X 6-in. x 10-ft. post 10 

2 — 2-in. X 6-in. x 16-ft. struts 32 

Total per bent 260 

22 centers at 260 ft. B. M 5,720 

Lagging 2 ins. x 33 ft. x 60 ft 3,960 

Total 9,680 

The machine work at the mill cost $20, and the carpenter work 
of framing the centers was ?7.75 for carpenters at 22 1/^ cts. per hr. 
and $9.25 for carpenters' helpers at 15 cts. per hr., making a total 
of $37. This is equivalent to $6.50 per M when distributed over the 
5,720 ft. B. M. in the centers. Tlie cost of erecting the centers 
with the aid of a hand-power derrick together with the cost of 
placing the lagging was $24, all this work being done by laborers at 
15 cts. cer hr. This $24 distributed over all the 9,712 ft. B. M. is 
$2.56 per M. The cost of removing the centers after completion of 
the work was $10, wages being 15 cts. per hr., or $1.05 per M. The 
total cost of the centers was: 

9,712 ft. B. M. hemlock, at $16 $155.51 

132 oak wedges, at 10 cts 13.20 

230 lbs. wire nails, at 3 Yz cts 8.05 

Machine work at mill 20.00 

Work framing centers 17.00 

"Work erecting centers 24.00 

Work tearing down centers 10.00 

Total $247.76 

It will be noted that the millwork and labor cost $71, which is 
equivalent to $7.30 per M distributed over the 9,712 ft. B. M. There 
were 112 cu. yds. of masonry in the arch alone, so that the cost 
of the centers distributed over the arch sheeting was $2.20 per cu. 
yd. But there were 250 cu. yds. of masonry, all told, in the arch, 
the abutments, paranet and wing walls. The short posts support- 
ing the centers rested on hard clay. 

Cost of Arch Culverts and Abutments, Erie Canal. — In 1840 con- 
tracts were let for enlarging the Erie Canal. The courts later de- 
clared the law making the appropriation unconstitutional and the 
New York State Legislature directed that the contracts be canceled 
and that contractors be paid tlieir prospective profits. The 12 engi- 
neers in charge of the work submitted the following estimates of the 
actual cost. The stone in masonry was limestone from the lower 
Mohawk valley. Masons and stonecutters were paid $2.25 per day 



496 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of 11 hrs. worked, laborers $1. The cost of masonry in arch cul- 
verts and bridges was as follows: 

Face stone : Per cu. yd. 

Quarrying, 1 cu. yd. per man day $2.25 

Cutting, 1.3 cu. yds. per man day 2.25 

Laying, 0.7 cu. yd. per man day 1.25 

Mortar 0.75 

Total, not including hauling |6.50 

Note: The cost of auarrying includes sharpening drills, fore- 
men, etc. 

Backing (rubble) : 

Quarrying, 2 cu. yds. per man day $1.00 

Laying, 1.75 cu. yds. per man day 1.00 

Mortar 1.25 

Total, not including hauling $3.25 

Arch sheeting: 

Quarrying, 1 cu. yd. per man day $2.25 

Cutting, 0.88 cu. yd. per man day 3.25 

Laying, 0.7 cu. yd. per man day 1.25 

Mortar 1.00 

Total, not including hauling, or centers $7.75 

Ring and Coping: 

Quarrying, 0.6 cu. yd. per man day $ 3.40 

Cutting, 0.55 cu. yd. per man day 5.00 

Laying, 0.58 cu. yd. per man day 3.00 

Mortar 0.50 

Total, not including hauling $11.90 

The cost of hauling stone 1 mile from quarry to canal was 50 
cts. per cu. yd.. 7 round trips being made per day by a team haul- 
ing % cu. yd. of stone, as measured in the work. 

The centers for arch culverts of 4 to 8-ft. span were estimated 
to cost 50 cts. cer cu. yd. of arch masonry. For spans of 10 to 
15 ft. the centers cost 75 cts. per cu. yd. of arch masonry. 

Timber stringers covered with 2 or 3-in. plank were largely used 
for foundations and floors of culverts. The cost of placing such 
timber was $4 per M. 

Cost of Lock Masonry, Erie Canal. — The following is a continua- 
tion of the data just given : 

The masonry for locks was dressed as follows : Cut stone face, 
%-in. joints; hammer dressed backing, 1-in. joints. Wages were 
as above given. 

Lock face stone : 

Quarrying, 0.67 cu. yd. per man day $ 3.00 

Cutting, 0.50 cu. yd. per man day 5.50 

Laying, 3.00 cu. yds. per man day 0.83 

Mortar 0.50 

Machinery 0.25 

Total, not including hauling $10.08 



STONE MASONRY. 497 

Lock backing (1-in. joints) : 

Quarrying, 1 cu. yd. per man day $2.00 

Cutting, 1.8 cu. yds. per man day 1.50 

Laying, 4 cu. yds. per man day 0.62 

Mortar 0.75 

Maciiinery 0.25 

Total, not including hauling $5.12 

The average cost of lock masonry, including face and backing, 
was *1.70 per cu. yd., exclusive of transportation which was $2.75 
per cu. yd. 

The cost of a masonry aqueduct consisting of masonry piers, 
arches and spandrels, was as follows: 

To lay masonry : Per day. 

1 mason $2.25 

2 tenders, at $1 2.00 

V2 stone cutter, at $2.40 1.20 

Total, 5.9 cu. yds. laid, at $0.92 per cu. yd. ..$5.45 
To lay arch masonry : Per day. 

1 mason $ 2.25 

2 tenders 2.00 

1 stone cutter 2.50 

Total, 8.95 cu. yds. laid at $0.76 per cu. yd.. .$ 6.75 
To lay spandrel masonry : Per day. 

1 mason $ 2.25 

2 tenders 2.00 

1 % stone cutters 4.00 

Total, 8.26 cu. yds. laid at $1 per cu. yd ? 8.25 

The total cost of aqueduct masonry, per cubic yard, excluding 
the cost of laying just given, was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Quarrying .....$ 2.25 

Transportation 2.00 

Cutting 2.25 

Mortar 1.00 

Machinery 0.25 

Total, not including laying ? 7.75 

Approximately $0.90 per cu. yd. should be added to this $7.75 to 
include cost of laying the masonry. 

Cost of Sweetwater Dam. — James D. Schuyler gives the following 
data on the Sweetwater Dam, California: The dam is 46 ft. thick 
at the base. 12 ft. at the top, and 90 ft. high. It is built as an 
arch with a radius of 222 ft. on line of face at the top. The stone 
was a rnetamorphic (or igneous?) rock with no well-defined cleav- 
age, breaking out in irregular masses. Its weight ranged from 
175 to 200 lbs. per cu. ft. And the average weight of the masonry 
was estimated to be 164 lbs. per cu. ft. The mortar was a 1 : 3, 
proportioned by barrels, mixed in a Ransome mixer. The mixer 
was given 3 or 4 turns after charging it with sand and cement, 
then the water was admitted during the next 3 or 4 revolutions ; 
8 to 10 revolutions made a thorough mixture, requiring 2 to 3 
mins. A tramway for delivering the mortar was carried around 
the face of the dam, on a bracket trestle held by bolts driven into 



498 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

holes drilled in the face of the dam masonry. A grade of 3 ft. 
in 40 at the end of the tramway next to the mixer was sufficient 
to give the mortar car an impetus that would carry it to the farthest 
end of the dam. By using this mechanical mixer and tramway a 
force of 5 men and a horse did the work formerly done by 4 mortar 
mixers and 14 hod carriers. The box of mortar was lifted from 
the car by a derrick and delivered to the masons. 

The stone was quarried from a cliff 100 ft. high situated 800 
ft. below the dam. It was hauled in wagons rigged with platforms 
on a level with the rear wheels. The quarry derricks were simple 
shear-legs, slightly inclined. All stones smaller than 500 lbs. were 
loaded on stone boats 4 ft. square, made of 3-in. plank with a bot- 
tom of boiler plate and provided with chains at the corners. The 
shear-leg derricks were used to hoist the stone boats and deposit 
their loads on the wagons. Stone boats cost $30 each, and several 
sets of them were worn out on the job. A single stone, weighing 
3 tons or more, was readily lifted by the shear-legs, and lowered 
upon a wagon driven underneath. All hoisting was done by horse 
power. Four derricks were used on the dam, masts being 30 to 38 
ft. long, and booms 26 to 32 ft. A fifth derrick, with a 50-ft. 
mast and a 45-ft. boom, proved far more efficient than the others. 
The work was completed Apr. 7, 1888, after 16 mos. 

The masonry was rubble throughout, amounting to 20,507 cu. yds., 
of which 19,269 cu. yds. were in the dam proper; 0.86 bbl. of 
cement was used per cubic yard of masonry. 
The cost of the dam was as follows: 

17,562 bbls. cement ? 63,111 

Hauling cement 8,614 

Lumber 2,408 

Iron work 4,916 

Powder and miscellaneous supplies 3,230 

Pipes, gates, etc 5,152 

Plant, tools, etc 6,237 

Total for materials and plant $ 93,668 

Labor, common and skilled $ 93,591 

Foremen 6,866 

Teams 19,696 

Engineering 10,555 

Clerical work 654 

Earthwork (by contract) 7,666 

Miscellaneous expenses 1,377 

Total for labor ?1'40,405 

Total for materials, etc 93,668 

Grand total $234,073 

Common laborers were paid $2 to $2.50 a day; masons, $4 to 
$5 ; carpenters, $3.50 to $4 ; blacksmiths, $4 ; teams with drivers, 
$5 ; machinists, $7 to $8 ; foremen, 4 to $6. Workmen were scarce 
and independent on account of the "boom" in California. The work 
cost 20 to 25% more than it would have cost under normal con- 
ditions. 

The itemized cost of 11,322 cu. yds. of the masonry laid from 
May 1 to Dec. 31, 1887, was as follows per cubic yard: 



STONE MASONRY. 499 

Percentage 

Per cu. yd. of total. 

Quarrying stone (labor) $ 0.425 4.829 

Loading stone 0.523 5.933 

Hauling stone 0.420 4.758 

Hoisting stone 0.577 6.550 

Loading and hauling sand 0.345 3.915 

Cement, at ? 4. 20 per bbl 3.427 38.900 

Mixing and delivering mortar 0.239 2.710 

Masons 0.797 9.050 

Helpers 0.186 2.109 

Excavating foundations 0.303 3.444 

Making and repairing roads 0.118 1.336 

Blacksmithing (labor) 0.163 1.854 

Carpentry 0.097 1.104 

Rope 0.104 1.186 

Tools 0.046 .524 

Steel 0.014 .155 

Blacksmith coal 0.009 .109 

Blocks and sheaves 0.011 .13c 

Powder 0.086 .974 

Lumber 0.195 2.220 

Wetting masonry 0.048 0.542 

Foremen 0.332 3.774 

Engineering and superintendence... 0.343 3.891 

Total $ 8.808 100.000 

Cost of a Granite Dam, Cheyenne, Wyo. — Mr. A. J. Wiley gives 
the following data on a dam for the Granite Springs Reservoir, 
Cheyenne. The work was done by contract, April 20, 1903, to 
June 21. 1904. From Nov. 20. 1903, to April 11. 1904. work was 
closed down on account of cold weather. The extreme height of 
the dam is 96 ft., and the length of the crest is 410 f t. ; the thickness 
at the base is 56 ft, and on the top it is 10 ft. It contains 14,222 
cu. yds. of granite rubble masonry laid in 1:4 Portland mortar, 
except for the face of stones where 1 : 3 mortar was used. The 
mortar constituted 35.2% of the dam; and 0.61 bbl. cement was 
used per cubic yard of masonry. 

The mortar was mixed with a Smith mixer, in batches of % cu. 
yd., and the mixer output was 6 cu. yds. per hr. The mortar was 
dumped into buckets and carried on cars running on a trestle built 
along the up-stream face of the dam. Derricks on top of the dam 
hoisted the mortar buckets. 

The stone was a gabbro, quarried about 100 ft. below the dam. 
It was devoid of cleavage and was blasted out in large masses from 
an open face 20 to 40 ft. high. The drilling was done by hand. 
For each cubic yard of rock there were used 0.35 lb. of dynamite 
and 1.05 lbs. of black powder. The stones averaged 2 cu. yds., but 
pieces containing 5 cu. yds. were used. 

Rocks breaking smaller than 3 cu. yds. were used as they were 
blasted out of the quarry, and larger masses were split up by plug 
and feather into roughly rectangular shapes. The best shaped 
stones were used for face stones, the ordinary rough rocks were 
used in the body of the dam, and the smaller pieces made the spalls. 
The rock was taken from the quarry by a guyed derrick with 40-ft. 
boom, and loaded upon platform cars. The track was laid upon 
such a grade that the loaded cars ran alone and the empties were 



500 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

pushed back by hand. The trestle which carried the track was 
supported by the steps on the down-stream side of the dam. Upon 
the top of the dam were located two gnyed derricks with 40-ft. 
booms similar to the quarry derrick. Bach of the three derricks 
was operated by a 10-ton hoisting engine located in an engine 
house near the south end of the dam. The derricks on top of the 
dam took the rock from the cars on the lower side of the dam 
and set them in the masonry. They also took the mortar buckets 
from the cars on the up-stream side of the dam and dumped them 
where needed on top of the dam. 

Spalls were brought upon the dam in skips, holding about a 
cubic yard each, and kept in the skips until used. The mortar 
was usually dumped in half-yard batches in a convenient depres- 
sion of the masonry, and was distributed with long-handled, round- 
pointed shovels. 

The up-stream face was laid with the- joints in the true plane 
of the face. No objection was made to having the convexity of 
a stone project beyond this plane, but no stones with concave 
faces were permitted in the face of the dam. The upper 20 ft. of 
the down-stream face were laid in the same manner, but the rest 
of the down-stream face was laid in rough steps with half the 
step inside and half outside the theoretical plane of this face. 
The stones in both these faces were laid to break joint and were 
well bonded into the body of the dam. In the body of the dam 
but little attention was pai<^ to the bond of the work, the irregular 
stones insuring this without effort, but every precaution was taken 
to insure the filling of voids. To this end the mortar was used 
very wet, even sloppy, and the chief rule observed was that there 
should first be placed a large excess of mortar of which the largest 
possible percentage was to be displaced by rock. In setting the 
large rock, a bed was prepared with spalls and mortar, and then 
a considerable excess of mortar was placed on the bed. The rock 
was then slowly lowered and settled on the bed by working it with 
bars. The excess mortar would ooze from under the rock which 
would then float upon an even layer of mortar, filling all the 
spaces under it. During this operation the inspector, either stand- 
ing upon the rock or having his hand upon it, can tell if the rock 
is riding or rocking, and, if necessary, has the rock raised and the 
bed readjusted. The large rocks were set as close as_ possible to 
each other without being in contact, the intervening spaces being 
filled with mortar and spalls. In this work the masons were not 
permitted to sandwich the spalls between layers of mortar, but 
were required first to fill the space with wet mortar in which the 
spalls were submerged, displacing as much as possible of the mortar. 
While it was the intention to have the masonry brought up in 
horizontal benches extending the full length of the dam, the 
exigencies of the work prevented this and the middle portion of 
the dam was completed first, stepping off toward each end. The 
average rate of progress was 60 cu. yds. of masonry per day of 
ten hours. The best monthly rate was 2,370 cu. yds. during July, 



STONE MASONRY. 501 

1903, averaging 83 cu. yds. for a ten-hour day, or 41.5 yds. of 
masonry per ten-hour day for a single derriclc, including the time 
lost in moving and resetting derricks. During this month the 
average daily force employed was as follows: In the quarry, 21. Z 
men, ly^ engine runners, and one derrick; in screening and haul- 
ing sand, 3.2 teams with drivers, and 3.2 men ; in mixing and 
delivering mortar, 3 men; in laying masonry, 3.5 masons, 6.5 
helpers, 2% engine runners, and 2 derricks. 

The following were the average wages paid per 10-hr. day: 
Quarrymen, $2.50 ; masons, $5.00 ; masons' helpers, $2.25 to $2.50 ; 
engine runners, $3.00; common labor, $2.25. 
The actual cost of the masonry was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.652 cu. yd. solid rock, $1.96 $ 1.28 

0.348 cu. yd. mortar (not incl. cement), at $1.93. 0.67 

0.613 bbl. cement, at $3.58, delivered 2.19 

Labor laying 1 cu. yd 1.11 

Total $ 5.25 

The solid rock was quarried and delivered for $1.96 per cu. yd. 
(solid), itemized as follows; 

Per cu. yd. 
Quarrying and Delivering: (solid). 

Common labor $ 1.06 

Engine runners 0.14 

Coal, $6 per ton 0.08 

Blacksmithing 0.13 

Steel ; 0.04 

Explosives 0.15 

Interest and dep. on plant ($1,644) 0.18 

General expenses 0.18 

Total per cu. yd. (soHd) $ 1.96 

This is equivalent to $1.28 per cu. yd. measured in the dam. 
The cost of securing the sand and mixing the mortar was as fol- 
lows per cu. yd. of mortar : 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor digging and hauling (teams) sand $ 1.10 

Blacksmithing, sand pit 0.13 

General expense, sand pit 0.19 

Labor mixing and delivering -....■ 0.30 

Fuel, $6 per ton 0.04 

Interest and depreciation on plant ($620) 0.12 

General expense 0.05 

Total per cu. yd. mortar $ 1.93 

The cost of laying the masonry was as follows per cu. yd. of 
masonry : 

Per cu. yd 

Labor, masons and helpers $ 0.50 

Engine runners 0.18 

Fuel, $6 per ton 0.10 

Blacksmithing 0.02 

Interest and depreciation on plant ($3,000) 0.22 

General expense 0.09 

Total $ 1.11 

The interest and depreciation on the plant was assumed to be 



502 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

50% of the first cost of the plant. The fuel was estimated on 
the basis of 5 lbs. of coal per horse-power hour of actual working 
time for the nominal horse-power of the engines. As a matter of 
fact, a large amount of cord wood was used instead of coal. 

Cost of Masonry, New Croton Dam. — This dam was built of 
gneiss (a granitic rock), and the average cost to the contractor 
during the years 1897 to 1905 was about as follows for the rubble 
masonry : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.95 bbl. cement, at $1.85 $1.75 

Quarrying % cu. yd. solid stone, at $1.50 1.00 

Sand, 1/3 cu. yd., at $0.90 0.30 

Labor laying masonry 0.90 

Pumping . . . . ; 0.10 

Plant, roads, etc 0.60 

General expense, 2% estimated 0.10 

Total $4.75 

In quarrying about 25% of the rock was wasted. 
In laying the masonry cableways were used for about half the 
yardage, and steel towers with derricks were used for the other 
half. 

Some of the face stone was dressed. The rough pointing of 38,000 
sq. ft. cost $0.60 per sq. ft. The 6-cut ax woi'k on 84,000 sq. ft. 
cost $1.20 per sq. ft. 

Cost of a Rubble Dam. — This dam was built in 1898 by contract, 
under the direction of Mr. George W. Rafter, across the Indian 
River, Hamilton County, N. Y. The main dam was 7 ft. wide on 
top, 47 ft. high, 33 ft. wide on bottom, and 400 ft. long. The face 
masonry was dressed to lay 1%-in. joints. The backing was large 
irregular rubble stones laid in beds of 1:3% mortar, and the 
vertical joints filled with 1 : 3 % : 7 % concrete. No attempt was 
made to keep separate accounts of the face masonry and the back- 
ing, but it was estimated that 27% of the dam was mortar. The 
stone was a pink synetic granite, quarried 500 ft. from one end 
of the dam. There was no difficulty in quarrying regular blocks 
for the face. The sand was loaded upon a scow holding 30 cu. 
yds. and hauled 2 miles down the river. A foreman and 6 men, 
by using a windlass, rope and sail, handled the scow. They loaded 
and delivered 720 cu. yds. of sand and 180 cords of wood per month, 
at a cost of about $310. Wages of common laborers were $1 a 
day and board, and it is probable that the board cost $0.50 per 
man per day. 

The plant to build the dam cost $10,340. The actual cost of the 
dam to the contractor was: 

Labor clearing 35 miles of margins, 1,160 acres. $13,000 

Hauling cement and supplies 22 miles 6,836 

Freight, cement and supplies 960 

Barn account (teams owned by contractor) .... 725 

Stone, cement and other materials 18,830 

Labor (not including clearing) 31,218 

General expense 9,601 



STONE MASONRY. 503 

Interest 1.150 

Insurance 1,235 

Depreciation of plant, est. 33% 3,450 

Total $87,0-05 

The "general expense" includes coffer-damming and pumping, 

erecting and wrecking the plant, etc. The time occupied in doing 

the work was 7 months. 

In July and August, when the work was well under way, the 

cost of the masonry was very low, and averaged as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Quarrying face stone (not incl. backing) $0.35 

Labor laying masonry 0.53 

Labor pointing masonry 0.15 

Mixing mortar and concrete, and crushing 0.20 

Cement 2.00 

Sand 0.15 

General expense and superintendence 0.27 

Total $3.65 

In addition to this there was the cost of quarrying the stone for 
the backing ; but this stone was paid for as excavation, so it is not 
included above. During July and August this excavation cost 46 
cts. per cu. yd. 

It will be noted that the accounts were not well kept, for no 
statement is given of the proportion of backing to face stone. The 
quarrying of the face stone doubtless cost several dollars per cubic 
yard of the face stone, although it amounted to only $0.35 per cu. 
yd. when distributed over all the masonry. Nor is it stated what 
the dressing cost. From measurements on a drawing of the cross- 
section of the main dam, I estimate that it runs 29 cu. yds. of 
masonry ner lin. ft., of which about 30% is face stone, if we allow 
a depth of 2 % ft. of face stone extending into the dam : but in 
the lower third of the dam, where there is great breadth, the face 
stone would not be more than 20% of the total masonry, and at 
the bottom only 15%. Hence if the work in July and August was 
in the lower part of the dam, as it doubtless was, we must multiply 
the $0.35, above given, by at least 5 to secure an approximate 
estimate of the cost of quarrying a cubic yard of face stone. In- 
deed, it is likely that the cost of face stone was more than 5 times 
$0.35 per cu. yd. 

I have gone into these details for the purpose of showing how 
little value there often is in published cost records, because of the 
failure of engineers to keep their cost records properly. The wages 
of quarrymen and masons are not given. 

Data on Laying Masonry With a Cableway. — Mr. Spencer Miller 
gives the following data on the use of cableways for laying ma- 
sonry. The Basin Creek Dam for the water-works of Butte, Mont., 
is 120 ft. high and 300 ft. long, designed by Mr. Chester B. 
Davis. A cableway 892 ft. between towers, spanned the dam and 
the quarry. No derricks were used on the dam, for, by using a 
snubbing post and a horse, the stones could be swung where desired. 



504 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In 16 days a gang of 86 men quarried and laid 1,430 cu. yds. of 
masonry. This gang included 6 masons, quarrymen, firemen and 
all laborers about the dam and camp. These six masons averaged 
15 cu. yds. of masonry each per day. 

At Rochester, N. Y., two cableways, side by side and 60 ft. 
apart, were used to erect a stone arch bridge 630 ft. long and 
towers 50 ft. high. A 30-hp., 8% X 10-in., engine was used for 
each cableway. Stones were laid between the cableways by hitch- 
ing the hoisting lines of both cableways to the same stone. To lay 
the masonry piers a frame was used which straddled the piers and 
on top of which a traveler was used to place the stone as fast 
as it was delivered by the cableway. After a pier was completed 
the framework and traveler were lifted by the cableways to the 
site of the next pier, in less than 10 minutes. The centers for the 
arches were lifted into place by the cableways. This highway 
bridge contained 2,200 cu. yds. of masonry in piers and arches, 
2,278 cu. yds. arch sheeting, 2,660 cu. yds. concrete spandrel back- 
ing, and 310,000 lbs. of iron work; 350 M of lumber were used 
in the centers. 

Cost of Masonry and Timber Crib Dam. — Mr. Mauiice S. Parker 
gives data on the Black Eagle Falls Dam, Missouri River, Great 
Falls, Mont. The work was done by day labor (Apr. 15, 1890, to 
Jan. 6, 1891) under Mr. Parker's supervision, wages being as fol« 
lows: Common labor, $2; stone masons, $4; carpenters, $3.50"; 
quarrymen, $2.25 ; stone cutters, $4.50 ; quarry foremen, $3.50 ; 
mason foremen. $5 ; stone cutter foremen, $5 ; carpenter fore- 
men, $5. 

The stone was a red sandstone weighing 160 to 170 lbs. (some 
specimens 178 lbs.) per cu. ft., and was quarried from the bed of 
the river, the average haul being 500 ft. on push cars. The stone 
occurs in vertical strata 1 to 4 ft. thick, the bedding planes making 
an angle of 45° with the current. Timber was delivered near the 
gate chambers. Cement used was Milwaukee and Buffalo mixed 
1:2. Portland cement was used in freezing weather and gave per- 
fect satisfaction, being now as hard as stone. The following table 
gives the cost of the labor in construction, including all handling 
of materials after unloading from cars: 

Cost of labor. 

4,600 cu. yds. first class rubble, at $6.56 $30,438 

1,500 cu. yds. cut stone masonry, at $16.40 - 24,600 

5,000 cu. yds. dry stone filling in cribs, at $2.10 10,500 

10,000 cu. yds. excav., half rock, half earth, at $1.07 10,700 

1,200 M timber in cribs, at $10.85 13,020 

100 M timber in gates and chambers, at $33.72 3,372 

Engineering expenses, 12 mos 5,900 

Total cost of labor $98,530 

The expense of false work of all kinds, such as cofferdams, tram- 
ways, etc., amounted to 5% of the total cost and is divided propor- 
tionately between the classes of work above given. The cost of 
iabor on timber in gates and chambers includes the cost of placing 
all irons and gearing. The total cost of the dam was $175,000, 



STONE MASONRY. 505 

Including materials, labor and salaries. About 20% of the rubble 
was broken range faced. The cut-stone masonry was laid with 
close beds and joints. 

■ The minimum flow of the river is 4,000 cu. ft per sea The 
average depth of water was 2 ft. when work was begun, but it 
was very swift as the rapids at the site of the dam had a fall of 
2 ft. in a 100 ft. During June floods the depth was 6 ft. The 
crib dam is 745 ft. long, and the canal and gates occupy an addi- 
tional width of 95 ft. The average height of the dam is 14 ft., 
resting on a ledge of sandstone. The longitudinal timbers of the 
crib are soaced 8 ft. c. to. c. The bottom timbers were cut to 
fit the rock, bedded in cement mortar and drift bolted to plugs of 
wood driven into holes drilled in the ledge rock. 

The work was begrun on the north side of the river, a sheer dam 
being first built to divert the stream from the dam site. This 
sheer dam consisted of wooden horses placed 8 ft. apart, with 
stringers of 4-in. plank. A facing of 2-in. tongue and grooved 
planks was placed on the up-stream legs of the horses, and a row 
of sand-filled bags placed at the toe of the planks. There was a 
little leakage, and the leakage water was diverted by a second 
row of sand bags parallel with the first row, and a short distance 
down stream. This sheer dam withstood a flood 6 ft. deep. 

On the south side of the river, which was deeper and swifter, it 
was necessary to sink small triangular stone-filled cribs to sup- 
port the wooden horses for the sheer dam. These cribs were of 
4-in. plank with 6-in. posts, each holding 1 cu. yd. of stone, and 
were placed 8 ft. apart, each crib supporting a horse. At times 
the depth of water against this sheer dam was 15 ft., but the 
leakage was easily cleared with hand pumps. 

To close the long gap between the two ends of the dam, wooden 
horses were placed 8 ft. apart with a foot walk of 4-in. plank on 
top, and heavy timbers to hold the horses down. From this tem- 
porary bridge a second tier of horse bents was placed (8 ft. c. to 
c.) on the up-stream side, connected with 4-in. stringers and 
sheeted with 4-in. plank. The dam was intended to break the force 
of the current, which it did admirably. The leakage was taken 
care of in sections by small sheer dams built of matched plank, and 
by the use of sand bags. Every 48 ft., an opening of 14 ft. was 
left in the crib dam which was used as a temporary sluiceway 
when the cofferdam was removed. These gaps were subsequently 
closed with planks, and the cribwork with its stone filling built in. 

Cost of Laying Masonry, Dunning's Dam. — Mr. E. Sherman Gould 
is authority for the following data on The Dunning's Dam near 
Scranton, Pa. The dam is masonry on a concrete foundation, built 
by contract. The stone for the masonry was a conglomerate laid 
in swimming beds of mortar. On one occasion one foreman, 8 
masons and about 9 helpers laid nearly 500 cu. yds. of rubble in 
76 hrs., using a double drum engine and derrick. This is equivalent 
to 8.2 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day per mason. On another occasion, 
another foreman, 7 masons and 8 or 9 helpers laid 375 cu. yds. 



506 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In 7 days, or 7.6 cu. yds. per mason per day. This was very rapid 
work in both cases. 

Cost of Quarrying and Laying a Limestone Wall. — Mr. James W. 
Beardsley is autliority for the following data on the cost of quarry-' 
ing and laying limestone for retaining walls on the Chicago Canal. 
The contractors selected parts of the canal where the limestone 
occurred in strata and were uniform, so that the beds of the stone 
quarried required no dressing. The stone was laid in courses 
averaging about 15 ins. thick, the better stone being selected for 
the face of the wall. Guy derricks having a capacity of 6 to 10 
tons, boom 40 to 60 ft. long, operated by a hoisting engine, were 
used for loading the stone. Black powder was used to shake up 
the ledges and the stone was then barred and wedged out. The 
cost per cu. yd. is the average of 93,500 cu. yds., measured in 
retaining walls. The mortar was only 13%% of the wall, indicat- 
ing an unusually even bedded stone that squared up well. The 
cost does not include general superintendence, installation of plant, 
plant rental, powder, material for repairs, and cost arising from 
delays. 

Mr. Beardsley has evidently divided the number of working days 
credited to each class of men by the total number of days worked 
on the job, which results in giving fractions of days labor in the 
following typical force: 

Per cu. yd. 
Quarry force: masonry. 
1 foreman, at $3.50 $0,078 

2.11 derrickmen, at $1.50 0.075 

8.42 quarrymen, at $1.65 0.312 

1.10 enginemen, at $2.25 0.052 

2.28 laborers, at $1.50 0.080 

0.33 waterboy, at $1.00 0.007 

0.27 blacksmith, at $2.50 0.013 

0.18 blacksmith's help, at $1.75 0.007 

0.36 drill runner, at $2.00 0.023 

0.07 drill helper, at $1.50 0.002 

0.04 watchman, at $1.50 0.001 

0.29 team, at $3.50 0.028 

1.12 derricks, at $1.25 0.040 

0.36 drill, at $1.25 0.015 

Total quarry force $0,733 

Wall force: 

1 foreman, at $4.25 - $0,113 

4.20 masons, at $3.50 -. 0.354 

1.46 masons' helpers, at $1.50 0.058 

1.81 mortar mixers, at $1.50 0.073 

0.66 mortar laborer, at $1.50 0.027 

1.82 hod carriers, at $1.50 ; 0.073 

1.77 derrickmen, at $1.50 0.071 

1 engineman, at $2.25 0.054 

1.62 laborers, at $1.50 0.065 

0.45 waterboy, at $1.00 0.009 

0.86 team,^ at $3.50 0.078 

0.20 carpenters, etc., at $2.50 0.010 

1.59 derricks, at $1.50 0.042 

Total wall force $1,027 



STONE MASONRY. 507 

This wall force of 16 men laid 37 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day, each 
mason averaging 8.8 cu. yds. . The rates for derricks, etc., apply 
to tlie cost of fuel, at $2 a ton. The wall derricks were stifE-legs, 
having booms 40 ft. long, and were moved on a track parallel with 
the wall. 

Work was done between Sept., 1894, and Oct., 1896, with a plant 

having a total value of $30,200. The total cost of the masonry was 

as follows: 

Quarry force $0.73 

Wall force 1.03 

Sand, at $1.35 per cu. yd 0.13 

Cement, at 60 cts. per bbl 0.24 



Total $2.13 

Cost of a Masonry Wall, Including Excavation.* — The work was 
done in Seotember. 1896. and consisted of the construction of a 
retaining wall at the round house of the Detroit, Lansing and 
Northern R. R., at Grand Racids, Mich. The contractor furnished 
the labor only, the material being furnished by the railroad com- 



^ ^l^€ ?f.fpnfr^>^^ 





Mt-Conavfe^ ^' ^ -'MasfefSlkl' ^^'-^ 

Fig. 1. Masonry Abutment. 

pany. The wall was built in the shape shown in Fig. 1, as it was 
desired to utilize it as the foundation for a future extension of 
the round house. 

Excavation. — The excavation was nearly all stiff clay with stone 
and small boulders, thus making hard digging. Almost all of the 
excavated matter was handled twice, cast out on the ground and 
then loaded on flat cars. The time given for excavation includes, 
perhaps, six or eight dollars' worth of time spent in moving cars. 
In all of the work the contractor was considered as a foreman and 
was allowed 40 cents per hour for the time he himself actually 
worked. In all of the cases the foremen hours are for the hours 
during which actual work was done by them. That is to say, the 
foreman not only acted as overseer, but also did actual work, exca- 
vating, laying stone, etc. 

The cost of the excavation work was as follows : 

Foreman, 33 hours, at 40 cts. per hour $13.20 

Foreman, 104 hours, at 22% cts. per hour 23.40 

Laborer, 285 hours, at 12^/^ cts. per hour 35.63 

Total $72.23 

^Engineering-Contracting, May 30, 1906. 



608 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A total of 168.1 cubic yards was excavated at a cost of $0.43 
per yard. The contract price at which the worlc was let was $0.25. 
Bach Filling. — ^In back filling the earth was wheeled from the 
flat cars and Dlaced back of the wall. A small amount of earth 
was cast in directly from the bank. The cost of this work was 
as follows: 

Foreman, 4 hours, at 40 cts. per hour $1.60 

Foreman, 11 hours, at 22 1^ cts. per hour 2.48 

Laborer, 52 hours, at 12 14 cts. per hour 6.50 

Total $10.58 

The back filling amounted to 63 4/10 cu. yds., and this was done 
at a cost of $0.17 per cubic yard. The contract price was $0.25 per 
cubic yard. 

Concrete. — The proportions for the concrete were 1:2%:5, Akron 
(natural) cement being used. All conditions were favorable for 
fair work. It was found that 1 cu. yd. of concrete was equivalent 
to 29.S cu. ft. of material, composed of 3.6 cu. ft. cement (1 1/10 
bbl.), 8.4 cu. ft. sand (2 7/10 bbl.) and 17.8 cu. ft. broken stone 
(51/2 bbl.). 
The cost of 15% cu. yds. of concrete was as follows: 

Foreman, 14 hours, at 40 cts. per hour $ 5.60 

Foreman, 20 hours, at 22% cts. per hour 4.50 

Laborer, 49 hours, at 12% cts. per hour 6.11 ' 

Mason, 2 hours, at 35 cts. per hour .70 

Total $16.91 

A total of 15% cu. yds. concrete was prepared at a cost of $1.09 
per cubic yard; the contract price was $1.00 per cubic yard. 

Stone Laying. — In the stone laying, Petoskey limestone was used. 
The limestone weighed, according to car weights, 5.9 tons per cord, 
equal to 93 lbs. per cubic foot of piled stone. Conditions were fair 
for good work. It was here found that 1 cu. yd. rubble masonry 
required 0.25 cord stone, 0.22 cu. yds. sand and 0.54 bbl. cement. 
Akron (natural) cement, one barrel containing 3 % cu. ft., was 
used and the mortar was mixed in the proportions of 1:3. In the 
force account given below the foreman laid stone, and all other 
foreman hours are for actual work. 

The cost of laying the 82.2 cu. yds. of rubble is shown in the 
following table: 

Foreman, 78 hours, at 40 cts. per hour $31.20 

Foreman, 80 hours, at 22% cts. per hour 18.11 

Mason, 41 hours, at 35 cts. per hour 14.52 

Laborer, 168 hours, at 12% cts. per hour 21.00 

Total $84.83 

A total of 82.2 cu. yds. of wall was built, the labor cost per 
cubic yard being $1.03 ; the contract price was at $1.25 per cubic 
yard. 

If the full cost of the plant is charged to the work, another 
32 cts. per cu. yd. must be added for plant. 



STONE MASONRY. 509 

The mortar was mixed 1 : 1, and Louisville (natural) cement 
was used, each bag being: called 2 cu. ft. 

The wall averaged 24 ft. high, and was 4 ft. wide for the upper 
8 ft., then it widened to 12 ft. at the base. It was laid in courses 
12 to 18 ins. thick. 

Cost of Laying Bridge Pier Masonry. — Mr. Gustave Kaufman 
gives the following data on the abutments and piers of a highway 
bridge across the Ohio River at Cincinnati. The total length of 
the bridge is 2.966 ft., with a 24-ft. roadway and two 7-ft. side- 
walks. There are two abutments, nine masonry piers, of which 
four piers are founded on limestone, and five on piles. There are 
28 pedestals for the steel viaduct approaches. The center span of 
the bridge has a clear height of 102 ft. above low water. Work 
on the substructure was begun May 1, 1890, and floods caused many 
delays, so that the bridge was not opened till Aug., 1891. 

Louisville cement was used throughout, except Portland cement 
for pointing. Piers Nos. 1. 2. 3 and 9 are Ohio River freestone, 
with a backing of freestone. Where pile foundations were used, 
the heads of piles were imbedded in 3 to 4i/^ ft. of concrete foun- 
dation. Piers 4 to 8, inclusive, are of Berea sandstone with a 
backing, or hearting, of concrete, up to the belt course, above which 
the masonry is Ohio River freestone entirely. The dimensions of 
the piers are shown in Table I. 

Table L — Dimensions Ohio River Piers. 
Size Height Size at Cubic 

Pier. Under Over Base of Yards Remarks. 

No. Coping. All. Shaft. Masonry. 

Feet. Feet. Feet. 



1 


5 X 30 


26.2 


6.4 X 31.4 


146.2 


Square shaft. 


2 


5 X 30 


39.4 


7.6 X 32.6 


271.7 


" 


3 


6 X 30 


47.0 


9.1 X 33.1 


393.9 


Circular sha 


4 


9 X 34 


74.0 


13.8 X 49.5 


1,432.9 




5 


10 X 34 


112.8 


17.3 X 53.7 


2,357.6 




6 


10 X 34 


104.1 


17.8 X 54.2 


2,475.6 




7 


9 X 34 


93.4 


16.0 X 51.8 


1,974.1 




8 


7X 32 


87.1 


13.4 X 46.8 


1,393.3 




9 


7X32 


37.3 


9.6 X 34.6 


330.1 


Square shaft. 



Note. — Pier No. 3, height includes caisson. The coping of all 
piers was Bedford oolitic limestone 18 ins. thick, except for piers 
5 and 6 which had a 24-in. coping. There were 2,173 cu. yds. of 
masonry in the ramps on both sides of the river. 

The masonry was laid with the helo of derrick scows, and the 
cost of laying the 280 cu. yds. above the starling course was $1-25 
per cu. yd., including the cost of sand and cement. The cost of 
laying the sub-coping and coping was $1.45 per cu. yd., including 
sand and cement. The cost of laying masonry and concrete, courses 
5 to 21, was ?1.30 per cu. yd., including sand and cement. These 
costs do not include cofferdams. Wages were as follows, per 10-hr. 
day: Common labor. $1.50; masons. $3.25; stone cutters, $3.50; 
enginemen, $2.00 ; foreman, $4.00. 

The face stones were laid alternate headers and stretchers, stones 
being not less than 31/2 ft. long, dressed to %-in. bed joints and 



510 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

%-in. vertical joints for at least 12 ins. back of the face. The 
width of each stone was 1^4 times the depth of the course. 

The cost of laying Pier 5 was $0.73 per cu. yd., courses 1 to 37 ; 
and $1.11 per cu. yd., courses 38 to 54 ; and $1.10 per cu. yd., 
courses 55 to 56; the cost of sand and cement is included in all 
cases. See Tables II and III. 

Cost of Sodom Dam. — Mr. Walter McCuUoch gives the following 
data on the Sodom Dam. on the east branch of the Croton River, 
N. Y. The dam is 500 ft long at the cooing, 240 ft. long at top of 
foundation, 53 ft. thick at foundation. 12 ft. thick under coping, 
and 78 ft. high above ground line. Work was begun Feb. 22, 1888, 
and completed Oct. 29, 1892. The contractor paid laborers $1.25 
a day, and masons, $3.50. There were 35,887 cu. yds. of masonry 
of all classes. Of this 23,600 cu. yds. were rubble laid in 1 : 2 
Portland mortar, 6,300 cu. yds. rubble in 1 : 3 mortar, 780 cu. yds. 
of granite dimension stone masonry, 4,300 cu. yds. limestone face 
masonry, and 530 cu. yds. of brick masonry. The face masonry and 
brickwork were laid in 1 : 2 Portland mortar. The rubble was 
quarried 1^ miles from the dam and hauled on double team trucks 
carrying 1 to 1% cu yds. per load, making 6 to 8 trips a day. The 
rock was a hard, close-grained gneiss of irregular cleavage. The 
face stones (4,300 cu. yds.) were quarried at a limestone quarry 
7 miles away and delivered on cars of the N. T. & N. E. R. R. These 
stones were cut for 30-in. courses, stretchers being 3% ft. long, 
and headers 4 ft. long. Dimension stones (780 cu. yds.) were 
granite from Wilmington, Del. Cement cost from $2.31 to $2.51 
per bbl. The cost of the rubble stone delivered on the work from, 
the quarry was $1.97 per cu. yd., including 5 cts. quarry royalty. 
Rubble stone and snails from the excavation waste banks cost $0.67 
per cu. yd. The average cost of rubble stone was $1.26. The 
actual cost of rubble masonry in 1 : 2 mortar was $4.45 per cu. yd. 
The actual cost of limestone for face work was $9.75 per cu. yd., 
including 15 cts. quarry royalty, but not including laying and mor- 
tar. The cost of dimension granite on the work, including dressing, 
was $30.08 per cu. yd. The cost of ihe coffer-damming and other 
work is not given. 

A cableway spanned the dam, 2-in. cable, 7 lbs. per ft., 667-ft. 
span, sag 25 ft. under 10-ton load. The cableway plant cost $3,800. 
After four months' use the cable, under a load of only 6 tons, broke 
50 ft. from one tower, at a place where stone and cement skips 
were taken up. A new cable was installed, the towers raised 10 f t. • 
so as to give it more sag, and it served till the end of the work. 
The cableway anchors were oak deadmen, 2 ft. diameter by 10 ft. 
long, in trenches in rock 6 ft. deep. The masonry was laid with 
fixed derricks and witla a traveling derrick on a 30-ft. trestle run- 
ning upon a track of 36-ft. gage. The best month's work was 3,000 
cu. yds. laid with 12 masons and three derricks; the average prog- 
ress was 1,700 cu. yds. per month. The Giant Portland cement 
came in duck bags of 100 lbs. each (93 lbs. net), four to the barrel. 
The Union natural cement came in 100-lb. bags (96 lbs. net), three 



STONE MASONRY. 5H 



» I 



^, 



2'S --"O a;* 

•S ^ cof^'^^to .tig 

» * % ^ i2 i2 ^ fl 

^- ^^^^^ 

W® 5;t oJ "-I "-I "-I "-I "-I rH T-i rt rt a ^ _C 



i^. 7" , i-Ni ^'j i.'j fc'j tij cvj v^ wv UNI -T' li.* uj lis vjiiv^v '^ n !>■ 

ma>f-'_: Tn Ti f^ 



> M <D 3 y _ 



n>» 



to 0) oj f- 0) 



O <D ft O ^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ° 8 I !i C 
^ co!-iJr'.J<-*-*iOTt<ioiocoo5Dcoco'*iX!';ocoo.i4j , "Oo 

Ph n « • rrt _; •" "2 



bo 

f;:^ .B2-SrHt-;-*Ot-«Ct-OOc-lOr-<1000N ; .„• ■ ii '^ 

pq ■" S <D 0) mS 

■^ «>; ooog 

•l2SoCr3 05 0qo6t-^tO-*-*COU50>-Ho6Mr-I flcC''^^ 

'^^^ sss^^ 

i.o'^. >- >• I -a w 

•r, ,„ J? 52 en oi N ootD com'*'*MC-ootou5oooo rd ■!?_< 

.l3g°,grH'-ICO=^c<IC<q(M(Mffqeq,Hi-li-lrHrHrH f^ p'O 

-G (U m '" O J S 

twNMlNC<jT}<||rtll^ml|in||oOO ^^ 

" ait>-lO ^C^ Woo OT COI> WlO W-^LOCD '^r^ 



(/J ,^j uj »-— Li.> -M t;3 l/J LW Wi ^tJ L— • UJ uj w^ ^r L£J Vf A^ 

Ig^ xxxxx^x^xx^x^xxx ^S^ 

0-^'CO'H05COcO>l>q>drH>0>05C>r-i "^'tjrC 

3 (M irq IH IH rS <] .H <; tH tH <j rH <j rH tH <B 2 tlfl 



■gOJ rH(MC^]CO <J. 

. t, rH<NM-*lO O-q Ort(M O ^O O t- 00 OS "O 

03 +-'rH*^e<lc<i'^N'*"^C'Oeoco 3^/ 

^O eoMcoco Og 

'^ O rH oq !M X> G 



512 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



^ '■^S'5i-iooio-*oOTHD5a5i>-Mio«ooocgoM ajra 

S * 5 I* CO CO ■* Tt( -* u5 lo in lo to i;d to L- 1>- c- o co o O Si . 

p t,co 

5 'P t- C oq •* CO C<1 CO ■* to 00 to 00 CO O t- CO CO Oi ^ " !h '^5 

vJ P»ai'5tD'^c^iMTHOosoOooC-«='toioLniraio 3^33^*^ 

I ^1^^^^^^^ • ■ • ^§88*^S 

gj 'Ogto"'. co05to-^cOTj<mecicq'>*<T«cocn • 42l*l',C^ 

W '*"rl c<io5LocqoO'*o3tot-^oi>tdir3-*c- • gj'^iDmQjCiS 

Jt^ ^-3 lO'^COCOlMC^rHr-lrtrH • ^ u, O O g ft 

^.Q M_ O 



2rrJt(_l<W mtT- 

p S o o rt'^ 

.i? fl co"^Oi00oeot-cocoiJ"'5'>'«0"*''^'^ 

H '"" ' _ _ _ _ 

(-5 Om2co"=^iMe<ie^Ne^eq'-<'-<'^'-"^'^'" iI)"'ti'S5-S 

CO cd ^ 5 fl 
05 m '"inPHft+j"" 



3 Oco'='odtotoinTHe<ico«ocooq(NOON tortcd^t^ 

■^ r/i W .,. CO ni i«.-i (^1 ^1 ^1 /^-l ..^ _J i~J ^^ *^ 1— 1 C<1 CO >»^ 1 rt -4-> -M ^ H 






C^art-«='in^-*^tH'-i'-it-totDtOT(<-*Tt. m 

"^ O fl ca M C^ Cq C<1 C^ Cq C<l C<I tH tH tH tH rH (M M ^ Jg 

.- o b 373 

ri to o 43 CQ 

*j loO llin llin l|t>;«o II llrH llooo g^ ecg 

03 ., uo"' mc<5 wo inodoi 02 touj ojTf^ioto ^^ ^ 

m*j i^in OJio OJuj a)Tf<rj< y «eo OJcococo 0'° 

S O O U5= ajN ^tH fe'^CO ^ ferH J[3rHOC= fe ^ ^ 

O 3 T-l'-l<iH<<rH<JrHrH<lj<<rH<^rHrH,H 0^ P, gg 



ffq (-■* CO Oco 






O' 



•Ha? eooi cq CO co-^ 10 ^ • g" 

.2 -J O Oo Oijq OcOrtiOOiopTtHOtO "d fl 

Q tH IN COCO ■* 3 -u 



^ 



STONE MASONRY. 513 

to the barrel. The sand and cement were mixed dry (3 turns with 
shovels) and delivered in boxes on the work where it was wet as 
needed. Rubble stones varied from 1 cu. ft. to 1 cu. yd. in size, and 
in placing them the beds of mortar were made very full and the 
stone thoroughly shaken till firm. Mortar was filled into the joints 
and then all the spalls that it would take were forced in. Care 
was taken not to build the rubble up in courses. In freezing 
weather, above Z0°, hot brine (5 lbs. salt to 1 bbl. of water) and 
heated sand were used for the mortar. Salt and sand were sprinkled 
over the fresh mortar at night. In the spring the mortar laid in 
freezing weather could be scaled off 1/16 to % in. deep, but under 
this it was hard. In laying the foundation it was found that 
springs of water would wash the cement out of tho concrete, so it 
proved better to lay beds of rubble made of small stones. The 
water could be led around the rubble and nursed from place to place 
till finally a small well, 2 ft. in diameter and 1 to 2 ft. deep, would 
be formed where the water boiled up. When the mortar about each 
little well had set, the water was bailed out, the well quickly filled 
with dry mortar, a bed of stiff wet mortar laid on top and covered 
with a large rubble stone. When the water was turned in behind 
this dam there were no leaks. This was in a large measure due to 
the use of rich mortar and careful work. No cracks developed. 

Cost of Dams and Locks, Black Warrior River. — Mr. R. C. Mc- 
Calla gives the following data relative to the cost of building 
masonry locks and dams on the Black Warrior River, Alabama. 
The work was done by hired labor for the government, in 1888 to 
1895, at costs given in Table IV. 

The stone is a sandstone quarried near the locks along the banks 
of the river and in the river bed. The stone for Lock and Dam No. 
3 was quarried in a reef just above falls 7 ft. high. The quarry 
covered two acres, and was operated a depth of 12 to 18 ft. 

during low water, requiring only two 3-in. pulsometer pumps to 
keep it drained. 

The face stone of locks Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were set in 1 : 3 Portland 
mortar (cement measured loose) ; the backing was partly set in mor- 
tar and partly in 1:3:5 concrete. Stiff-leg derricks were used to 
set the stones. 

In October, 1891, 200 cu. yds. of backing and 600 cu. yds. of 
dimension stone were quarried for Lock No. 2, Black Warrior River, 
Tuskaloosa, Ala. The stone was a fine quality of blue sandstone 
quarried from the bed of the river at the f.^lls, after diverting the 
water. The cost of quarrying these 800 cu. yds. was $1,598, or about 
?1 per cu. yd. for the backing and $2.33 per cu. yd. for the dimen- 
sion stone. In this month 434 cu. yds. of dimension stone were 
cut by stonecutters at a cost of $6.83 per cu. yd. The masonry 
wall is 390 y2 ft. long, 8 to 14 ft. wide, and 34 ft. high, built in 
courses of ashlar 18 to 24 ins. thick, and about 50% cut stone. In 
October two gangs of masons, using two derricks, laid 1,563 cu. yds. 
of first-class masonry at a total cost of 92% cts. per cu. yd., in- 
cluding the cost of screening sand, mixing mortar, operating steam 



514 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



THtOrHOrHO 



■ tH rf N lO rH 05 
lOTjiOOOt-OO 






O 

W.-y I0t-I0050«0 

O-M iH<35rH(N005 

M S ■* 05 •* U5 lO T»< 



> 



03 r-! C-^ T-i O iH O 



O 
^ . 



eg oooooooo 
eq oooooooo 

O OOMCCegt-^eOr-ir-J 
OiOOTflCOT-l-*-* 
O"^t^O"^00lO00CX3 
oTwOCOOS^CqiOCO 



00 05 00 t- Ttl lO -mS 
"""^ "•OOrH 






-a 

bo 



tf 



o 

3 



Oj MOIMOiHOO 



■OCOCOOOC<JlOrHU5 
'THlOt^rHOOcOt-O 

oiocqioooiot--"^ 
Nooo^ooocooT 
tH , OJ rHiM iH 



C-Ot-O^OOOO^N 
000000Ot-OOC~M 
OIOOOOC-LOU5C-T-I 



oe»50oco-*w«>co 



4-> •is 
P 3 



-a 



^ c to S 5 

oj-i-; is o d 
S S >» ^^ o 



'C, 



«... _ 
b£ 

i^ o 2 
cd o c« 



B m 5 

3 oj o 



S 5 1^ 
MWEH 



M (V) 



Eh to 
o 
O 



-d 



!-( 
CIS 

« 
O 

o3 
> 

a 

o 

(V 

o 

o 

b3- 



S CD 

(Brd- 

°.S 

o o 
on 

.5 o 

ra'O 



STONE MASONRY. 



515 



•ooooooo 

. CDOOO OOO 



»«• 1-1 i-l ;0 CO iH N 

IH N rH ■ "^ iti 






o 

6>; 

c^ +-) ciOiOcco ••'^ 

Q'r3 Louscoaseo •"»< 
g O-C-rHOOrH • ■rfl 

nj coco CO CO "th 

13 0503 



^ 



ft; 

o 

Bi 



o 

PQ 



P 



ta 
o 
U 



pq 



d 

CO +j 

c 



(t) 



ajccoqo^T-tcocooooooo 

OOrHO^COLOrHCDOOOOOO 

iot-OT-iOOOiot^co*^t>c<i 

rH coooocoo:ioo 

*«■ rHLOrH03T)<0 



01 



<M 



rH ''^ 



till 
O 



CO CO CO PO to O t^ 
la lO Tji t^ rj« CO O 
lO LO CO CQ CO CO CO 
COCOCO CO 



M 
o 
o 

o 



P 



coom-*t- 

Tf rH lO rH ■«}< 



00 00 t- O t- OS N 

CO CO CD CO CO cq o 
I?C1 CT* eo -a< CO U5 



0^:- 



-a 
o 



(-> lit* 

§«» 

CO n 
d ci3 

- © 



■^ i)fi 






3 

<u c iuo tec 
3 oiiii: o3 dS (U 



'flS 



3 



bxic c fJ !- 



'^^ 



fS t- o S c 



^ o 



T-; o 

12; ■" 

9-0 
o <I> 

(J Kl 

■»-> 



516 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

hoists, unloading material at the wall and converting them into 
masonry. The itemized cost of the mason work was: 

Foreman, 1 mo $ 90.00 

Masons, 202 days of 8 hrs.. at $2.80 565.60 

Laborers, 35 Vs days of 8 hrs.. at $1.20 42.15 

Laborers, 270y2 days of 8 hrs., at $1.00 270.50 

Laborers, 369% days of 8 hrs., at $0.80 295.70 

Laborers, 146% days of 8 hrs., at $0.60 88.05 

Boys, 83% days of 8 hrs.. at $0.40 33.30 

Wages paid in board 42.00 

Fuel for hoists 18.49 

Total, at 92 1^ cts. ner cu. yd $1,445.79 

It will be noted that the wages of laborers were very low. Doubt- 
less the men were negroes. 

On the south wall of Lock No. 2. Black Warrior River, during 
August, 1892, two gangs of masons, three masons to the gang, with 
helpers, laid and pointed 2,370 cu. yds., about 40% of which was 
dry rubble wall, the rest beiner first-class masonry in Portland ce- 
ment mortar. This is 16 cu. yds. per mason per 8-hr. day. The fol- 
lowing includes the cost of screening sand, mixing mortar, unload- 
ing materials at the wall, operating steam hoists, fuel for same, 
laying and pointing the masonry : 

Foreman, 1 mo ? 100.00 

Masons, 1471/2 days, at $3.50 516.25 

Laborers, 271/2 days, at $1.50 41.25 

Laborers, 108 days, at $1.25 135.00 

Laborers, 5IO1/2 days, at $1.00 510.50 

Laborers, 216 days, at $0.80 172.80 

Laborers, 186% days, at $0.75 139.88 

Laborers, 103 days, at $0.55 56.65 

Boys, 87% days, at $0.50 43.88 

Wages paid in board 100.00 

Fuel 22.75 

Total, at 77.6 cts. per cu. yd $1,838.96 

Cost of Rock-fill Dams. — The three dams on the Black Warrior 
River, built by hired labor, were of the rock-fill type without mor- 
tar or core-walls. The down stream face is composed of large 
roughly dressed stones, laid in steps and doweled together. A 
timber crib is built into the upper face of the dam and sheathed 
with 6 X 12-in. plank. The dams were built during low water, 
without cofferdamming. Floating and stationary derricks were 
used. Sandstone for dams Nos. 1 and 2 was delivered by barge, 
and for No. 3 by rail, a track being laid on stone-fllled cribs along 
the toe of the dam. The cost of this work is given In Table V. 

Crib No. 1. Crib No. 2. Crib No. 3. 

Lumber and iron Ft.B.M. 34,453 $13.65 33,109 $12.68 33,109 $14.16 

Carpenter work. Ft.B.M. 34,453 6.94 33,109 6.83 33,109 12.62 

Filling rock ... Cu. yds. 1,640 0.35 1,105 0.24 1,090 0.46 

Total $1,277 $909 $1,390 

Note. — Crib No. 1 is 29 ft. 10 ins. high, 11 ft. 8 ins. wide, and 
90 ft. long; Cribs Nos. 2 and 3 are 28 ft. 8 ins. high, 11 ft. 6 ins. 
wide, and 9 ft. long. The cribs are of 6 x 8-in. yellow pine with 
cross-pieces at intervals of 5 ft., drift-bolted together, and filled 
with one-man stone. 



STONE MASONRY. 



517 



Cost of Cyclopean Masonry, Reference See the section on Con- 
crete under Rubble Concrete. 

Cost of Limestone and Sandstone Slope-Walls. — A slope-wall is 
practically a stone block pavement laid upon a sloping face of earth 
to protect it from erosion. The "wash" of passing boats in canals 
makes necessary some such protection of the earth in certain 
places. The beating of waves upon the sides of a reservoir or small 
lake acts in a similar manner, and a slope-wall is usually provided 
to resist the erosion. The concave side of a river bank is occasion- 
ally protected by slop-walling, with perhaps a line of piling at the 
toe of the wall. 

A dry slope-wall, it will be seen, is an engineering structure 
often used, although very little exists in print as to its design or 
cost. Since the forces acting upon a slope-wall are not readily 
measurable, the design is an art, and not a science. Recorded ex- 




Em. news. 



Fig. 2. Slope "Wall. 



Fig. 3. 



perience of others, personal experience of the designer and com- 
mon sense should govern the design. 

The oldest slope-walls on the Erie Canal were made of cobble- 
stones rammed solidly into the bank, and placed so that the stones 
touched one another Cobbles for this purpose were gathered from 
fields or creek beds, and ranged in diameter from 4 ins. to 12 ins., 
the average being about 6 or 8 ins. These cobble slope-walls, while 
not as handsome as those made of dressed quarry stone, were in 
fact more durable, for the shales and limestone ledges along the 
route of the Erie Canal furnish stone more or less subject to 
weathering. Cobbles, or "hardheads," on the contrary, are often 
granitic and always tough. 

Slope-walls made of quarry stone are built as shown in Figs. 2 
and 3. The stones are split with wedges or plug and feathered, 
then roughly dressed with a hammer, and placed in the wall on 
edge, just as brick or stone block are placed in a street pavement. 
The longest dimension of the stone is laid parallel with the axis of 
the canal or river. In some of the earlier walls, huge slabs of stone 
were laid flatwise just as sidewalk flagging is laid, but such stones 
are apt to settle unevenly and tilt up so that a passing boat or mov- 
ing ice will displace them entirely. Moreover it is practically im- 
possible to bed very large stone properly, since ramming has no 



518 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

effect. Experience, therefore, has shown the necessity of splitting 
up slabs into blocks readily laid and bedded by hand ; and it costs 
no more in the end to build walls in this way, for the cost of 
handling with a derrick and cost of frequent moving of derrick 
more than offset the cost of splitting the stone. It is customary on 
the Erie Canal always to provide a lining of gravel (Fig. 1) back 
of the wall. This lining serves a twofold purpose: It makes it 
easy for the workman to bed jagged stone properly, and it further 
adds to the protection of the subsoil from wash. "Waves beating 
through the joints in the slope-wall strike this gravel which is not 
easily disnlaced. and do not reach the subsoil with sufficient force 
to displace it. It is my opinion that this gravel lining is one of 
the most important and necessary features of a well-made slope- 
wall. Crushed stone, of course, would serve equally well or better, 
but usually the cost is more than for gravel. There are places 
where broken stone costs less than gravel and in such places it 
should be used. 

On rivers or reservoirs, subject to wide fluctuation in water level, 
the gravel or stone lining for the paving is even more necessary; 
for there the surface i-ain water, flowing down over the face of the 
slope-wall, will cut rivulets beneath it unless proper lining is pro- 
vided. Embankments ara usually so designed as to prevent much 
rain water from flowing over the slope-wall face, as shown in Fig. 
1, where the towpath is seen to have a slope away from the canal. 
In diking a river the same form of top slope is usually provided 
where a slope-wall is to be laid ; but in protecting a natural river 
bank it is often impossible entirely to prevent rain water from 
flowing over the face of the slope-wall. Ditches should be dug to 
divert the rain water, which is then carried in a pipe culvert 
through to the river. Ditches, however, are apt to fill up with 
washed-in earth, so that in any event a substantial lining of 
gravel should be placed back of the slope-wall, in order to guard 
against erosion by rain water. A thickness of gravel lining of from 
4 to 8 ins. will suffice, 4 ins. ordinarily being enough. 

Passing to the thickness of the stone slope-wall itself, we find 
a range of from 6 ins. to 24 ins. with 12 to 16 ins. most commonly 
used. The Chemung River, near Elmira, N. Y., is a stream about 
600 ft. wide and 20 ft. deep in times of high water. At one place 
on this river a slope-wall 24 ins. thick was built by the State, 
and a few miles away another had been built 12 ins. thick, both of 
a shaley limestone. Both walls have served for years, except in 
places where the piling at the toe has been undermined. The 24-in. 
wall was evidently an extravagant design ; and not justified by 
the conditions, particularly as the lighter wall had been in service 
some years before the construction of the 24-in. wall was begun. 
Because a river is occasionally a raging torrent it does not follow 
that the floating debris or ice will displace the small stones of a 
well-laid slope-wall. As a matter of fact, each stone is held by the 
weight of stones above, even when laid on a 1% to 1 slope, and a 
stone is pried out of a slope-wall with great difficulty. I believe 



STOiXE MASOXRV. 519 

that ordinary brick laid dry as a slope-wall pavement will protect 
a river embankment perfectly, provided the subsoil does not become 
undermined. In slope-wall masonry, on river embankments subject 
to blows of ice and logs, a thickness of 8 to 10 ins. seems an advis- 
able minimum, for some erosion and settlement of the subsoil or 
lining must be provided for. On reservoirs or canals a less thick- 
ness may be used where blows from boats are not frequent 
But as above stated 12 ins. is very often specified, and as will be 
seen later, it is not an extravagant depth. Having fixed upon the 
depth of stone to be used in the wall, the thickness (or rise) and 
length remain to be determined. A minimum tliickness of 4 ins. 
is usually specified. As a matter of fact, except for appearance 
sake, thickness is not an important factor. An engineer who is 
fond of seeing coursed masonry will often require that the slope- 
wall be laid in courses of a specified minimum and maximum 
thickness. It costs money to dress the stone to lay in such courses, 
but for appearance sake, near a highway, such expense may be 
justified. Ordinarily it is not justifiable. Slope-walls are built for 
protection, not for beauty. 

If any definite minimum thickness of courses is specified, it should 
be governed by the stratified thickness of stone in the nearest 
quarry. If the quarry is thick-bedded limestone, then it is safe to 
omit any minimum thickness requirement ; for to split into thin 
slabs with plug and fesfthers is expensive, and the contractor will 
surely not split the stone thinner than the maximum thickness 
specified. If the quarry stone is thin-bedded, as shaley limestone 
and some sandstones are, a minimum thickness of 3 or 4 ins. 
may be named. A maximum thickness of 10 or 12 ins. is a 
reasonable requirement. A minimum length of 12 ins. is often 
specified, and is not unreasonable, for slabs are readily broken with 
a hammer to almost any desired length. There is no objection to 
stones up to 24 ins. in length. 

Slope-wall paving is "laid to break joint," as shown in Fig. 3, 
and it is well so to lay it, because if the toe is washed out, this 
breaking of joint enables the wall above to span the space, and so 
prevents rapid crumbling away of the wall. However, specifications 
are often drawn with absurd refinement as to this bonding ; the 
least admissible number of inches of bond is named, and altogether 
the wall is treated as if it were to be a bridge pier, or arch, 
or other necessarily strong structure. To require that the stones 
shall be laid so as to break joint is a sufficient requirement for 
slope-wall work. 

"We come now to the feature of the specifications that makes a 
wall cost little or much — the allowable maximum width of bed and 
end joints. Specifications sometimes name %-in. joints to the full 
depth of each stone. Such work, as we shall see, costs twice as 
much as under the more reasonable requirement of 1%-in. joints, 
carried back 4 ins. from the face beyond which the stone may fall 
away to a wedge shape. To call for joints of less than 1% ins. 
is justifiable only where well coursed slope-walling is desired for 



520 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



appearance sake. "Wall with 1%-in. maximum joints serves, the 
purpose of protection from erosion, and any expense incurred in 
better dressing is merely "for looks." 

In laying a slope-wall, "frames" or "profiles" should be set 
about 20 or 25 ft. apart, as shown in Fig. 4. Stakes are driven as 
shown, and a 1 x 4-in. profile-stick of timber is nailed to the stake 
at the proper grade, as determined by the Y-level. The workmen 
then stretch a string from the bottom of one frame to the bottom 
of the next one, and thus have a line to which they can accurately 
lay the face of the slope-wall. Never allow a workman to attempt 
to lay slope-wall without such frames and a cord to guide him ; 
for without such guides he will surely lay a wall with humps and 
hollows. Another point in practical laying is always to incline 
each stone lightly uphill. Do not try to set it exactly at right 
angles to the surface of the ground, for an endeavor to do this re- 
sults in a wall like that in Fig. 5, where the stone are in steps. 




Toe Slick-' 



Fig. 4. Profiles. 



It is an excellent plan to set the profile strips exactly 13% ft. apart, 
for reasons given later on. 

The stone are split with plug and feathers and hammers in the 
quarry, hauled by wagons and dumped at the top of the embank- 
ment as in Fig. 4. Laborers then throw the stones down to the 
slope-wall masons, who roughly scabble and lay them, filling in the 
chinks back of the face with spalls and gravel lining. An intelli- 
gent laborer can soon learn to lay common slope-wall, but skilled 
slope-wall masons, if available, usually lay a better-appearing wall 
at less cost. Sharp-pointed stones like A, Fig. 6, should ordinarily 
not be allowed ; but stones like B, that are roughly dressed, 3 to 4 
ins. back of the face, and then fall away so as to leave a wide end 
joint as shown, are not objectionable, provided these joints are 
filled with spalls and gravel. 

Before passing to a consideration of costs, a word should be given 
as to protecting the toe or foot of the wall. In canal work it is 
customary to lay a 12 x 12-in. toe-timber or stick, as shown in 
Fig. 4. Since timber continually submerged does not rot, and 



STONE MASONRY. 521 

since frozen timber in tlie winter wlien canals are closed does not 
rot eitlier, this design is not objectionable for canals. However, 
I question the necessity of using a toe stick at all under ordinary 
conditions in canal work. In river work, a toe stick resting against 
piles driven 5 ft. c. to c, is often used. In some cases the toe 
stick is done away with entirely and a line of close-driven piles 
substituted, which is a very expensive solution of tlie problem and 
not altogether satisfactory. Piling on the concave bank of a river 
seems to hasten rather than retard undermining. A brush mattress 
is a better toe protection under such conditions, and heavy rip-rap 
is still better where the brush is alternately wet and dry. 

The following are actual costs of work that I have done. The 
quarry required very little stripping, and was located on a side 
bill, 2% miles from the work. The stone was a thin bedded lime- 
stone, rather shaley, and was barred and wedged out with the use 
of little or no powder. Tliere was very little plug and feathering 
as the stone split readily under the hammer. Common labor was 
employed, the only skilled man being the foreman, who worked 
witli the men. 

One hundred and forty wagon loads of stone, each load measur- 
ing 2 cu. yds. corded upon the wagon, and 1.55 cu. yds. laid in the 
slope-wall, making a total of 220 cu. yds. in the wall, were quar- 
ried and loaded by five men (including the foreman) in 20 working 
days of 10 hrs. each, or at the rate of 2.2 cu. yds. of slope-wall 
quarried per man per day. Laborers received $1.50 a day and 
foreman $2.50, so the wages averaged $1.70, which, divided by 2.2, 
makes the cost nearly 80 cts. per cu. yd. for quarrying and loading 
the stone. Each driver helped load and unload his wagon, and 
hauled 4 to 5 loads a day. A team and driver received 70 cts. a 
load for hauling (5 miles round trip) over a good hard gravel road 
with no upgrades; so the cost of hauling was about 45 cts. per cu. 
yd. of slope-wall, making a total of $1.25 for the stone delivered at 
the work. A auarry rental of 10 cts. per cu. yd. was paid for the 
stone. To estimate the cost of loading and hauling for other dis- 
tances the following observations were made : Two laborers work- 
ing quite deliberately handed up the stone to the driver, wlio stacked 
them on his "stone rack" (3x11 ft.), or wagon box without sides 
other than a strip of 4 x 4-in. timber. It required 15 mins. to load 
a wagon with 2 cu. yds. measured on the wagon, or 1.55 cu. yds. 
in the slope-wall. The driver alone would unload his wagon at the 
dump in 7 mins., by simply rolling the stone off. 

The team traveled at a speed ot 2V2 miles an hour, or 220 ft. 
a minute, at a walk, and generally trotted part of the way back 
to make up for lost time at both ends. With a short haul, or over 
soft roads trotting would have been out of the question ; and over 
very soft earth roads with occasional steep pulls a load half as 
great as the above is the maximum. 

On another similar contract 750 cu. yds. of slope-wall were quar- 
ried at a cost of $1.10 per cu. yd., the stone being a "grit" or 
shaley limestone, quarried by laborers at $1.50 per day of 10 hrs. 



522 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The haul was 1 % miles from quarry to wall and 6 trips a day were 
made by each team, hauling 1% cu. yds. each trio as measured in 
the wall, at a cost of 35 cts. per cu. yd. for hauling. This stone, 
therefore, cost $1.45 per cu. yd. delivered. 

In laying 750 cu. yds. of "second-class" slope-wall, 12 ins. thick, 
joints 1% ins. as a maximum, stone allowed to fall away 4 ins. 
back of face, not laid in courses, but an excellent wall in appear- 
ance and in reality, the cost was as follows: The first few days, 
using new hands, intelligent laborers, each man laid 2% cu. yds. at 
a cost of 60 cts. a cu. yd., wages being $1.50 per 10-hr. day. Later 
these men readily averaged 3 cu. yds. per day. Some skilled slope- 
wall layers were iniported and received $2.50 per 10-hr. day. These 
men readily laid 5 cu. yds. each day, one laborer to every four 
slope- wall layers acting as a helper to deliver stone. Thus 600 
cu. yds. of slope-wall were laid in 130 layer-days and 35 helper- 
days, half of the layers being skilled men, and half common labor- 
ers. There was no foreman in constant attendance, as each man's 
work between the frames was easily measured up, and his daily 
progress thus known. A portion of the work was sublet at 50 cts. 
per cu yd. to two of the skilled slope-wall masons who had each 
been averaging 5 cu. yds. a day. From that time on each averaged 
7% cu. yds. of wall daily. Skilled men like these under subcon- 
tract will lay 10 or even 12 cu. yds. of a somewhat rougher slope- 
wall in 10 hrs. On another contract where the wall was 16 ins. 
thick, 4 masons at $2.50 and 4 laborers at $1.50 averaged 60 cu. 
yds. of fair slope-wall per 10-hr. day. Work was scarce, and one 
of the masons was the subcontractor himself, and received 30 cts. 
per cu. yd. Assuming 50 cts. per cu. yd. as a fair average cost for 
laying good "second-class" slope-wall and $1.25 to $1.50 for cost 
of stone delivered, we have a total cost of $1.75 to $2.00 per cu. yd. 
in place. 

The average contract price for slope-wall on the Brie Canal 
deepening in 1896-7 was $2.50^ per cu. yd., wages being as above 
given. Sloce-wall laid in courses, with close joints the full depth 
of the wall, no course less than 6 ins. thick — a sand-papered job — 
was let for $4.50 per cu. yd. under conditions where $2.50 was a 
fair Drice for sood ordinary slope-wall. The actual cost was not 
far below the contract price for stone plug and feathered to size 
cost delivered $2.50 per cu. yd., and laying cost $1.25- per cu. yd. 
Gravel lining in both cases was paid for separately, the contract 
price along the Brie Canal averaging 90 cts. per cu. yd. of lining 
in place. The actual cost of this lining is of course figured as for 
any earthwork, an allowance being made for spreading it on , the 
face of the embankment after dumping it. To spread it most ex- 
peditiously it will pay to make a wooden chute into which the 
gravel is shoveled from the wagons, a shoveler helping the driver 
to unload. Two men will unload 1 cu. yd. in this way in 10 min- 
utes, if they work as they should. The driver then has a rest on 
his return trip, at the end of which it is well to provide an extra 
wagon, which has been loaded during his absence. It takes only 



STONE MASONRY. 523 

1% mins. to change the team from the empty to the loaded wagon. 
Since 1 to 1% cu. yds. of gravel constitute a load, since teams 
travel 220 ft. oer min., and since a' laborer can load 18 cu. yds. of 
gravel in 10 hrs., we have all the factors necessary to compute th*} 
cost of hauling and unloading. There is very little work in spread- 
ing the gravel where a chute is used, 2 to 5 cts. per cu. yd. cover- 
ing this item. 

If good thin-bedded sandstone or limestone is not available, it 
may be necessary to plug and feather the stone to sizes specified, 
and this cost may be estimated by data on page 492. 

In order to secure the most economic results, slope-wall masons 
should be paid on the bonus system. To do this, the profile strips 
are set 13% ft. apart, so that every lineal foot on the strip means 
% cu. yd. of slope-wall, if the wall is 1 ft. thick. Each mason is 
assigned to one lot, between two profile . strips, and, the lots are 
numbered consecutively with red chalk marks on the posts. The 
profile strips are of 2 x 4 dressed pine, painted with foot marks, so 
that a timekeeper can see at a glance the height to which the 
wall in any given lot has reached at the end of the day. There is 
no measuring to be done after the strips are nailed in place, yet 
the timekeeper and tlie masons themselves can keep a perfect 
record of daily progress. After the work has been under way a 
short time, it will be evident that a laborer to every two masons, 
say, will be necessary to deliver stone down the slope. At first 
the average output is but little better than before, but certain of the 
masons will do much better than the average. Their wages are then 
increased and perhaps two or more of the slower masons are dis- 
charged. Immediately, if there are no unions to interfere, the out- 
put of the men increases. At the end of a week I have had the 
average yardage increase 50%, and individual yardage increase 
much more, the quality of the workmanship remaining as before. 
The men receive higher wages and the contractor increases his 
profits, both by virtue of the greater output and by reducing the 
cost of supervision. I have been away from such work, after 
organizing it, for two weeks at a time, without a foreman in direct 
charge, yet the output has not fallen off. A more effective plan 
than merely to increase the daily wage is to pay a bonus per cubic 
yard for every yard in excess of, say, 3 cu. yds. laid per day. 

Cost of Granite Slope-Wall — The cost of a granite slope-wall 
greatly exceeds the cost of slope-walls of stratified rock such as are 
described in the preceding paragraphs, if any attempt is made to 
square the granite slope-wall stones, for rubble granite stones 
must be plug and feathered on all faces to square them up. Even 
where the specifications are lenient, if an attempt is made to secure 
a granite slope-wall with a smooth face, but without close joints, 
the cost of plugging off the faces of stone before laying, and the 
cost of reducing them to a size not greater than the thickness of 
the wall (12 to 18 ins.) is not a small item. If granite boulders, or 
granite rubble stones from a quarry, are to be used, first estimate 



524 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

roughly the average size of each stone, then estimate the number of 
plug-holes necessary to snlit it into slope-wall stones. Use the 
data on page 492 for estimating the cost of this plug and feather 
work. 

On one job of granite slope-wall work, 3 masons splitting field 
boulders with plugs, and 10 laborers laying a wall 18 ins. thick, 
averaged 14 cu. yds. per day of 10 hrs. for $24, or $1.70 per cu. yd. 
for splitting and laying the stones. No attempt was made to secure 
close joints or to lay the stone in courses. Stones were frequently 
laid flatwise and bedded in spawls ; and spawls were used liberally 
between joints. The masons were rapid workers, but the laborers 
were a slow lot of men. 

Cost of Laying a Limestone Slope-Wall. — Mr. W. B. Fuller says. 
"The paving of the upper sides of the sedimentation basin (Al- 
bany, N. Y.) is of blue limestone blocks, 10 to 15 ins. deep, 8 to 
20 ins. wide, and 15 to 36 ins. long. Two masons and one helper 
together would lay about 16 sa. yds. per day, and the labor cost of 
laying the stone and gravel, including the teaming of the material 
about 800 ft., was 72 cts. per sq. yd." 

The specifications called for a slope-wall 10 ins. thick laid on a 
gravel lining 24 ins. thick. 

Cost of Slope Wall Paving.* — Maj. Graham D. Fitch gives the 
following : 

In paving the bank of the Upper White River, selected sand- 
stone (bluestone) was used, the pieces being set on edge and 
rammed. A coat of gravel was then swept over the paving. The 
work was done by Government forces ; common laborers receiving 
$1.50 for 8 hrs. 

The cost of grading and paving behind the land wall was as 
follows : 

Per sq. yd. 
Material. Unit cost. Total. Paving. 

Riprap stone, 798 cu. yds $0.74 $590 $0,307 

Cement, 5 bbls 1.97 10 .006 

Total materials $600 $0,313 

Labor : 

Insp. of riprap stone, 798 cu. yds. $0,008 $6 $0,003 

Insp. of cement, 5 bbls 022 .... .... 

Grading and paving 1,916 sq. yds. .495 947 .493 

Total labor $953 $0,496 

Grand total, 1,916 sq. yds $1,553 $0,810 

The total labor time for the 1,916 sq. yds. of grading and paving 
was 550 Vs days, the work done per man per day being 3.49 sq. yds., 
or 1.45 sq. yds. 

It will be noted that 1 cu. yd. of stone made 2.4 sq. yds. of 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 283. 



STONE MASONRY. 525 

pavement, showing that the thickness was 15 ins. The labor of 

grading and paving was $1.18 per cu. yd. 

At another place the cost of slope-wall pavement was as follows: 
Material : Unit cost. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Riprap, 693 cu. yds 74 $513 $0.74 

Labor : 

Paving, 425 days ?835 $1.20 

Inspection of riprap, 8 days 15 .02 

Total $850 $1.96 

Grand total, 693 cu. yds. placed $1,363 $1.96 

The amount of paving done per man per day was 1.16 cu. yds. 

At another place the cost was : 

Unit cost. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Riprap, 438 cu. yds $.74 $324 $.74 

Labor, 203% days 374 .85 

Grand total, 438 cu. yds $698 $1.59 

The average work done per man per day was 2.1 cu. yds. of rip- 
rap placed. 

Cost of Riprap on a River Bank.* — Maj. Graham D. Fitch gives 
the following: 

The work was done on the Upper White River, by Government 
forces, common laborers receiving $1.50 per 8-hr. day. Sandstone 
was used. 

The following was a piece of bank revetment, the riprap being 
laid roughly by hand to a depth of nearly 12 ins. There were 
3,588 sq. yds.: 

Unit cost. Total. Per sq. yd. 

Riprap, 1,235 cu. yds $0.74 $914 $0,254 

Inspection of riprap, 1,235 cu. yds.. .008 10 .002 

Placing riprap, 1,235 cu. yds 245 302 .084 

Total $1,226 $0,340 

The labor time for placing the 1,235 cu. yds. of riprap was 156 
days, and each man placed an average of 7.92 cu. yds. of riprap per 
day. On the basis of 3,588 sq. yds. of revetment each man placed 
an average of 2.3 sq. yds. per day. 

At another place riprap was placed on a brush mattress for bank 
revetment. The bank thus protected was 450 ft. long by 44 ft. 
wide (measured along the slope). The banlt was graded by 124 
man-days, at a cost of $229, or 18 sq. yds. per man-day. 

The cost of riprapping the bank was as f ollowfa . 

Unit cost. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Riprap, 1,044 cu. yds $0.74 $768 $0.74 

Paving, 109% days 206 .197 

Inspection of riprap, 14 days 26 .024 

Grand total, 1,044 cu. yds $1,000 $0.96 

The work done per man per day was 8.42 cu. yds. of riprap placed. 

* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 288. 



520 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

There were 2,200 sq. yds., hence the cost per sq. yd. was 9.4 cts. 
for labor, and 35 cts. for stone. 

Cost of Riprap and Brush Mattress, Cross- Reference. — Data on 

this will be found in the section on Timberwork. Consult the index 
under "Brush Mattress." 

Cost of Riprap In a Crib Dam.* — Maj. Graham D. Fitch gives the 
following : 

The work was done on the Upper White River, by Government 
forces, common laborers receiving $1.50 for 8 hrs. The stone was 
sandstone. 

In filling the pockets of a crib dam 324 ft. long, 8,000 cu. yds. 
of riprap were used, at the following cost : 

Per cu. yd. 

Riprap stone $0.74 

Labor filling crib 0.43 

Total $1.17 

Each laborer averaged 4 cu. yds. filled per day. 

On a small crib near one abutment of the dam, 527 cu. yds. of 

riprap were put in at the rate of 4.45 cu. yds. per man-day. 

On a foundation crib for the abutment of the dam, 876 cu. yds. 

of riprap were put in at the rate of 6.84 cu. yds. per man-day. 

Cost of Rlprapping Cribs.t — The following data relate to the cost 
of rlprapping cribs with breakwater stone at Ashtabula Harbor, 
Ohio. The stone was loaded from the dock into a derrick scow 
by the derrick, the scow was then towed an average of one-fourth 
mile and the stone placed, as riprap, behind new crib docks which 
had just been completed. The object of this crib backing was to 
protect the cribs from storms and also to relieve them of any 
lateral thrust which might cause them to move. The derrick scow 
used in handling the stone holds a maximum deck load of about 
125 tons. The derrick boom is about 50 ft. long and all move- 
ments of the derrick are operated by steam. 

The stone was placed in a mound of a triangular cross-section 
against the cribs, the apex of this right-angle triangle being at the 
water surface. The depth of water at the site of work averaged 
about 15 ft. 

The stones used were irregular in shape, weighing 160 lbs. per 
cu. ft., the total average weight of each stone being about one ton. 

The cost records below are for the months of May and June, 
1907, and embraces the entire operation of rlprapping the cribs, the 
work including: Loading the stone from the dock onto the deck 
of the scow ; towing the scow from the dock to the site of the new 
cribs, an average distance of about one-fourth mile ; unloading 
the stone behind the cribs as riprap ; towing the scow from the 



*Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 285. 
iEngineering-Contracting, July 31, 1907. 



STONE MASONRY. 527 

cribs back to the dock to be loaded again ; time due to bad weather 
and breakdowns, interest and depreciation on value of plant and 
miscellaneous expense. 

The scale of wages per 10-hr. day was as follows: 

Foreman (who was also steam engineer) $3.00 

Deck hands : 2.00 

Watchman 1.75 

The cost of backing the cribs with breakwater stone for month of 

May, during which time 661 tons of stone were placed, was as 
follows : 

Total. Per ton. 

10 transfers by tugs, at $5 $ 50.00 $0,075 

6 tons coal, at $2.70 16.20 .024 

Labor, placing stone 47.15 .071 

Lost time due to bad weather and breakdowns. . 31.60 .048 

Interest and depreciation on value of plant 90.00 .136 

Miscellaneous 10.00 .015 

Total $244.95 $0,369 

The cost of backing the cribs for the month of June, during which 
time 1,380 tons of stone were placed, was as follows: 

Total. Per ton. 

24 transfers by tugs, at $5 $120.00 $0,087 

17 tons coal, at $2.70 45.00 .032 

Labor, placing stone 189.15 .140 

Lost time, due to bad weather and breakdowns.. 42.50 .030 

Repairs and miscellaneous 38.55 .043 

Interest and depreciation on value of plant 90.00 .065 

Total ., $545.20 $0,397 

In the above tables the item "placing stone" includes the loading 
of stone on the scow from the dock and placing it behind the cribs. 
The labor cost of these two portions of the work were about equal. 
Interest and depreciation on plant was taken as 15% per annum 
and was distributed over five months. The item "miscellaneous" 
includes wages of watchman on Sundays, and a few supplies, such 
as engine-oil, waste, manila lines, etc. The repairs shown in the 
record for June consisted of repairing the damage due to a boom 
being dropped by accident and breaking in two. 

On the basis that the weight of the stone was 160 lbs. per cu. ft, 
the cost per cubic yard for riprapping the cribs was as follows : 
Month of May, 80 cts. ; month of June, 85 cts. 

For the above information we are indebted to Mr. E. C. Bowen, 
Jr., Assistant Engineer, Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. 

[For further data on riprap, see the index under "Riprap."] 

Cost of Riprap Stone, References. — For the cost of quarrying and 
handling stone see the sections on Rock Excavation and on Stone 
Masonry. Also consult the index under "Riprap," for contract 
prices of riprap are given in the section on Railways and elsewhere. 

Cost of Cleaning Masonry With Acid. — Mr. C. M. Saville gives 
the following relative to the cost of cleaning masonry with acid. 



528 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The granite ashlar masonry of a reservoir gate chamber had been 
pointed with 1 : 1 Portland cement mortar late in the fall, during 
very cold weather. In order to work quickly the pointing mortar 
was mixed very wet, and consequently dripped over the ashlar, giv- 
ing an unsightly appearance. In the spring, the pointing was re- 
moved, the stone washed with acid, and then repointed. About 560 
sq. yds. of stone facing were thus gone over in 9 days by 2 men at 
a total cost of ?50, or 9 cts. per sq. yd. for labor. Dilute muriatic 
acid was used, 1 part acid to 2 parts water, applied with old paint 
brushes; 4 gals, of acid were required, or 1 gal. for 140 sq. yds. 
The two men were engaged 5 daj's removing pointing, 2 days clean- 
ing stone, and 2 days repointing. 

For other data, see the index under "Masonry, Cleaning." 

Cost of Excavating Masonry. — The masonry abutments of an old 
bridge were removed to make way for a new arch bridge. A hand- 
power derrick was used, and the material was piled near the der- 
rick. The cost of excavating this masonry was 50 cts. per cu. yd., 
wages being 15 cts. per hr. In another similar case the cost was 
75 cts. per cu. yd. The average contract price for such vt^ork on 
the Erie Canal, in 1896, was 80 cts. per cu. yd., wages being 12y2 
cts. per hr. 

Mr. C. R. Neher informs me mat the cost of excavating 3,140 
cu. yds. of old railway bridge piers, and depositing the material 
In the river bed, was 38 cts. per cu. yd., not including the cost of 
scaffolding. 

For other data on masonry excavation, see the index under 
"Masonry, Excavation." 

Cost of Pointing Old Bridge Masonry — Cleaning and pointing old 
masonry, using Alpha cement at $2.40 per bbl., masons' wages 
being $2 and helpers $1.60 per day, cost as follows: 

Small jobs ; no staging : Cts. per sq. ft. 

Cement 0.26 

Labor 0.74 

Total per sq. ft 1.00 

This is equivalent to 9 cts. per sq. yd. 

Large jobs ; staging used : Cts. per sq. ft. 

Cement 0.27 

Labor 1.87 

Total per sq. ft 2.14 

This is equivalent to 19 cts. per sq. yd. 
For other similar data, see the index under "Masonry, Pointing." 

Cost of Lining Tunnel With Masonry. — Drinker gives the follow- 
ing data on the lining of Carr's Tunnel (825 ft.) on the Pennsyl- 
vania R. R. in 1868-1869: 

Brickwork. — Six hundred and nine thousand brick in the arch 
(5% broken and lost) ; 10.44 bushels of neat cement (no sand used 
in the mortar) laid 1,000 bricks, the mortar forming 30% of the 



STONE MASONRY. 529 

biick masonry; the arch was 25 ins. thick, 24%-ft. span and 9-ft. 

rise: 

Cost per M. 

Bricks, f. o. b $ 8.80 

Loss in handling 0.51 

Unloading and delivering 1.92 

Laying 5.84 

Cement 5.10 

Total $22.17 

Bricklayers received 40 cts. per hr. ; helpers, 17% cts. per hr. ; 
carpenters, 27% cts. per hr. ; laborers, 17 cts. per hr. 

Stonework. — One thousand seven hundred and thirty perches (25 
cu. ft. ) of rough masonry for side walls, presumably sandstone ; 
187 perches of ring stone; 25 perches wasted in dressing. The 
bench walls were 4 ft. wide at the bottom, 3 ft. at the top and 13 ft., 
high : 

Cost per perch. 

Quarrying (1,730 perches) ..$4.8C 

Cutting (1,730 perches) 4.36 

Hauling (1,942 perches) 1.06- 

Handling and laying (1,917 perches) 2.8ft 

Cement, 1.65 bu. ner cerch (8 1/6% of the 
masonry) 0.81 

Total $13.83 

Stonecutters and masons received 35 cts. per hr. ; quarrymen, 
17% cts. per hr. ; laborers, 17 cts. The stone side walls were laid 
in 8 courses averaging 2 ft. thick each; hence there were 52,800 
sq. ft. of beds cut; and estimating each stone 3 ft. long and 
dressed for 1% ft. back of the face on joints, there were 14.300 
sq. ft. of joints; making a total of 67,100 sq. ft. of cutting which 
cost 11.2 cts. per sq. ft. This is said to have been too high a unit 
cost, and the accuracy of the measurements is questioned. 

Arch centering cost $1,400, to which was added $600 for moving 
the centering forward from time to time ; making $2.40 per lin. ft. 
of tunnel, to which must be added $0.70 per lin. ft. for scaffolding. 

For further data on tunnel lining, see the index under "Tunnel, 
Lining." 

Cross- References. — Other data on stone masonry will be found in 
various parts of this book, for which see the index under Masonry. 



SECTION VI. 

CONCRETE AND REINFORCED CONCRETE 
CONSTRUCTION. 

Definitions. — See also the definitions in Section V on Stone 
Masonry. 

Aggregate. — The broken stone or gravel used in concrete. The 
word ballast is also used in this sense. 

Batch. — The amount of concrete mixed at one time either by a 
gang of men or by a machine mixer. In hand mixing, ordinarily 
one barrel of cement and the proper proportions of sand and stone 
make a batch. 

Cement. — A preparation of calcined clay and limestone, or their 
equivalents, possessing the property of hardening into a solid mass 
when moistened with water. This property is exercised under 
water, as well as in ooen air. Cements are divided into four 
classes : Portland, Natural, Puzzolan and Silica cement. 

Portland cement is the finely pulverized product resulting from 
the calcination to incipient fusion of an intimate mixture of properly 
proportioned _ argillaceous and calcareous materials, and to which 
no addition greater than 3% has been made subsequent to cal- 
cination. 

Natural cement is the finely pulverized product resulting from 
the calcination of an argillaceous limestone at a temperature only 
sufficient to drive off the carbonic acid gas. A few years ago it 
was common practice to give to all natural cements the name 
Rosendale cement, for it was at Rosendale, N. Y., that the first 
natural cement was made in this country. 

Pozzolan is an intimate mixture of pulverized granulated fur- 
nace slag and slaked lime without further calcination which pos- 
sesses the hydraulic aualities of cement. 

Silica cement (or sand cement) is a mixture of clean sand and 
Portland cement ground together. 

Concrete. — An artificial stone made by mixing cement mortar 
with gravel or broken stone. The proportions of cement, sand and 
stone are generally expressed in parts by measure (occasionally 
by v/eight). A 1:2:5 (one, two, five) concrete .means 1 part 
cement to 2 parts sand to 5 parts stone. A 1:3:6 concrete is 
made of 1 part cement, 3 parts sand and 6 parts stone (or gravel). 
When both . stone and gravel are used, the concrete may be desig- 

530 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 531 

nated thus. 1:3:2:4, which means 1 cart cement, 3 parts sand, 2 
parts gravel and 4 parts stone. 

Dry concrete is a term used to designate a mixture containing 
so small a percentage of water that very hard ramming is required 
to flush the water to the surface. 

Wet concrete contains so much water as to require little or no 
ramming. "Sloppy concrete" is concrete so wet that it will run 
down a slightly inclined trough. 

Concrete that is mixed dry is spread in layers 6 or 8 ins. thick 
and rammed or tamped vmtil the water flushes to the surface. 
Concrete that is mixed loet is spaded with a spade-like tool that 
is worked up and down in the concrete to remove all air bubbles 
particularly near the forms or near any steel used to reinforce 
the concrete. 

The terms crushed stone and broken stone are used indiscrim- 
inately to designate stone that has been broken by a rock crusher. 

Crusher run means all the crushed stone just as it comes from 
the crusher, without separation into sizes, and generally it in- 
cludes the product that would be termed screenings if it were 
screened out. 

Facing. — (1) A rich mortar placed on the exposed surfaces to 
make a smooth finish. (2) Shovel facing by working the mortar 
of concrete to the face. 

Forms are the molds (usually of lumber) that hold the concrete 
in shape until it has set or hardened. 

Matrix is a term sometimes used instead of mortar, but there 
is no good reason for using the term at all. 

Molds. — See Forms. 

Reinforced concrete is concrete in which are embedded bars or 
wires of steel or iron. It is often called concrete-steel. 

Rubble concrete is a term applied to concrete in which large 
rubble stones, or plums, are embedded. Stones from the size of 
a man's head to the size of a barrel are thus used. When larger 
stones are used, and the concrete becomes simply a coarse grained 
mortar between them, probably the term cyclopean masonry is 
more correct than rubble concrete; still there is no distinct divid- 
ing line. 

Screenings applies to the product of the crusher that passes 
through the smallest screen used. The size of the smallest hole 
in the screen varies from %-in. to %-in., so the word screenings 
has no definite meaning, although it can usually be taken to apply 
to all stone under %-in. in diameter. 

Sylvester wash. — ^A waterproofing wash consisting of alum and 
soft soap applied alternately to the surface of concrete. 

Voids is a term applied to the spaces between the grains of 
sand, or to the spaces between the fragments of broken stone. 
The voids are expressed in a percentage of the total volume of 
the loose material. 

Magnitude of the Subject and General Discussion. — I have spoken 
of earth excavation as being a subject of great magnitude. But 



532 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the subject of concrete is even greater. This is well indicated in the 
citation even of a few of the important books on concrete which 
will be found at the end of this section. 

Mr. Charles S. Hill, of the editorial staff of Engineering-Contract- 
ing, and I have collaborated in writing a 700-page book* devoted 
solely to the methods and cost of concrete and reinforced concrete 
construction. Yet there is practically no duplication in our book 
of the matter in Reid's great treatise, "Concrete and Reinforced 
Concrete Construction," in whose 900 pages the subject of tl]^ 
design of concrete construction is elaborated. 

It will be evident, therefore, that in the space devoted to concrete 
in this handbook, only the principles of the methods and cost of 
construction can be given, supplemented by a few illustrative ex- 
amples. However, the reader will find a good many more examples 
in other sections of the book, notably the sections on Bridges, 
Sewers, Waterworks, Pavements, and Buildings, for which consult 
the index under "Concrete." 

While, at first glance, estimating the cost of concrete may seem 
difficult, it is in reality a comparatively simple task when the cost 
is divided into separate items and sub-items. Then the reason why 
the concrete base of a pavement costs say, $3.50 per cu. yd., while 
the cost of a reinforced concrete building is, say, $15 per cu. yd., is 
made very clear. 

In considering variations in published cost data one should 
always bear in mind that there are not only many different ways 
of doing the same thing, but that workmen vary greatly in effi- 
ciency. The latter element depends mainly on the management, 
and it is a particularly important factor in this comparatively new 
branch of engineering work — concrete construction. I have re- 
ceived several letters from experienced concrete contractors ques- 
tioning tlie accuracy of certain costs of concrete work that I had 
published, because, it was said, no such low costs had ever come 
under their observation. This was doubtless true and it was for 
just that reason that I had published those low costs ; for, accom- 
panied by the methods of doing the work, those records showed 
what thoroughly efficient workmen under good management could 
accomplish. I go so far as to say that unit costs of concrete work 
that are now regarded as being very low will, before long, seem 
exceedingly high — unless it should happen that rates of wages and 
prices of materials rise sufficiently to offset entirely all improve- 
ments in machines, methods, and management. 

There is not the slightest doubt, for one thing, that .we are 
using too much cement in most of our concrete. Rarely do we see 
American specifications requiring less than 0.9 bbl. of cement per 
cu. yd., although there are many classes of heavy concrete work 
for which 0.5 to 0.6 bbl. of cement per cu. yd. would suffice. 

We have excellent machines for mixing concrete, but compara- 



*"Concrete Construction — Methods and Cost," by Gillette and 
Hill. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 533 

tively tew contractors know how to transport the materials to 
and from the mixers witli any great degree of economy. 

Not only do poor designs of forms, but inefficient workmanship 
in framing, erecting and shifting them, usually run up the cost of 
formwork far above what it should be. Incidentally I may say 
that it is my opinion that the oft-berated method of intrusting 
both the design and erection of concrete buildings to firms of con- 
structing engineers is a method that is likely to grow more popu- 
lar. In spite of the objection that the designer should not be 
also the contractor for the structure, there is one very important 
element to consider, and one that seems to me to offset entirely 
any objection. The concrete contractor who is also a designer will 
so design as to be able to use his forms again and again on many 
dtfjerent buildings of the same character. Eventually this will 
lead to the wide use of steel forms for certain classes of work, 
and thus reduce the item of form cost still more. 

The manufacture of concrete in slabs, beams, boards, etc. — a sort 
of concrete lumber — is certain to become common, and will greatly 
reduce the cost of many classes of concrete work. Why, for ex- 
ample, should not rough retaining walls be built of concrete beams, 
or sticks, exactly as timber bulkheads are now made on railway 
work in timb"''ed countries? By casting dovetailed shapes on the 
ends of the sticks, und corresponding recesses in other beams, it 
would be a simple matter to build such a concrete retaining wall of 
concrete, say 8x12 ins., in cross-section, with "anchors" of similar 
concrete sticks extending back into the earth filling that is placed 
back of the wall. In this manner a wall only 8 ins. thick, with 
each course anchored to the earth fill, could be built by unskilled 
laborers at a very low cost. The concrete sticks would be made in 
a yard, hauled to tne site of the work, and erected with a light A 
derrick or moved on "doUeys" up an incline, just as heavy timbers 
are now handled. 

In spite of the questionable success, thus far, of reinforced con- 
crete cross-ties for railways, there is abundant reason to believe 
that such ties will eventually be perfected, thus leading to the 
making of concrete lumber in great quantities. 

I am satisfied that thin concrete slabs, both in the form of con- 
crete lumber and made in place by plastering mortar upon a 
reinforcing sheet or mesh, are destined to play a very important 
part in the construction field. Flues for carrying hot smelter 
gases have been made of expanded metal plastered on both sides 
with cement mortar. "Why should not tall smokestacks be made 
in the same way? It might be necessary to give a large flare to 
the base. Eiffel Tower fashion, in order to secure stability when 
anchored to a concrete base. The great advantages of this method 
of plastering cement mortar upon a steel skeleton are two : ( 1 ) 
The ability to build concrete work without any forms at all ; and 
(2) the ability to secure an exceedingly thin structure of great 
strength and durability. 

With these and kindred possibilities of development of concrete 



534 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

construction along lines of greater economy, it is not likely that the 
lowest construction costs given in this book will look very low to 
readers of its next edition. 

Cost of Manufacturing Cement. — Boilleau & Lyon give the fol- 
lowing cost of manufacturing slag cement: 

"The following figures may be relied upon as absolutely accurate. 
They represent the writer's experience as treasurer and general 
manager of the Maryland Cement Co. of Baltimore." 
Cost for an output of 5,000 bbls. per month: 

Per bbl. 

Mill force, labor and supt $0,160 

125 tons coal per mo., at $3.05 0.076 

3,000 bu. lime per mo., at $0.16 0.100 

900 tons slag per mo., at $0.50 0.090 

Repairs, $100 per mo 0.020 

On and grease, $40 per mo 0.007 

Contingencies 0.011 

Total $0,464 

Administration 0.121 

Grand total $0,585 

The same authorities give the following estimate of cost of 
manufacturing Portland cement in Pennsylvania in 1904. 

The figures are based on an output of 1,200 bbls. per day, using 
60-ft. kilns, and are the results of actual experience in Penn- 
sylvania. 

Labor: Per bbl. 

Quarry $0,050 

Stone house (2 men each shift) 0.005 

Mill building (6 men each shift) 0.015 

Kiln room (4 men each shift) 0.015 

Engine and boiler i-oom (4 men each shift) 0.015 

Fuel mill (3 men per shift) 0.010 

Yard gang (13 men one shift) 0.015 

Repair gang (12 men one shift) 0.023 

Packing house 0.040 

Miscellaneous 0.002 

Total labor $0,190 

Raw Material: 

Coal for quarry and mill $0,225 

Gypsum 0.018 

Total raw material $0,243 

Supplies: 

Repair parts $0,040 

Lubricants 0.020 

Miscellaneous supplies 0.030 

Total supplies $0,090 

Plant Charges: 

Interest $0,070 

Sinking fund 0.050 

Depreciation and wear and tear 0.050 

Total plant charges $0,170 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 535 

General Expense: 

Office force (12 men one shift) $0,020 

Administration and selling 0.065 

Total general expense $0,085 

Grand total $0,778 

The above figures multiplied by 1,200 give the daily cost. 

There were 4 boilers, each 250 hp., and 2 engines of 500 hp. each. 
Six kilns were run, two shifts daily. 

The fuel for burning clinker was gas slack coal, at $2.60 per ton, 
requiring 105 lbs. per bbl. of clinker. Under the boilers and in the 
dryers 75 lbs. of bituminous coal (at $3 per ton) per bbl. of cement. 

The mill equipment was of the ball and tube type. 

A mill can be built for $50,000 to $60,000 per kiln, exclusive of 
land. A 1,200-bbl. plant (6 kilns) need not cost more than 
$420,000 including land. From 30 to 100 acres, at $200 per acre, are 
commonly used by larger plants than this. Figuring on 11 mos. 
run, or an annual output of 360,000 bbls., interest at 6% on $420,000 
is $25,200 per year, or 7 cts. per bbl. 

A 60-ft. kiln costs $3,000, but a 100-ft. kiln can be bought for 
$5,000, and will do the duty of two 60-ft. kilns at much less ex- 
pense; 100-ft. kilns have turned out as much as 475 bbls. per day. 
The Edison Cement Co. uses 150-ft. kilns. 

In a well-equipped mill without countershafting, the raw and 
clinker mills alone use half the horsepower, and of the repair parts 
fully 75% are required by them, as well as 50% of the lubricants 
and 66% of the miscellaneous supplies. One-third the cost of a 
cement mill is in the crushing and pulverizing departments with 
their necessary buildings and power. 

The stone from the quarry is crushed to 2% to 3-in. size in a No, 
5 or 6 gj'ratory crusher, but a No. 7% or 8 is much better. 

In the 1,200-bbl. mill, three ball mills and three tube mills on 
the raw side kept the six 60-ft. kilns going even when 1,310 bbls. 
were turned out per day. The same number of ball and tube mills 
on the clinker side, however, only averaged 750 bbls. per day, but 
under better management this was increased to 900 bbls. 

Theory of the Quantity of Cement in Mortar and Concrete. — All 
sand contains a large percentage of voids. In 1 cu. ft. of loose 
sand there are 0.3 to 0.5 cu. ft. of voids: that is, 30% to 50% of 
the sand is voids. In making mortar the cement is mixed with 
sand, and the flour-like grains of the cement fit in between the 
grains of the sand, occupying a part or all of the voids in the 
sand. According to the old theory (as given in Trautwine's Pocket- 
book and elsewhere), the amount of cement required to make a 
given mortar is calculated as follows : Suppose the mortar is to be 
1 cu. ft. of cement to 2 cu. ft. of sand (a 1 to 2 mortar) ; and sup- 
pose the sand contains 35% voids, then 2 cu. ft. of sand would 
contain 2X0.35; or 0.7 cu. ft. voids. Now, the 1 cu. ft. of 
cement would fill this 0.7 cu. ft. of voids in the sand and leave an 
excess of 1 — 0.7, or 0.3 cu. ft. of cement; hence, the resulting 
mortar would be 2 cu. ft. of sand -|- 0.3 cu. ft. of cement (the excess 
left over after filling the voids in the sand), thus making 2.3 cu. ft. 



536 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of mortar from the mixture of 1 cu. ft. of cement with 2 cu. ft. of 
sand. As above stated, this simple theory was commonly given by 
all writers (without exception, so far as I know), although many 
contractors and some engineers must have learned by experience 
that the theory is incorrect. In 1901, I called public attention to 
the errors of the theory and published a formula that gives much 
closer approximations to actual tests. 

Since a correct estimate of the number of barrels of cement per 
cubic yard of mortar or concrete is very important, and since it is 
not always possible to make actual mixtures before bidding, it 
seems wise to give space to a discussion of the theory that I have 
offered. 

When loose sand is mixed with water, its volume or bulk is in- 
creased, subsequent jarring will decrease its volume, but still leave 
a net gain of about 10% ; that is, 1 cu. ft. of dry sand becomes 
about 1.1 cu. ft. of damp sand. Not only does this increase in 
the volume of the sand occur, but, instead of increasing the voids 
that can be filled with cement, there is an absolute loss in the 
volume of available voids. This is due to the space occupied by the 
water necessary to bring the sand to the consistency of mortar ; 
furthermore, there is seldom a perfect mixture of the sand and 
cement in practice, thus reducing the available voids. It is safe 
to call this reduction in available voids about 10%. 

When loose, dry Portland cement is wetted, it shrinks about 15% 
in volume, behaving differently from the sand, but it never shrinks 
back to quite as small a volume as it occupies when packed tightly 
in a barrel. Since barrels of different brands vary widely in size, 
the careful engineer or contractor will test any brand he intends 
using in large quantities, in order to ascertain exactly how much 
cement paste can be made. He will find a range of from 3.2 cu. ft. 
to 3.8 cu. ft. per bbl. of Portland cement. Obviously the larger 
barrel may be cheaper though its price is higher. Specifications 
often state the number of cubic feet that will be allowed per barrel 
in mixing the concrete ingredients, so that any rule or formula to 
be of practical value must contain a factor to allow for the speci- 
fied size of the barrel, and another factor to allow for the actual 
number of cubic feet of paste that a barrel will yield — the two 
being usually quite different. 

The deduction of a rational, practical formula for computing the 
quantity of cement required for a given mixture will now be given, 
based upon the facts above outlined. 

Let p = number of cu. ft. cement paste per bbl., as determined 
by actual cost. 
n = number of cu. ft. of cement oer bbl., as specified in the 

specifications. 
s = parts of sand (by volume) to one part of cement, as 

specified. 
fir = parts of gravel or broken stone (by volume) to one 
part of cement, as specified. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 537 

V = Dercentaee of voids in the dry sand, as determined by 

tests 

V = percentage of voids in the gravel or stone, as deter- 

mined by test. 

Then, in a mortar of 1 Dart cement to s parts sand, we 
have; 

n s = cu. ft. of dry sand to 1 bbl. cement. 
n s V — cu. ft. of voids in the dry sand. 
0.9»isv = cu. ft. of available voids in the wet sand. 
l.l»is = cu. ft. of wet sand. 
p — 0.9 ns V = cu. ft. of cement paste in excess of the voids. 
Therefore : 

1.1ns +(.p — 0.9nsv)=cu. ft. of mortar per bbl. 
Therefore : 

27 27 

N = = 

1.1 n s + ip — O.d n s v) p -\-n s (1.1 — 0.9 v.) 

N being the number of barrels of cement per cu. yd. of mortar. 
When the mortar is made so lean that there is not enough cement 
paste to fill the voids in the sand, the formula becomes 

27 

N = 

1.1 n s 

A similar line of reasoning will give us a rational formula for 
determining the quantity of cement in concrete ; but there is one 
point of difference between sand and gravel (or broken stone), 
namely, that the gravel does not swell materially in volume when 
mixed with water. However, a certain amount of water is required 
to wet the surface of the pebbles, and this water reduces the avail- 
able voids, that is, the voids that can be filled by the mortar. "With 
this in mind, the following deduction is clear, using the nomen- 
clature and symbols above given : 

ng = cu. ft. of dry gravel (or stone). 
ngV = cu. ft. of voids in dry gravel. 
0.9ngV = cu. ft. of "available voids" in the wet gravel. 
p + ns (1.1 — 0.9 i;) — 0.09 ng V = excess of mortar over the avail- 
able voids in the wet gravel. 
ng + p + ns {1.1 — 0.9-!;) — 0.9n5'V = cu. ft. of concrete from 1 
bbl. cement. 

27 

N = 

p + n s (1.1 — 0.9 V) +ng (1 — 0.9 V) 
N being the number of barrels of cement required to make 1 cu. 
yd. of concrete. 

This formula is rational and perfectly general. Other experi- 
menters may find it desirable to use constants slightly different 
from the 1.1 and the 0.9, for fine sands swell more than coarse 
sands, and hold more water. 

The reader must bear in mind that when the voids in the sand 



538 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

exceed the cement paste, and when the available voids in the gravel 
(or stone) exceed the mortar, the formula becomes : 

27 

N- 

I ng 

These formulas give the amounts of cement in mortars and con- 
cretes compacted in place. Tables I to IV are based upon the fore- 
going theory, and will be found to check satisfactorily with actual 
tests. 

Table I. Barrels of Portland Cement per Cubic Yard of Mortar. 

("Voids in sand being 35%, and 1 bbl. cement yielding 3.65 cu. ft. 

of cement paste.) 

Proportion of Cement to Sand. 1 to 1 1 to 1 % 1 to 2 1 to2 % 1 to 3 1 to 4 

Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. 

Barrel specified to be 3.5 cu. ft. 4.22 3.49 2.97 2.57 2.28 1.76 
" 3.8 " .4.09 3.33 2.81 2.45 2.16 1.62 
" 4.0 " .4.00 3.24 2.73 2.36 2.08 1.54 
" 4.4 " .3.81 3.07 2.57 2.27 2.00 1.40 

Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. mortar 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 

Table II. Barrels of Portland Cement per Cubic Yard of Mortar. 
(Voids in sand being 45%, and 1 bbl. cement yielding 3.4 cu. ft. 

of cement paste.) 
Proportion of Cement to Sand. 1 to 1 1 to 1% 1 to 2 1 to 21/2 1 to 3 1 to 4 

Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. 

Barrel specified to be 3.5 cu. ft. 4.62 3.80 3.25 2.84 2.35 1.76 

" 3.8 " .4.32 3.61 3.10 2.72 2.16 1.62 

" 4.0 " .4.19 3.46 3.00 2.64 2.05 1.54 

" 4.4 " .3.94 3.34 2.90 2.57 1.86 1.40 



Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. mortar 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 

In using these tables remember that the proportion of cement to 
sand is by volume, and not by weight. If the specifications state 
that a barrel of cement shall be considered to hold 4 cu. ft., for ex- 
ample, and that the mortar shall be 1 part cement to 2 parts sand, 
then 1 barrel of cement is mixed with 8 cu. ft. of sand, regardless 
of what is the actual size of the barrel, and regardles of how much 
cement paste can be made with a barrel of cement. If the specifica- 
tions fail to state what the size of a barrel will be, then the con- 
tractor is left to guess. 

If the specifications call for proportions by weight, assume a 
Portland barrel to contain 380 lbs. of cement, and test the actual 
weight of a cubic foot of the sand to be used. Sand varies ex- 
tremely in weight, due both to the variation in the per cent of 
voids, and to the variation in the kind of minerals of which the 
sand is composed. A quartz sand having 35% voids weighs 107 lbs. 
per cu. ft.; but a quartz sand having 45% voids weighs only 91 
lbs. per cu. ft. If the weight of the sand must be guessed at, assume 
100 lbs. per cu. ft. If the specifications require a mixture of 1 cement 
to 2 of sand by weight, we will have 380 lbs. (or 1 bbl.) of cement 
mixed with 2X380. or 760 lbs. of sand; and if the sand weighs 
90 lbs. per cu. ft., we shall have 760 -h 90, or 8.44 cu. ft. of sand to 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 53'J 

every barrel of cement. In order to use the tables above given, we 
may specify our own size of barrel ; let us say 4 cu. ft. ; then 8.44 
-T- 4 gives 2.11 parts of sand by volume to 1 part of cement. With- 
out material error we may call tliis a 1 to 2 mortar, and use the 
tables, remembering that our barrel is now "specified to be" 4 cu. 
ft. If we have a brand of cement that yields 3.4 cu. ft. of paste 
per bbl., and sand having 45% voids, we find tlmt approximately 
3 bbls. of cement per cu. yd. of mortar will be required. 

It should be evident from the foregoing discussions that no table 
can- be made, and no rule can be formulated that will yield accu- 
rate results unless the brand of cemeni is tested and the percent- 
age of voids in the sand determined. This being so the sensible 
plan is to use the tables merely as a rough guide, and, where the 
quantity of cement to be used is very large, to make a few batches 
of mortar using the available brands of cement and sand in the 
proportions specified. Ten dollars spent in this way may save a 
thousand, even on a comparatively small job, by showing what 
cement and sand to select. 

Table III. Ingredients in 1 Cubic Yard of Concrete. 

(Sand voids, 40% ; stone voids, 45% ; Portland cement barrel yield- 
ing 3.65 cu. ft. paste. Barrel specified to be 3.S cu. ft.) 
Proportions by Volume. 1:2:4 1:2:5 1:2:6 1:21/2:5 l:2y2:6 1:3:4 

Bbls. cement per cu. yd. 

concrete 1.46 1.30 I.IS 1.13 1.00 1.25 

Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.41 0.36 0.33 0.40 0.35 0.53 

Cu. yds. stone per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.82 0.90 1.00 0.80 0.84 0.71 

Proportions by Volume 1:3:5 1:3:6 1:3:7 1:4:7 1:4:8 1:4:9 

Bbls. cement per cu. yd. 

concrete 1.13 1.05 0.96 0.82 0.77 0.73 

Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.48 0.44 0.40 0.46 0.43 0.41 

Cu. yds. stone per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.80 0.8S 0.93 0.80 0.86 0.92 

Note. — This table is to be used where cement is measured pacls;ed 
in the barrel for the ordinary barrel holds 3.S cu. ft. 

It will be seen that the above table can be condensed into the 
following rule: 

Add together the number of parts and divide this sum into ten, 
the quotient will be approximately the number of barrels of ce- 
ment per cubic yard. 

Thus for a 1:2:5 concrete, the sum of the parts is 1 4- 2 -f- 5, 
which is 8 ; then 10 -h 8 is 1.25 bbls., which is approximately equal 
to the 1.30 bbls. given in the table. Neither this rule nor this table 
is applicable if a different size of cement barrel is specified, or if 
the voids in the sand or stone differ materially from 40% and 45% 
respectively. There are such inumerable combinations of varying 
voids, and varying sizes of barrel, that the author does not deem 
it worth while to give other tables. 



540 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table IV. Ingredients in 1 Cubic Yard of Concrete. 
(Sand voids, 40% ; stone voids, 45% ; Portland cement barrel yield- 
ing 3.65 cu. ft. of paste. Barrel specified to be 4.4 cu. ft.) 
Proportions by V^olume. 1:2:4 1:2:5 1:2:6 1:21/2:5 1:21/2:6 1:3:4 

Bbls. cement per cu. yd. 

concrete 1.30 1.16 1.00 1.07 0.96 1.08 

Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.42 0.38 0.33 0.44 0.40 0.53 

Cu. yds. stone per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.84 0.95 1.00 .0.88 0.95 .0.71 

Proportions by Volume. 1:3:5 1:3:6 1:3:7 1:4:7 1:4:8 1:4:9 

Bbls. cement per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.96 0.90 0.82 0.75 0.68 0.64 

Cu. yds. sand per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.47 0.44 0.40 0.49 0.44 0.42 

Cu. yds. stone per cu. yd. 

concrete 0.78 0.88 0.93 0.86 0.88 0.95 

Note. — This table is to be used when the cement is measured 
loose, after dumping it into a box for under such conditions a 
barrel of cement yields 4.4 cu. ft. of loose cement. 

Cement per Cubic Yard of Mortar by Test. 

According to tests by Sabin, by Fuller (in Taylor and Thompson) 

and by H. P. Boardman, the following results were obtained : 

Neat. 1:1. 1:2. 1:3. 1:4. 1:5. 1:6. 1:7. 1:8. 

Authority. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. Bbls. 

Sabin 7.40 4.17 2.84 2.06 1.62 1.33 1.14 

W. G. Fuller... 8.02 4.58 3.09 2.30 1.80 1.48 1.23 1.11 1.00 
H. P. Boardman 7.40 4.50 3.18 2.35 

The proportions were by barrels of cement to barrels of sand, 
and Sabin called a 380-lb. barrel 3.65 cu. ft., whereas Fuller called 
a 380-lb. barrel 3.80 cu. ft. ; and Boardman called a 380 lb. 
barrel 3.5 cu. ft. Sabin used a sand having 38% voids; 
Fuller used a sand having 45% voids; and Boardman used a sand 
having 38% voids. It will be seen that the cement used by Sabin 
yielded 3.65 cu. ft. of cement paste per bbl. (i. e. 27^7.4), whereas 
the (Atlas) cement used by Fuller yielded 3.4 cu. ft. of cement 
paste Der bbl. Sabin found that a barrel of cement mea,sured 
4.37 cu. ft. when dumped and measured loose. 

Mr. Boardman states a barrel (280 lbs., net) of Lehigh Portland 
cement yields 3.65 cu. ft. of cement paste; and that a barrel (265 
lbs., net) of Louisville natural cement yields 3.0 cu. ft. of cement 
paste. 

Mr. J. J. R. Croes, M. Am. Soc. C. E., states that 1 bial. of Rosen- 
dale cement and 2 bbls. of sand (8 cu. ft.) make 9.7 cu. ft. of 
inortar, the extreme variations from this average being 7%. 

The Size and Weight of Barrels of Cement. — A barrel of Port- 
land cement contains 380 lbs. of cement, and the barrel itself 
weighs 20 lbs. more. The size of the barrel varies considerably, 
due to the difference in weight per struck bushel, and to the differ- 
ence in compressing the cement in the barrel. A light burned Port- 
land cement weighs 100 lbs. per struck bushel ; a heavy burned 
cement weighs 118 to 125 lbs. per struck bushel. The number of 
cubic feet of packed Portland cement in a barrel ranges from 3 to 
3%. English Portland cement barrels contain 3l^ to 3% cu. ft. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



541 



packed. There are usually four bags (cloth sacks) of cement to 
the barrel, and each bag itself weighs 11/2 lbs. 

The natural cements are lighter than Portland. The Western ce- 
ments, such as Louisville, Akron and Utica weigh 265 lbs. per bbl., 
and the barrel weighs 15 lbs. more. A barrel of Louisville 
cement =3% cu. ft. packed. The Rosendale cements of New York 
and Pennsylvania weigh 300 lbs. per bbl. and the barrel weighs 20 
lbs. more. There are usually three bags of natural cement to the 
barrel. 

When cement is ordered in cloth sacks, there is a charge made of 
10 cts. per sack, but on return of the sacks a credit of 8 to 10 cts. 
per sack is allowed. Cement ordered in wooden barrels costs 10 cts. 
more per bbl. than in bulk. Cement ordered in paper bags costs 
5 cts. more per bbl. than in bulk. Hence it is that nearly all cement 
used in large quantities is ordered in cloth sacks which are returned. 

When a barrel of cement is dumped out and shoveled into a box 
it measures much more than when packed in the barrel, ordinarily 
from 20 to 30% more. I have measured a number of barrels of 
English Portland cement, which is still much used on the Pacific 
Coast of America, and find that a barrel having a capacity of 3% 
cu. ft. between heads will yield 4.5 cu. ft. of cement measured dry 
and loose in a box. I have found brands of American Portland 
cement that yield 4.65 cu. ft. when measured loose in a box. The 
variation is considerable, as is seen in the following table, com- 
piled from data given by Mr. Howard Carson, M. Am. Soc. C. E. : 

(2) (3) 

( 1 ) Actual Volume 

Brand Capacity contents when 

of of of packed dumped Increase 

Portland bbl. bbl. loose. in 

cement. Cu. ft. Cu. ft. Cu. ft. bulk. 

Giant 3.5 3.35 4.17 25% 

Atlas 3.45 3.21 3.75 18% 

Saylor's 3.25 3.15 4.05 30% 

Alsen (German) 3.22 3.16 4.19 33% 

Dyckerhoff (German) 3.12 3.03 4.00 33% 

Some engineers require the contractor to measure the sand and 
stone in the same sized barrel that the cement comes in ; then 1 
Dart of sand or stone usually means 3% cu. ft. Other engineers 
permit both heads of the barrel to be knocked out, for convenience 
in measuring the sand and stone ; then a barrel means about 3 % 
cu. ft. Still other engineers permit the contractor to measure his 
cement in a box loose ; then a barrel usually means from 4 to 4.5 
cu. ft. Since most of the cement now used is shipped in bags and 
since four bags of Portland cement make a barrel, it is the custom 
among most engineers to call a bag 1 cu. ft., even though it may 
yield a little more cement. Still other engineers prefer to specify 
that a Portland barrel shall be called 3.8 cu. ft., which is equiva- 
lent to 100 lbs. of cement per cu. ft. 

It is desirable that engineers and architects adopt some uniform 
practice in this matter, for now a contractor is often unable to 
estimate the quantity of cement required for any specified mix- 
ture because the size of the barrel is not specified. 



542 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

There have been advocates of proportioning parts by weight, 
but, aside from the fact that it is seldom convenient to weigh the 
ingredients of every batch, there is no gain in such a departure 
from long-standing precedent. Sand and gravel and stone are by no 
means constant in specific gravity, as advocates of weighing seem 
to suppose. 

Effect of Moisture on Voids in Sand. — Few engineers and fewer 
contractors realize how greatly the volume of sand is affected by 
the presence of varying percentages of moisture in the sand. A dry, 
loose sand that has 45% voids if mixed with 5% (by weight) of 
water will swell (unless tamped) to such an extent that its voids 
may be 57%. The same sand if saturated with more water until it 
becomes a thin paste, may show only 37%% voids after the sand 
has settled. The following tests by Feret show the effect that 
water has upon sand: 

Two kinds of sand were used, a very fine sand and a coarse sand. 
They were measured in a box that held 2 cu. ft. and was 8 ins. deep, 
the sand being shoveled into the box, but not tamped or shaken. 
After measuring and weighing the dry sand, 0.5% (by weight) of 
water was added, the sand was mixed and shoveled into the box 
again and weighed. This was repeated with varying percentages 
of water, up to 10%, with the following results: 

Per cent of water in sand. 0% 0.5% 1% 2% 3%, 5% 10%; 

Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 
Weight per cu. yd. of 

fine sand and water 3,457 2,206 2,085 2,044 2,037 2,035 2,133 

Weight per cu. yd. of 

coarse sand and water. 2,551 2,466 2,380 2,122 2,058 2,070 2,200 

It will be noted that the weight of mixed sand and water is 
given ; but, to ascertain the exact weight of dry sand in the mix- 
ture, divide the weight given in the table by 100% plus the given 
tabular per cent ; thus, the weight of dry fine sand mixed with 
5% of water is 2,035^1.05 = 1,938 lbs. per cu. yd. It will also be 
noted that when the water exceeds 3 to 5%, the weight of the mix- 
ture increases, showing that a larger percentage of water com- 
pacts the sand. The voids in the dry fine sand were 45%, and in 
the sand with 5% moisture they were 56.7%. 

It is well known that pouring water onto loose, dry sand com- 
pacts it. By mixing fine sand and water to a thin paste,, pouring it 
into a pail and allowing it to settle, it was found that the sand 
occupied 11% less space than when measured dry in a box. The 
voids in fine sand, having a specific gravity of 2.65, were deter- 
mined by measurements in a quart measure, and found to be as 
follows : 

Voids. 

Sand, not packed 44 % %j 

Sand, shaken to refusal 35 % 

Sand, saturated with water 37% % 

Mr. H. P. Boardman made some experiments with Chicago sand 
having 34 to 40% voids when dry, by adding water to the sand. 
The results were as follows: 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 543 

% % % % % 

Water added, % by weight 2 4 6 8 10 

Resulting increase in volume. . 17.6 22 19.5 16.6 15.6 

However, a very moderate amount of shaking would reduce this 
increase in volume by y^ to Vj. 

Effect of Size of Sand Grains on Voids. — If in any given volume 
of sand all the grains were of the same shape and of uniform size, 
the percentage of voids would be the same regardless of the size 
of the grains. This is equivalent to saying that the finest birdshot 
has the same percentage of voids as the coarsest buckshot. Nat- 
ural sand grains, unless they have been sorted by screening, are apt 
to vary greatly in size, large and small being intermixed. It is 
this that causes such wide discrepancies in published data as to 
the percentage of voids in dry bank sands. We may divide sand 
into three sizes, for convenience. The largest size (L) being sand 
that will pass a sieve of 5 meshes per lineal inch, but will not 
pass a sieve of 15 meshes per lineal inch; the medium size 
(M) being sand that will pass a 15-mesh sieve, but will not 
pass a sieve of 50 meshes Der lineal inch; and the fine size (F) 
being sand tnat will ass a 50-mesh sieve. If we mix varying 
proportions of the large, medium and fine (L, M and F), we find 
that we get the densest mixture, with the least voids, when we have 
an L6, MO, F4 mixture, that is, 6 parts large size, no parts medium, 
and 4 parts fine size. With a dry sand whose grains have a specific 
gravitv of 2.65, if we weigh a cubic yard of either the fine, or the 
medium, or the large size, we find a weight of 2,190 lbs. per cu. yd., 
which is equivalent to 51% voids. If we mix the three different 
sizes in varying proportions, we find, as above stated, that an Lr6, 
MO, F4 mixture is densest, and it weighs 2,840 lbs. per cu. yd. 
shoveled into a box dry. This is equivalent to 36% voids. We can 
get a denser mixture, with a lower percentage of voids, if we mix 
about equal parts of sand and clean gravel. It will be noted that 
the common statement that the densest mixture is obtained by a 
mixture of gradually increasing sizes of grains is erroneous. There 
must be enough difference in the sizes of grains to provide voids 
so large that the smaller grains will enter them and not wedge 
the larger grains apart. 

The shape of the grains has a very pronounced effect upon the 
percentage of voids, rounded grains having less voids than angular 
grains. Using sand having a granulometric composition of L5, M3, 
F2, measured in a quart measure, the following results were obtained 
by Feret : 

Voids. . 

Unshaken. Shaken. 

Natural sand, rounded grains 35.9 % 25.6 % 

Crushed quartzite angular grains 42.1 27.4 

Crushed shells, fiat grains 44.3 31.8 

JResidue of quartzite, flat grains 47.5 34.6 

The measure was shaken until no further settlement could be 
produced. 

Mr. William B. Fuller made the following tests: A dry sand, 
having 34% voids shrank 9.6% in volume upon thorough tamping, 



544 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



until it had 27% voids. Tlie same sand moistened with 6% water, 
and loose, had 44% voids, which was reduced to 31% by ramming. 
The same sand saturated witli water had 33% voids, and by thorough 
ramming its volume was reduced 8i^%, until the sand had only 
261/2% voids. 

Table V. — Sizes of Sand Grains. 



Held by a 

No. 10 . . 


Sieve. 


A. 
35.3% 
32.1 
14.6 

; 'V.6 
4.9 
2.0 


B. 

'12.8% 
49.0 

29.3 

5.7 
2.3 


C. 

"4.2% 

12.5 

44.4 


E. 


No. 20 . . 




11% 


No. 30 .. 
No. 40 . . 




14 


No 50 . . 




53 


No 100 . 






No. 200 . 













Voids 33% 39% 41.7% 31% 

Note. — A is a "fine gravel" (containing 8% clay) used at Phila- 
delphia. B. Delaware River sand. C, St. Mary's River sand. 
D, Green River, Ky., sand, "clean and sharp." 

Table VI. — ^Voids in Sand. 
Locality. Authority. 

Ohio River W. M. Hall 

Sandusky, O C. E. Sherman 



Franklin Co., O 

Sandusky Bay, O. . 



C. E. Sherman 
S. B. Newberry 



St. Louis, Mo H. H. Henby 



Sault Ste. Marie. . 



H. von Schon 



Voids. 


Remarks. 


31% 


Washed 


40% 


Lake 


40% 


Bank 


32.3% 




34.3%. 


Miss. River 


41.7% 


River 


34 to 40% 




39% 


Del. River 


31 to 34% 




33% 


Clean 


401/2% 


.....••■•• 


45.6% 




30% 


Clean 



Chicago, 111 HP. Boardman 

Philadelphia, Pa 

Mass. Coast 

Boston, Mass Geo. A. Kimball 

Cow Bay, L. I Myron S. Falk 

Little Falls, N. J. . . W. B. Fuller 
Canton, 111 G. W. Chandler 

Voids and Weight of Broken Stone and Gravel. — Data as to 
these will be found in Section III, Rock Excavation. Consult the 
index under "Broken Stone," also under "Gravel." 

Tables for Estimating the Cost of Concrete and for Designing 
Reinforced Concrete Beams and Slabs.* — Tables of cost and crush- 
ing strength of concrete mixtures, when compiled from reliable 




Fig. 1. 



data, have a very useful purpose in figuring on concrete work. In 
our issue of Feb. 19, 1908, we published a table of this character 
long used by a prominent Eastern contractor. Another table of 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 26, 1908. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 545 

••xiui g :%z -T uo i,^luA^ 

pasBq saiaaouoo jo rncomt-ot^or-i^ t?-2£ « o g 
mSuaj^s JO oirtTJij ^t-"^"-: ■=.«;<>: «oio "oJ I'ri t, 

(Mr-!rHTHiH ' " ' ' ^Xi'^-' di C 

0) ^ :3 .--ft— 

+j M-rj o (D'U C ooooooinoo -sij ™i-i • <P 
S 5R si i^ -^ O " 'KoooooMoio -a^ "s^-d.il 






C a> M M C^ CO T-H rH rH tH iH Q Q 0) -73 ^ 

.0) S5 ^ oddo'ddodd O"!::! 2 fte 

Ou-M ooooooooo t^liJ^'OTSe 

§ ^ "^g'd'^.SS 

g Id^'^S^ 33^33 3 3 3 3 2 %^ g 

2 o2S-=^ oooooaot)CJa)CS.-.§ 

I ^=«iS3^ «;^=;'«.=;=:°.°=: S3.§o3^ 

a -piS -no T9A-BJO :t-ooooooooo5 05 05 => g S'Oo aj 

<J -^ ■ ' * * ' rt^ OJ 'i^ ^"^ ' ^ 

r fnt 3 P^^ . tH t. 

Eh i; o ? .t-ONTt<^5D«Ot- g Oj 3&3--P+J 

" , 0-S>"-pjC -no PUBS •co^'»"*^^-*^ 3 o a2<t-i 

6 U-s^^ g^ii^^bud 

(Br >'a!5 >.3-Ma>3 3'*^ 

y; <D ;-, t«* '^ t^'-' cd '^ Jii 3 

;^ — , S • ,. •c-T)<oocq-^<ot,oo ira-g !«)3-3 M 

& ^ M^-""P^ '"^O 9U0JS •t-ooooo50503osos eg " c oj-g .-XJ 

I Ctyos: 30 Og I .g-go 

^ Msi ..00.0^^0.00 Si3^|S| 

M !*• O M .<N.OqrHrHrtOOO 11^^^ gg 

.2 O o'c . . . • in C5 lo c- «D o 03 (M -e O X?^"'^ ^ «o 

S W '-' :<^i<^ir^rH•r-iddd fe:§X>'^ ^ 

°S I "3- «• - * cd 

M Ofi3-Ort 

<i 9U01H iH e<i M 'S' in to 00 o N '. +j lyO ctf C 

o2 P"^S^ ;^ ;^ |c^ft3c^ 

•f-jB rH!Me<icO'*<in«o^O'^0.3oJ 

■S5 V S'O 3 

«o ^? d 01 u- a 

►r O rr t, (U'O c 

>> ;UaUI80,-,-rt^r-rtrHrtTH ftt! OJ ft t» P 



546 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

similar scope is given here (Table VII). This table has been com- 
piled by Mr. H. J. Fixmer, Assistant Engineer, Board of Local Im- 
provements, Chicago, 111., from various and it is believed trustworthy 
sources. The cost column, while necessarily based on given con- 
stants, shows relative costs of different mixtures which are fairly 
true for all cases. These costs, in connection with the ratio of 
strength figures, show almost at a glance the economy of the selected 
mixtures. 

Table VIII is used in designing slabs and girders. Attention is 
called to the fact that the value h is used and that the value d-h is 
the selected thickness of the fireproofing only. In other words the 
depth of the beam is the value h plus the thickness required for fire- 
proofing. The value fc — 500 lbs.— is practically the universal build- 
ing code allowance. The value fs of course varies with the percent- 
age of steel used. A little study of the table shows the advantage 
of using not less than 1%% of steel for reinforcing. 

For purposes of comparison the following data as to brickwork are 
useful : 

Crushing strength Cost per 
lbs. per sq. in. cu. ft. 

First-class brickwork in cement mortar 834 $0.44 

Good brick in cement mortar 486 0.35 

Ordinary brick in lime mortar 347 0.26 

1,000 brick = 40 cu. ft. when laid. 

Percentage of Water Required in IVlortar — A good rule by which 
to determine the percentage of water by weight for any given mix- 
ture of mortar is as follows: Multiply the parts of sand by 8, add 
24 to the product and divide the total by the sum of the parts of 
sand and cement. 

Example : Required percentage of water for a mortar of 1 
cement to 3 sand : 

SOLUTION. 

1 cement =24% 

3 sand X 8% =24% 

4 parts at 12% = 48% 

Hence the water should be 12% of the combined weight of the 
cement and sand. For a 1 : 1 mortar, the rule gives 16% water. For 
1 : 2 mortar the rule gives 13%% water. For a 1:6 mor- 
tar • the rule gives 10.3% water. Incidentally, it may be 
added, the percentages of water obtained by this rule give a mortar 
that has the greatest adhesion to steel rods (see Falk's "Cements,. 
Mortars and Concretes," page 61). 

About 23 gals of water are required per cu. yd. of 1 : 3 : 6 concrete. 

Estimating the Cost of Steel in Reinforced Concrete. — In re- 
inforced concrete the amount of steel is usually expressed in per- 
centages of the volume of concrete. Thus 1% of steel means that 
one one-hundredth r>art of the volume of reinforced concrete is steel. 
In a cubic yard of reinforced concrete there is 1% of 27 cu. ft., or 
0.27 cu. ft. of steel, if the reinforcement is 1%. A cubic foot of steel 
■ weighs 490 lbs., but for all practical purposes we can call it 500 lbs. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



547 



n 
<! 

« 
Q 



n 



-a 

m 

C . 
— (p 



Ni35 «Ot— <MOU5 in 
i-l-*<rHOiO'*OOOcOtD 






OOt-IOaOO«Ot-OmiM 

'oOO© 'rHi-iN 



d o oj 



.5.5.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.S ■ 



^#^^#^^ 



C r^; ooooot^" 



CO 



<! 
H 

» 
a 
o 

O 

U 

Q 
O 

u 
o 



01 






ID 

■M C 

II O '^ ■'"' 

d 0) a* 

« Ol-i-' to 



OOOOoOo 
lr-lrHr',-H 
"^ "^ ^-"^ ^-- li- ^^ V.O 

I ^ 



■ — ' (*^ -^ wa (.--J -J wj ^^ 

e5^ 



i ^ S O « 



s %\ 



2 s* 



ft 






lo Lo 00 m CQ 
oOiHO«r>OTH;oo 



oooooooo 



oooooooo 



oooooooo 






a 

c ^ 

■a ri 

s .s 



CM 

ii-M o 
emu 

t3 



oooooooo 
oooooooo 
oooooooo 

o"toTj<'e<rooo«rTjr 



oooooooo 
oooooooo 
miaiaiaiaiainu: 



S« 



C 

3 



eq c 



II 


;-i 
o 


y-s 


C 


tir 


o 


c 


O 


c 




o 




o 


o 




■(-) 


0) 


is 


c 








;-i 


o 


o 


c 



"e ^ 



.-^ 



c 

0) 

S 
o 

Cud 

c 



03--; u 
-) cd o 



m 3 






X 



o 
o 

IH 
^^ 

'J' 
CO 






Oi 
> in •• 

V^,-ir^^ 

m c .. 

to tH 
O to 

. ™ c 



2'S'o 

■ "'SS 

to te'« . 

.Seq Sue 

.2 c ^.^2^ 

WO . •— ' fcun 






S M to "y 



tc 



cc.2f 



• o o 

Mto g 



■w<H 

-I -I'T-I 



a s 
-t-i i-i 

TO o 



01 



o 



.5 01 'S - -j:^' 
^ o g C o 

>5 (D 01 w^ 5 
^ "=■£ ^ c S 

tH X! C "^ 

o 01 to p ^ 

•" 0) C '-' ^A 

w^ to > 

vtijj+^d OI P 

& Oi toj., 

M,G C O) m 

,.S§25-S 

. P 01 tj." 

OJ "tj 
|||?5| 

tH°° to o o u 
01 II !-. O-M fe 

O S'H*-' E. 

-onj o q 
O O t< 



to . 



•= CC^ 



548 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Hence reinforced concrete containing 1% of steel has 0.27X500 = 135 

lbs. of steel per cu. yd. 

Per cent. Lbs. of Lbs. of 

of Steel Steel 
Steel. Per Cu. Ft. Per Cu. Yd. 

0.20 1.00 27.0 

0.20 1.25 33.8 

0.30 1.50 40.5 

0.35 1.75 47.3 

0.40 2.00 54.0 

0.45 2.25 60.8 

0.50 2.50 67.5 

0.55 2.75 74.3 

0.60 3.00 81.0 

0.65 3.25 87.8 

0.70 3.50 94.5 

0.75 3.75 101.3 

0.80 4.00 108.0 

0.85 4.25 114.8 

0.90 4.50 121.5 

0.95 4.75 128.3 

1.00 5.00 135.0 

Knowing the price of steel for reinforcing, it is a simple matter 
of multiplication to estimate the cost of the steel for any percent- 
age of reinforcement. For example it is desired to know the cost of 
steel for a concrete sewer reinforced with twisted bars %-in. square, 
the steel amounting to 0.30%. According to the table there would 
be 40.5 lbs. of steel per cu. yd. in concrete reinforced with 0.30% of 
steel. The following table of prices is given in a catalog of Ran- 
some's in 1906 : 

Price of Ransome Twisted Steel Bars. 

Add the prices given below to the prevailing prices for plain steel 
bars f. o. b. Pittsburg. 

Per 100 lbs. 

Larger than % inch square add 0.30 

Larger than 11/16 inch square add 0.375 

Larger than % inch square add 0.375 

Larger than 9/16 inch square add 0.425 

Larger than V^ inch square add 0.425 

Larger than 7/16 inch square add 0.65 

Larger than % inch square add 0.70 

Larger than 5/16 inch square add 0.75 

Larger than % inch square add 0.80 

Larger than %xl inch add 0.425 

Larger than %x% inch add 1.20 

The above figures are for carload lots. For quantities less than 
carload lots, add $0.05 per 100 lbs. For quantities less, between 
1,000 lbs. and 2,000 lbs., add $0.10 per 100 lbs. 

For quantities less than 1,000 lbs., add $0.30 per 100 lbs. 

If the present price of plain steel bars is $1.50 per 100 lbs., f. o. b. 
Pittsburg, tlxep the price of %-in. Ransome twisted steel bars is 
$1.50 -1- $0.70, or $2.20 per 100 lbs., or 2.2 cts. per lb. f. o. b. Pitts- 
burg. Let us assume that the freight and haulage brings the price 
up to 2% cts. per lb., delivered on the job. The labor cost of bend- 
ing and placing steel in reinforced concrete sewers averages about 
% ct. per lb. Hence the total cost of the steel in place is 3 cts. per 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 549 

lb. in this particular case. Since there are 40% lbs. of steel per cu. 
yd. of concrete containing 0.30% steel, we have a total cost of 40.5 X 
3 cts. = $1.22 per cu. yd. for the steel. 

In lilie manner all similar problems may be solved. To facilitate 
rapid estimates, it is a good plan to keep records of all reinforced 
concrete structures in such form as to show the percentage of steel 
used. In doing this, however, be careful to separate the founda- 
tions which are not reinforced from the superstructure which is re- 
inforced. A reinforced concrete arch bridge usually rests on abut- 
ments which are not reinforced. Do not lump together all the con- 
crete in making an estimate, but separate the arch from the abut- 
ments. Frequentlj' engineers have failed to separate the yardage of 
foundation from the yardage of superstructure of reinforced concrete 
bridges, yet without such a separation accurate cost estimates are 
impossible. 

Cost of Sand. — The cost of sand may be estimated by adding 
together the cost of loading in the pit, the cost of hauling in 
wagonS; the cost of freiglit and rehandling if necessary and the cost 
of washing. On page 553 are given data on the cost of shoveling 
sand into wagons. The cost of wagon hauling is given on page 125. 
Freight rates can always be secured, and it is usually safe to esti- 
mate the weight on a basis of 2,700 lbs. per cu. yd., provided the 
sand has not been rained upon after loading in the car. The cost 
of screening sand by hand is the cost of shoveling it up against an 
inclined screen ; but if a large amount of gravel must be screened 
to get a small amount of sand, care must be taken to make tests in 
the pit to ascertain how many cubic feet of gravel and sand must 
be shoveled to secure one cubic foot of sand. In some places sand 
must be dredged or pumped with a sand pump from the bottom of a 
river or lake. In other places sand must be made by crushing stone 
and running the small crushed product through rolls. At Couders- 
port. Pa., a small plant for making artificial sand from stone has 
been in operation for many years. 

Stone was crushed and passed through rolls in order to make a 
sand for the mortar used in the Lanchensee Dam, Germany. A jaw 
crusher, driven by a 15-hp. engine, crushed 65 cu. yds. of stone 
(graywacke) per 10-hr. day. All pieces from 0.16 to 1.6 ins. diam- 
eter were passed through rolls. The rolls were 14% ins. long and 
34 ins. diameter, and made 22 revolutions per niinute, requiring 12 
to 15 hp. A pair of these rolls produced 20 cu. yds. of sand per 
10-hr. day. The rolls had chilled bands which, when worn, were 
ground true with an emery wheel without removing the rolls. 

Where a large amount of concrete is to be made, a contractor can 
seldom afford to guess at the source of his sand supply. I have 
known several instances where long hauls over poor roads have made 
the sand more expensive than the stone per cubic yard of concrete. 
Bach job should be estimated in detail, using the data given else- 
where in this book. 

A very common price for sand in cities is ?1 per cu. yd., delivered 
at the work. Sand is often sold by the load, Instead of by the cubic 



S50 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

yard. It is wise to have a written agreement defining the size of a 
load. 

Cost of Washing Sand in a Tank Washer. — Mr. W. H. Roper 
gives the following data on the cost of washing sand for U. S. Lock 
No. 3, at Springdale, Pa. The sand dredged from the river con- 
tained much fine coal and silt which was removed by the washer, 
which consisted of a circular tank, 9 ft. diam. x 7 ft. high, provided 
with a sloping false bottom perforated with 1-in. holes, through 
which water was forced. A 7 % x 5 x 6-in. pump with a 3-in. 
discharge pipe was used to force the water into the tank. The 
paddles for keeping the sand in suspension were rotated by a 7-hp. 
engine. A charge of 14 cu. yds. of sand was washed in from 1 to 2 
hrs., at a cost of 7 cts. per cu. yd. This device was designed by 
Capt. W. R. Graham, who is said to have applied for a patent. It is 
doubtful whether any patentable combination exists in the device. 
See Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction" for the design of 
this washer, and also for the design of the one described in the next 
paragraph. 

Mr. F. H. Stephenson gives the following data relating to a sand 
washer designed by Mr. Allen Hazen, which consisted of a wooden 
box 10 ft. long, 2% ft. wide and 2% ft. deep; a 6-in. pipe, provided 
with a gate, or valve, enters at one end, and connects with three 
3-in. pipes capped at the ends. In the bottoms of these 3-in. pipes 
are %-in. holes, spaced 6 ins. apart, through which water discharges 
under pressure into the box. Sand is shoveled into the box at one 
end, and the upward currents of water raise the fine and dirty par- 
ticles until they escape through the waste troughs. When the box 
becomes filled with sand a sliding door is raised at the end, and the 
clean sand flows out through a 3-in. hole in the box. The operation 
is continuous, so long as sand is fed into the washer. By manipu- 
lating the door the sand can be made to flow out with a very small 
percentage of water. Sand containing 7% of dirt was thus washed 
so that it contained only 0.6% dirt. In 10 hrs. the washer handled 
200 cu. yds. of sand. 

If sand is handled to and from the washers by shovels the cost 
of shoveling is the largest item of expense, and this can be easily 
estimated. If the sand is dumped into bins which feed into the 
washer by gravity, and is finally delivered by gravity to buckets or 
cars, the cost of washing is mainly the cost of pumping, plus the 
interest and depreciation of plant. The amount of water required per 
cubic yard has been given above, so that a close estimate of cost can 
readily be made for any given condition. 

Other data as to methods and costs of washing sand and gravel 
will be found in "Concrete Construction — Methods and Cost" by 
Gillette and Hill. 

Cost of Washing Sand With a Hose.— Where the quantity of sand 
to be washed is not very large, the simplest method is to use water 
from a hose. Build a tank 8 ft. wide and 15 ft. long, the bottom 
having a slope of about 8 ins. in the 15 ft. The sides should be 
about 8 ins. high at the lower end, rising gradually to 3 ft., the 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 551 

height of the upper end. The lower end of this tank should be 
closed with a board gate about 6 ins. high, sliding in guides so 
that it can be removed. Dump about 3 cu. yds. of the dirty sand at 
the upper end of the platform and play a stream of water upon it 
from a %-in. nozzle, the man standing on the outside of the lower 
end of the platform. The water and sand How down the platform 
and the dirt passes off with the overflow water over the gate. In 
about an hour the batch of sand will be washed. By building a pair 
of platforms the washing can proceed continuously ; and one man 
can wash 30 cu. yds. a day, at a cost of 5 cts. per cu. yd. for his 
labor. To this must be added the cost of shoveling up the sand 
again, say, 10 cts. per cu. yd., and any extra hauling due to the 
location of the washer. If the water is pumped, about 10 cts. more 
per cu. yd. will be spent for coal and wages, making a total of 
25 cts. per cu. yd. 

Washing With Sand Ejectors — Where very large quantities of 
sand are to be washed more expensive apparatus than above de- 
scribed may be used. In Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction" 
will be found detail drawings of what are termed "sand ejectors," 
consisting of a row of conical hoppers now used extensively for 
washing filter sand. From the bottom of each hopper the sand and 
water are forced to the top of the next hopper by a stream of water 
passing through an ejector. The dirty water overflows at the top 
of each hopper, and finally clean sand is discharged into receiving 
bins or buckets. One man can readily attend to feeding the sand 
into the first hopper and another man will handle the discharge. It 
requires about 3,000 gals, of water per cu. yd. of sand washed, 
so that with an output of 36 cu. yds. of sand in 10 hrs., the amount 
of water to be pumped is 108,000 gals. A gasoline pump may 
be used. 

"With such an output the cost would be about as follows: 

Per Day. Per Cu. Yd. 

2 laborers at $2 $4.00 $0,111 

1 man on pump 3.00 0.083 

Fuel, etc., for 5 hp. pump 1.00 0.028 

Total $8.00 $0,222 

The cost of pumping can be greatly reduced where a larger yard- 
age is to be washed daily. 

For other data on sand washing with ejectors see the part of the 
section on Waterworks devoted to sand filtering. 

Cost of Washing Gravel. — In the Railway Section will be found 
data on the cost of washing gravel for railway ballast. 

Cost of Transporting in Push Carts. — For hauling concrete over 
comparatively level runways, two-wheel push carts, or concrete 
buggies, are far more economic than wheelbarrows. A cart having 
a capacity of 6 cu. ft., and holding about 0.2 cu. yd. of concrete, is 
pushed by one man. With wages at 15 cts. per hr., and man trav- 
eling 200 ft. per min., the cost would be 1% cts. per cu. yd. per 100 
ft. of distance from mixing board to point of dumping the con- 



552 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Crete. Two lines of plank should be laid for the wheels to travel on. 
Cost of Making Concrete by Hand. — The cost of making concrete 
by hand may be divided into the following items : 

(1) Loading the barrows, buckets, carts or cars used to trans- 
port the materials (stone, sand and cement) to the mixing board. 

(2) Transporting and dumping the materials. 

(3) Mixing the materials by turning with shovels or hoe^. 

(4) Loading the concrete with shovels into barrows, buckets, 
carts or cars. 

(5) Transporting the concrete to place. 

(6) Dumping and spreading. 

(7) Ramming. 

(8) Forms, runways, cement house, bins, etc. 

(9) Finishing the surface of the concrete. 
(10) Superintendence and general expenses. 

Unloading the iViaterials From Cars. — The stone and sand will 
ordinarily be delivered by wagons or cars and dumped into stock 
piles as near the proposed work as possible, without being in the 
way after construction begins. The contractor should use fore- 
tliought not only in planning the location of his stock piles, but also 
in providing a large enough storage capacity to tide over irregu- 
larities in the delivery of materials, especially where materials 
come by rail from a distance. It is usually a short-sighted policy 
to attempt to unload direct from the railway cars onto the mixing 
board, without providing a stock pile ; for the foreman will be 
spending most of his time trying to get the railroad to deliver 
materials promptly. By all means provide stock piles, unless there 
is some good reason to the contrary. 

Sand can be dumped directly on the ground, but broken stone 
(unless it is very small, %-in. or less in size) should always be 
dumped upon a plank floor, well made. Such a floor should 
consist of 2-in. plank laid on 4 x 6-in. stringers, firmly bedded in the 
ground and spaced about 3 ft. apart. Never lay a lot of loose plank 
directly upon the ground, without stringers, for they are sure to 
settle unevenly under the load, and thus make it difficult to shovel 
up the stone. The object of the plank is to provide an even surface 
along which a square pointed shovel can be pushed in loading bar- 
rows, carts, etc. I find that a man can load 18 or 20 cu. yds. of 
broken stone into wheelbarrows in 10 hrs., if he is shoveling off a 
well-laid plank platform, but he will not average more than 12 or 
14 cu. yds. a day shoveled from a pile without a plank flooring. The 
reason is that a shovel can be shoved with difficulty into a mass of 
broken stone (2-in. size), but can readily be shoved along a plank 
floor Incidentally I may add that broken stone delivered in hopper- 
bottom cars can be shoveled with difficulty as compared with 
shoveling in flat-bottom cars ; the ratio being about 14 cu. yds. per 
man per day from hopper-bottom cars as compared with 20 cu. yds. 
from flat cars. On the other hand, the hopper-bottom coal car 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 553 

should always be chosen where it can be dumped through a trestle. 
If the amount of work to be done will justify the expense a trestle 
may be built. Often, however, there is a railroad embankment 
which can be dug away for a sliort distance and stringers placed to 
support the track. Then the cars can be dumped into the hole 
thus made, and the material shoveled out and down the slope. 

Many foremen for railway companies waste hundreds of dollars 
by shoveling the materials from freight cars out upon the earth — 
often upon the side of an embankment where shoveling is very 
difficult. In many cases it would have paid well to have unloaded 
the cars by the aid of a stiff-leg derrick and iron buckets or skips 
loaded by the shovelers in the cars ; these skips being dumped upon 
a well-made platform. In other cases chutes lined with sheet iron 
would have served to deliver the stone upon a plank flooring at the 
foot of the embankment, just as coal is delivered into a cellar. 
Damp sand will not slide down a chute on a slope of 1% to 1, but 
coarse broken stone, if given a start when cast, with the shovel, will 
slide on an iron-shod slope of 3 or 4 to 1. 

If the material is delivered in wagons it seldom is necessary to 
have large stock piles provided the wagons come direct from the 
sand pit and the quarry. 

Cost of Loading the Materials. — A man who is a willing worker 
can readily load 20 cu. yds. of sand into a barrow or cart in 10 hrs., 
but under poor foremen, or when laborers are scarce, it is not safe 
to count upon more than 15 cu. yds. a day, or, say, 10 cts. per cu. yd. 
for loading. Practically the same figures hold true of broken stone 
shoveled off a good plank floor ; but, if the stone is shoveled off the 
ground, estimate 15 cu. yds. a day under good management, or 12 
cu. yds. a day under poor management. Since in a cubic yard of 
concrete there are ordinarily about 1 cu. yd. of broken stone and 
about 0.4 cu. yd. of sand, the cost of loading the materials into 
wheelbarrows and carts is as follows, wages being 15 cts. per hour: 



1 cu. yd. 


stone loaded for 11 cts. 


0.4 cu. yd. 


sand loaded for 4 cts. 



1 cu. yd. concrete loaded for 15 cts. 

The cement can be loaded with more ease than the other materials, 
whether it is in barrels or in bags, and the cost of loading it into 
barrows or carts will be not over 2 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete, thus 
making a total of 17 cts. per cu. yd. for loading the concrete ma- 
terials into barrows or carts. 

Cost of Transporting the Materials. — The most common way of 
transporting the materials from stock piles to the mixing board is in 
wheelbarrows over plank runways. A wheelbarrow is usually load- 
ed with 2 sacks of Portland cement (200 lbs.), or with 2 cu. ft. of 
stone or of sand, if a steep rise must be made to reach the mixing 
platform; but, if the run is level, 300 lbs. of cement, or 3 cu. ft. 
of sand or stone is a common wheelbarrow load. A man wheeling 
a barrow travels at the rate of about 200 ft. per minute, going and 
coming, and loses % minute each trip dumping the load, fixing run 



554 ■ HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

planks, etc. An active man will do 20 or 25% more work than this, 
while a very lazy man may do 20% less. With wages at 15 cts. per 
hour, the cost of wheeling the materials for 1 cu. yd. of concrete 
may be obtained by the following rule : 

To a fixed cost of 4 cts. (for lust time) add 1 ct. for every 20 ft. 
of distance from stock pile to mixing board if there is a steep rise in 
the runway, but if tiie runway is level add 1 ct. for every 30 ft. 
distance of haul. Since loading the barrows costs 17 cts. per cu. yd. 
the total fixed cost is 4 + 17 cts. or 21 cts. per cu. yd., to wnich is 
added 1 ct. for every 20 or 30 ft. of haul, according to the character 
of the runway. 

I have frequently seen small stock piles located as close as pos- 
sible to mixing boards, so that wheelbarrows were not used, the 
materials being carried in shovels direct to tlie mixing boards. On 
work of any considerable size this is a very foolish plan, as we can 
readily see. It takes from 100 to 150 shovelfuls of stone to make 
1 cu. yd. It therefore costs at the rate of 50 cts. per cu. yd. to 
carry it 100 ft. and return empty handed, for in walking sliort dis- 
tances the men travel very slowly — about 150 ft. per minute. From 
this it appears that it costs more to walk even half a dozen paces 
with stone carried in shovels than to wheel it in barrows. Of 
course, by using large coal scoops the cost of carrying material in 
shovels could be reduced to one-half or one-third the cost with ordi- 
nary shovels ; but scoops are never used in mixing concrete. 

Another mistake that is very commonly made by foremen is to 
provide no plank runways from the stock pile to the mixing board, 
but instead to run the wheelbarrows over the ground. This is bad 
enough even in dry weather over a very hard packed earth path, 
but after a rain or on a soft pathway it means a great loss of 
efficiency. Had I not seen this error committed repeatedly, I should 
not mention it, for it would seem that no foreman could be so short- 
sighted as not to provide a few planks for runways. 

Where the runway must rise to the mixing board, give it a slope 
or grade seldom steeper than 1 in 8, and if possible flatter. Make a 
runway on a trestle at least 18 ins. wide, so that men will be in no 
danger of falling. See to it, also that the planks are so well sup- 
ported that they do not spring down when walked over, for a springy 
plank makes hard wheeling. If the planks are so long between the 
"horses" or "bents" used to support them, that they spring badly, it 
is usually a simple matter to nail a cleat across the underside of 
the planks and stand an upright strut underneath to support and 
stiffen the plank. 

Materials may be hauled in one-horse dump-carts for all distances 
more than 50 ft. (from stock pile to mixing board) at a cost less 
than for wheelbarrow hauling. A cart should be loaded in 4 mins. 
and dumped in about 1 min., making 5 mins. lost time each round 
trip. It should travel at a speed of not less than 200 ft. per min., 
although it is not unusual to see variations of 15 or 20%, one way 
or another, from this average, depending upon the management of 
the work. A one-horse cart will readily carry enough stone and 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 555 

sand to make Va cu. yd. of concrete, if the roads are fairly hard and 
level; and a horse can pull this load up a 10% (rise of 1 ft. in 10 
ft.) planked roadway provided with cleats to give a foothold. If a 
horse, cart and driver can be hired for 30 cts. per hour, the cost 
of hauling the materials for 1 cu. yd. of concrete is given by the 
following rule : 

To a fixed cost of 5 cts. (for lost time at both ends of haul) 
add 1 ct. for every 100 ft. of distance from stock pile to mixing 
board. Where carts are used it is possible to locate the stock piles 
several hundred feet from the mixing boards without adding ma- 
terially to the cost of the concrete. It is well, however, to have the 
stock piles in sight of the foreman at the mixing board, so as to in- 
sure promptness of delivery. 

Cost of Mixing the Materials. — This element of cost depends upon 
the number of times that the materials are turned over With 
shovels. I have seen street paving work where the inspection was so 
lax that the contractor was required to turn over the mass of Band, 
cement and stone only three times before shoveling it into place. 
On the other hand, the contractor is rarely required to turn over the 
cement and sand more than three times dry and three times wet to 
make the mortar, and then turn over the mortar and stone three 
times. A willing workman, under a good foreman, will turn over 
mortar at the rate of 30 cu. yds. in 10 hrs., lifting each shovelful 
and casting it into a pile. This means a cost of 5 cts. per cu. yd. 
of mortar for each turn ; but as there is seldom more than 0.4 
cu. yd. of mortar per cu. yd. of concrete, we have a cost of 2 cts. 
per cu. yd. of concrete for each turn that is given to the mortar. 
So if the mortar is given 6 turns before adding the stone, we have 
2 cts. X 6 which is 12 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete for mixing the 
mortar. Then if the mortar and stone are turned three times we 
have 5 cts. X 3, or 15 cts. more for mixing, thus making a total of 27 
cts. per cu. yd. for mixing the concrete, wages being 15 cts. per hr. 

I recall seeing one specification that called for 6 turns of the mor- 
tar dry and 3 turns wet. Under such a specification the cost of 
mixing the mortar would be 50% more than 1 have assumed in the 
• example just given. Specifications for hand mixing should always 
state the number of turns that will be required, but frequently they 
do not, thus leaving the contractor to guess at the probable require- 
ments of the inspector. In such a case it is a good plan to use hoes 
instead of shovels for mixing the mortar, because in this way a good 
mortar can be mixed with much greater rapidity than when an in- 
spector insists on 6 to 9 turns with shovels, as frequently happens 
when specifications are ambiguous. 

As above stated, it often happens that on city pavement work, two 
turns of the mortar, followed by two turns of the mortar and stone, 
are considered sufficient. In such a case the cost of mixing the 
mortar is 2 cts. X 2, or 4 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete ; to which is 
added 5 cts. X 2, or 10 cts., for mixing the mortar and stone, making 
in all 14 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete. When concrete is mixed Very 
wet, or sloppy, this amount of mixing appears to give good results. 



556 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Where a given number of turns of concrete is specified, disputes 
often occur between inspectors and foremen as to whether shoveling 
into wheelbarrows constitutes a "turn" or not, and whether any sub- 
sequent shoveling in getting the concrete to its final resting place 
constitutes a "turn." It seems but fair to count each handling with 
the shovel as a turn, no matter when or where it occurs, but in- 
spectors will not always look upon it in that light. 

The foregoing costs of mixing apply to work done by diligent 
men; but easy-going men will make the cost 25 to 50% greater. 
I have seen this latter class of men most frequently on day labor 
work for cities, railways and other companies and corporations 
Whose foremen have little or no incentive to secure a fair day's work 
from the men. 

Cost of Loading and Hauling Concrete. — The cost of loading con- 
crete, after it is mixed, is less than the cost of loading the materials 
separately before mixing, because while the weight is greater (due 
to the added water), the bulk or volume of the concrete is much less 
than the volume of the ingredients before mixing. Moreover a 
smooth mixing board, and the presence of the foreman, secures more 
rapid work. In shoveling any material a large part of the work 
consists in forcing the shovel into, or under, the mass to be lifted. 
With wages at 15 cts. per hour, the cost of loading concrete into bar- 
rows or buckets should net exceed 12 cts. per cu. yd. The cost of 
wheeling it after loading is practically the same as for wheeling 
the dry ingredients, as given by the rule on page 272. The cost per 
cubic yard of loading and wheeling is therefore given by this rule : 
To a fixed ©ost of 16 cts. (for loading and lost time) add 1 ct. for 
every 30 ft. of level haul. 

If the concrete must be elevated, a gallows frame, or a mast with 
a pulley block at the top, a team of horses and a rope for hoisting 
the skip load of concrete, can often be used to advantage. 

Another method, well worthy of more frequent use, consists in 
wheeling the barrows of concrete to a gallows frame where they 
are raised by a horse, and when wheeled to place. 

In building railv/ay abutments, culverts, and the like, it is often 
desirable to locate the mixing board on high ground, perhaps at some- 
little distance from the forms. If this can be done, the use of der- 
ricks may be avoided as above suggested or by building a light pole 
trestle from the mixing board to the forms. The concrete can then 
be wheeled in barrows and dumped into the forms. If' the mixing 
board can be located on ground as high as the top of the concrete 
structure is to be, obviously a trestle will enable the men to wheel 
on a level runway. Such a trestle can be built very cheaply, espe- 
cially where second-hand lumber, or lumber that can be used subse- 
quently for forms is available. A pole trestle whose bents are made 
entirely of round sticks cut from the forest is a very cheap structure, 
If a foreman knows how to throw it together and up-end the bents 
after they are made. I have put up such trestles for 25 cts. per lin. 
ft. of trestle, including all labor of cutting the round timber, erecting 
It, and placing a plank flooring 4 ft. wide on top. The stringers and 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 557 

flooring plank were used later for forms, and their cost is not in- 
cluded. A trestle 100 ft. long can thus be built at less cost than 
hauling, erecting and talking down a derrick ; and once the trestle 
is up it saves the cost of operating a derrick. 

Concrete made with Portland cement (but not with natural ce- 
ment) can be hauled long distances in a cart or wagon before it 
begins to harden. This fact should be taken advantage of by con- 
tractors far oftener than it is. I am inclined to think that the 
extensive use of natural cement, which sets too quickly to admit of 
hauling far, has blinded contractors to the possibilities of saving 
money by hauling Portland cement concrete long distances. Since a 
cart is readily hauled at a speed of 200 ft. a minute, where there are 
• no long steep hills, it is evident that in GVs minutes a cart can travel 
a quarter of a mile; in 13 minutes, half a mile; and in 26 min- 
utes, a mile. Portland cement does not begin to set for 30 minutes; 
hence it may be hauled a mile after mixing it. The cost of hauling 
concrete with one-horse dump-carts is practically the same as the 
cost of hauling its dry ingredients. 

Cost of Dumping, Spreading and Ramming. — The cost of dump- 
ing wheelbarrows and carls is included in the rules of cost already 
given, excepting that in some cases it is necessary to add the wages 
of a man at the dump who assists the cart drivers or the barrow 
men. Thus in dumping concrete from barrows into a deep trench 
or pit, it is usually advisable to dump into a galvanized iron hopper 
provided with an iron pipe chute. One man can readily dump all 
the barrows that can be filled from a concrete mixer in a day, say 
150 cu. yds. At this rate of output the cost of dumping would 
be only 1 ct. per cu. yd., but if one man were required to dump the 
output of a small gang of men, say 25 cu. yds., the cost of dumping 
would be 6 cts. per cu. yd. 

Concrete dumped through a chute requires very little work to 
spread it in 6-in. layers ; and, in fact, concrete that can be dumped 
from wheelbarrows, which do not all dump in one place, can be 
spread very cheaply ; for not more than half the pile dumped from 
the barrow needs to be moved, and then moved merely by pushing 
with a shovel. Since the spreader also rams the concrete, it is diffi- 
cult to separate these two items. As nearly as I have been able to 
estimate this item of spreading "dry" concrete dumped from wheel- 
barrows in street paving work, the cost is 5 cts. per cu. yd. If, on 
the other hand, nearly all the concrete must be handled by the 
spreaders, as in spreading concrete dumped from carts, the cost is 
fully double, or 10 cts. per cu. yd. And if the spreader has to 
walk even 3 or 4 paces to place the concrete after shoveling it up, 
the cost of spreading will be 15 cts. per cu. yd. For this reason it is 
apparent that carts are not as economical as wheelbarrows for 
hauling concrete up to about 200 ft., due to the added cost of 
spreading material delivered by carts. 

The preceding discussion of spreading is based upon the assump- 
tion that the concrete is not so wet that it will run. Obviously 



558 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

where concrete is made of small stones and contains an excess of 
water, it will run so readily as to require little or no spreading. 

The cost of ramming concrete depends almost entirely upon its 
dryness and upon the number of cubic yards delivered to the ram- 
mers. Concrete that is mixed with very little water requires long 
and hard ramming to flush the water to the surface. The yardage 
delivered to the rammers is another factor, because if only a few 
men are engaged in mixing they will not be able to deliver enough 
concrete to keep the rammers properly busy, yet the rammers by 
slow though continuous pounding may be keeping up an appearance 
of working. Then, again, I have noticed that the slower the con- 
crete is delivered . the more particular the average Inspector be- 
comes. Concrete made "sloppy" requires no ramming at all, and 
very little spading. 

I have had men do very thorough ramming of moderately dry 
concrete for 15 cts. per cu. yd., where the rammers had no spread- 
ing to do, the material being delivered in shovels. It is rare indeed 
that spreading and ramming can be made to cost more than 40 cts. 
per cu. yd., under the most foolish inspection, yet one instance is re- 
corded below of even higher cost. 

If engineers specify a dry concrete and "thorough ramming" they 
would do well also to specify what the word "thorough" is to mean, 
using language that can be expressed in cents per cubic yard. It is 
a common thing, for example, to see a sewer trench specification in 
which one tamper is required for each two men shoveling the back- 
fill into the trench ; and some such specific requirement should be 
made in a concrete specification if close estimates from reliable 
contractors are desired. Surely no engineer will claim that this is 
too unimportant a matter for consideration when it is known that 
ramming can easily be made to cost as high as 40 cts. per cu. yd., 
depending largely upon the whim of the inspector. 

Example of High Cost of Tamping. — Mr. Herman Conrow is 
authority for the following data : 1 foreman, 9 men mixing, 1 ram- 
ming, averaged 15 cu. yds. a day, or only 1% cu. yds. per man per 
day, when laying wet concrete. When laying dry concrete the same 
gang averaged only 8 cu. yds. a day, there being 4 men ramming. 
With foreman at $2 and laborers at $1.50 a day, the cost was $2.12 
per cu. yd. for labor on the dry concrete as against $1.13 per cu. yd. 
for the wet concrete. Three turnings of the stone with a, wet mortar 
effected a better mixture than four turnings with a dry mortar. 
The ramming of the wet concrete cost 10 cts. per cu. yd., whereas 
the ramming of the dry concrete cost 75 cts. per cu. yd. I think 
this is the highest cost on record for ramming. It is evident, how- 
ever, that the men were under a poor foreman, for an output of 
only 15 cu. yds. per day with 10 men is very low for ordinary con- 
ditions. Moreover, the high cost of ramming indicates either poor 
management or the most foolish inspection requirements. 

Cost of Rolling and Finishing Concrete Floors. — I am indebted to 
Mr. Ernest L. Ransome for the following: 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 559 

When concrete floors are built directly on the ground, there is no 
necessity of having a concrete as rich in cement as when the floor 
spans an opening. A mixture of 1 part Portland cement, 4 parts 
sand and 8 parts gravel or broken stone is strong enough, and this 
requires less than three-quarters of a barrel of cement per cubic 
yard. If hand mixing is used, more cement is needed, but we are 
assuming that the materials are thoroughly mixed. Actual tests 
have demonstrated that more cement is required with hand mixing 
tlian with machine mixing. 

The concrete should be spread in a layer 3 to 5 ins. thick, depend- 
ing upon the nature of the subsoil and the loads the floor will have 
to support. Then the concrete should be rolled, for rolling is more 
effective than tamping and costs far less. The first attempts at 
rolling were unsuccessful because a roller of too great weight was 
used. Mr. Ransome discovered that a light roller should be used 
for the first rolling, followed by rolling with a heavier roller, and 
finishing with a roller still heavier. 

The Ransome Concrete Machy. Co., of Dunellen, N. J., makes 
rollers of three sizes to be used successively, weighing: No. 1, 290 
lbs. ; No. 2, .375 lbs. ; No. 3, 645 lbs. 

One laborer will readily roll 7,500 sq. ft. in a 9-hr. day. If the 
floor is 4 ins. thick, this is equivalent to nearly 100 cu. yds. With 
wages at $1.50 a day, the cost is 0.2 ct. per sq. ft, or 1% cts. per cu. 
yd. for the rolling. 

An interesting fact about rolling concrete is this : The water is 
flushed to the surface and may even run off in a thin stream, but the 
water is perfectly clear, carrying no cement in suspension. Where- 
as, when concrete is tamped, the water is milky, due to the cement 
that is flushed to the surface. 

After the concrete is rolled, a finishing coat of mortar is applied. 

Most contractors have finished floors with a coating of cement 
mortar immediately following the laying of the body of the floor. 
There are several objections to this practice. In the first place, 
should a heavy rain fall before the floor is roofed over, the surface 
will be damaged. This objection, however, is not so serious as 
another. Scaffolding placed on green concrete mars its surface, and, 
in addition to this, drippings of mortar and concrete from above 
spoil the surface. Moreover, it is very difficult to put a finishing coat 
on reinforced concrete floors when they are still soft. To escape 
these objections Mr. Ransome invented "Ransomite," which is a 
liquid that causes new concrete to adhere to old. The body of a con- 
crete floor is built, as above described, and the flnishing coat is not 
put on until the scaffolding and forms are removed from above. 
Then the floor is given a wash of "Ransomite," at a cost of approxi- 
mately Vi ct. per sq. ft. for material and labor. Upon the floor is 
spread a layer of cement mortar % to 1 in. thick, the mortar being 
1 part Portland cement to 2 parts sand. 

A skilled finisher at $4 a day, with a helper at $2.50, will finish 
500 sq. ft. of floor in a day. Considerably more than 1,000 sq. ft. 



560 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a day have been finished by a skillful and willing man, but, assum- 
ing only 500 sq. ft. a day, the cost of finishing is about 1% cts. 
per sq. ft. 

For further data on finishing floors, see the part of the section on 
Roads and Pavements where costs of cement walks are given. 

Cost of Superintendence. — This item is obviously dependent upon 
the yardage of concrete handled under one foreman and the daily 
wages of the foreman. If a foreman receives $3 a day and is boss- 
ing a job where only 12 cu. yds. are placed daily, we have a cost of 
25 cts. per cu. yd. for superintendence. If the same foreman is 
handling a gang of 20 men whose output is 50 cu. yds., the super- 
intendence item is only 6 cts. per cu. yd. If the same foreman is 
handling a concrete-mixing plant having a daily output of 150 cu. 
yds., the cost of superintendence is but 2 cts. per cu. yd. I have 
given these elementary examples simply because figures are more 
impressive than generalities, and because it is so common a sight to 
see money wasted by running too small a gang of men under one 
foreman. 

Of all classes of contract work, none is more readily estimated day 
by day than concrete work, not only because it is usually built in 
regular shapes whose volumes are easily ascertained at the end of 
each day, but because a record of the bags, or barrels, or batches 
gives a ready method of computing the output of each gang. For 
this reason small gangs of concrete workers need no foreman at all, 
provided one of the workers is given command and required to keep 
tally of the batches. If the efficiency of a gang of 6 men were to fall 
off, say, 15%, by virtue of having no regular non-working foreman 
in charge, the loss would be only $1.35 a day — a loss that would be 
more than counterbalanced by the saving of a foreman's wages. In- 
deed, the efficiency of a gang of men would have to fall off 25%, 
or more, before it would pay to put a foreman in charge. I know 
by experience that in many cases the efficiency will not fall off at all, 
provided the gang knows that its daily progress is being recorded, 
and that prompt discharge will follow laziness. Indeed, I have more 
than once had the efficiency increased by leaving a small gang to 
themselves in command of one of the workers who was required to 
punch a hole in a card for every batch. 

To reduce the cost of superintendence there is no surer method 
than to work two gangs of 18 to 20 men, side by side, each gang 
under a separate foreman who is striving to make a better showing 
than his competitor. This is done with marked advantage in street 
paving, and could be done elsewhere oftener than it is. 

In addition to the cost of a foreman in direct charge of the labor- 
ers, there is always a percentage of the cost of general superintend- 
ence and office expenses to be added. In some cases a general 
superintendent is put in charge of one or two foremen ; and, if he is 
a high-salaried man, the cost of superintendence becomes a very 
appreciable item. 

Summary of Costs of Making Concrete by Hand — Having thus 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 561 

analyzed the costs of making and placing concrete, we can under- 
stand why it is tliat printed records of costs vary so greatly. More- 
over, we are enabled to estimate the labor cost with far more accu- 
racy than we can guess it ; for by studying tlie requirements of tlie 
specifications, and the local conditions governing the placing of stock 
piles, mixing boards, etc., we can estimate each item with consid- 
erable accuracy. My purpose, however, has not been solely to show 
how to predict the labor cost, but also to indicate to contractors and 
their foremen some of the many possibilities of reducing the cost of 
work once the contract has been secured. I have found that an 
analysis of costs, such as above given, is the most effective way of 
discovering unnecessary "leaks," and of opening one's eyes to the 
possibilities of effecting economies in any given case. 

To indicate the method of summarizing the costs of making con- 
crete by hand, let us assume that the concrete is to be put into a 
deep foundation requiring wheeling a distance of 30 ft. ; that the 
stock piles are on plank 60 ft. distant from the mixing board ; that 
the specifications call for 6 turns of gravel concrete thoroughly 
rammed in 6-in. layers; and that a good sized gang of, say, 16 men 
(at ?1.50 a day each) is to work under a foreman receiving $2.70 
a day. We then have the following summary by applying the rules 
already given : 

Per cu. yd. 
concrete. 

Loading sand, stone and cement $ .17 

Wheehng 60 ft. in barrows (4 + 2 cts.) 06 

Mixing concrete, 6 turns at 5 cts 30 

Loading concrete into barrows 12 

Wheeling 30 ft. (4 + 1 ct.) 05 

Dumping barrows (1 man helping barrowman) . . .05 
Spreading and heavy ramming 15 

Total cost of labor $ .90 

Foreman at $2.70 a day 10 

Grand total ?1.00 

To estimate the daily output of this gang of 16 laborers proceed 
thus: Divide the daily wages of all the 16 men, expressed in cents, 
by the labor cost of the concrete in cents, the quotient will be the 
cubic yards output of the gang. Thus, 2,400 -j- 90 is 27 cu. yds. in 
this case. 

In street paving work where no man is needed to help dump the 
wheelbarrows, and where it is usually possible to shovel concrete 
direct from the mixing board into place, and where half as much 
ramming as above assumed is usually satisfactory, we see that the 
last four labor items instead of amounting to 12 + 5 -f 5 -f- 15, or 37 
cts., amount only to one-half of the last item, % of 15 cts., or 7% 
cts. This makes the total labor cost only 60 cts. instead of 90 cts. 
If we divide 2,400 cts. (the total day's wages of 16 men) by 60 cts. 
(the labor cost per cu. yd.), we have 40 which is the cubic yards out- 
put of the 16 men. Tliis greater output of the 16 men reduces the 
cost of superintendence to 7 cts. per cu. yd. 



562 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Mixing Concrete With Machine.— Care must be taken not 
to confuse the cost of mixing concrete with tlie cost of delivering ma- 
terials to the mixer and conveying the concrete away from the mixer. 
A study of the various costs given on subsequent pages will show 
that the cost of mixing alone is only a small part of the total cost 
of making concrete. 

If all the materials are delivered to the machine in wheelbarrows, 
and if the concrete is conveyed away in wheelbarrows, the cost of 
making concrete, even with machine mixers, is high. On the other 
hand, where the materials are fed from bins by gravity into the 
mixer, and where the concrete is hauled away in cars, the cost of 
making the concrete may be very low. 

There are three types of mixers : ( 1 ) Batch mixers ; ( 2 ) continu- 
ous mixers ; ( 3 ) gi'avity mixers. Cube mixers, double-cone mixers, 
and drum mixers are batch mixers in which a charge is rotated 
for 10 or 15 turns and then discharged all at once. The con- 
tinuous mixers have paddles or plows that stir up the materials as 
fast as they are delivered, a continuous stream of concrete being 
discharged. In one type of gravity mixer the falling materials strike 
baffle plates which perform the mixing. In the more common type 
(the Hains), the materials pass through three funnel-shaped hop- 
pers, the hour glass action causing the mixing. 

Batch mixers are commonly made in three sizes, %-yd., %-yd. and 
1-yd. It is generally considered sufficient to give the mixer 10 or 
15 turns, occupying 1 to 1% mins., after charging it with a batch; 
but as some time is consumed in charging and discharging, etc., it is 
safe to count on only one batch every 3 mins., or 200 batches in 10 
hrs. If each batch is '/^-yd., the daily output is 100 cu. yds. ; if 
the batch is 1 yd., the daily output is 200 cu. yds. 

Where the work is well organized, and no delays occur in deliver- 
ing the materials to the mixer, a batch every 2 mins., or 300 batches 
in 10 hrs., will be averaged ; and there are a few records of 1 batch 
every 1% mins., and even less. 

Not more than 12 hp. are required to run a %-yd. mixer. Where 
materials are delivered from bins or skips, 2 men will charge a %-yd. 
mixer and 1 man will attend to dumping it, and a gasoline engine 
consuming 10 gals, of gasoline per 10-hr. day at 12^4 cts. per gal., 
will represent the full cost of labor and fuel for mixing 200 cu. yds. 
If the 2 men are paid $1.50 each, and 1 man at $1.75, the cost of 
labor and fuel is only $6.00, or 3 cts. per cu. yd. It is not in the 
mixing, therefore, that the money is consumed, but in conveying ma- 
terials to and from the mixer, in ramming the concrete, in installing 
the plant for mixing and conveying, and in interest and depreciation 
charges. 

For tables of sizes, weights, capacities, etc., of mixers made by 11 
different manufacturers, see Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construc- 
tion," p. 660. etc. 

A batch mixer will, in general, require the following engine power : 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 563 

HP. 

% cu. yd. batch mi.\er 7 

V.J cu. yd. batch mixer 10 

% cu. yd. batch mixer 14 

1 cu. yd. batch mixer 20 

It is wise to provide a boiler power about 50% in excess of tl\e 
engine power. 

Tlie weiglits of batcli mixers, with and without engine and boiler, 
seldom exceed the following : 

Size of batch, cu. yd 14 % % 1 

Weight of mixer on skids, lbs 3,500 3,800 6,000 6,700 

Ditto With engine and boiler, lbs 7,000 7,500 12,000 13,500 

Prices vary considerably, but, for purposes of estimating, assume 
about 10 cts. per lb. 

The above sizes of "batches" are based not upon the loose meas- 
ure of the materials, but of the concrete rammed in place. 

Cost of Mixing With a Gravity IVIixer.— Mr. G. B. Ashcroft states 
that a small gravity mixer of the Hains type was used in the build- 
ing of a dock for The William Skinner Ship-Building & Dry Dock 
Co., of Baltimore, Md. It consisted of two conical hoppers, one 
above the other, and above these were four small pyramidal hop- 
pers for measuring the sand and stone, and above these were small 
bins. One man at each conical hopper tending the gates, and two 
men at the pyramidal hoppers (4 men in all) constituted the gang on 
the mixer. A scow load of sand and another of broken stone were 
hauled alongside the bulkhead on which the mixer stood, and a 
clamshell bucket dredge was used to load the sand and stone from 
the scows into the bins of the mixer. Each batch was 25 cu. ft. of 
1:2:5 concrete rammed into place. The record for 10 hrs. was 110 
batches, making about 35 cts. per cu. yd. as the labor cost. Wages 
of common laborers were $1.50. The concrete was run directly into 
place through chutes ; and the mixer was moved from place to 
place by means of the dredge boom. 

On the Cedar Grove Reservoir, built for Newark, N. J., a large 
gravity mixer of the Hains type was used. The best day's output 
was 403 cu. yds. ; the average output during the best month was 
302 cu. yds. ; and the average of the whole job was 225 cu. yds. per 
10-hr. day. The stone, sand and cement were all raised by bucket 
elevators to the top of the high wooden tower that supported the 
bins and the mixer. There were 10 men operating the mixer, so that 
(exclusive of power, interest and depreciation) the labor cost of 
mixing averaged only 7 cts. per cu. yd. ; and during one month it 
was as low as 5 cts. per cu. yd. This does not include delivering 
the materials to the men at the mixer, nor does it include conveying 
the concrete away and placing it. The work was done by contract. 

On the Pittsburg filter construction in 1906, a Hains mixer was 
used, and its output was 500 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day. 

Cost of Forms. — It is a common practice to record the cost of 
forms or molds in cents per cubic yard of concrete, giving separately 
the cost of lumber and labor. This should be done, but the analysis 
of the cost of forms should always be carried a step farther. The 



564 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

records should be so kept as to show the first cost per M (i. e., 1,000 
ft. B. M.) of lumber, the number of times the lumber is used, the 
labor cost of erecting, and the labor cost of taking down the forms 
each time — all expressed in M ft. B. M. Thus only is it possible 
to compare the cost of forms on different kinds of concrete work, 
and thus only can accurate predictions be made of the cost of forms 
for concrete work having dimensions differing from work previously 
done. It is well also to make record of the number of square feet 
of exposed concrete surface to which the forms were applied. There 
are three ways, therefore, of recording the cost of forms : ( 1 ) In 
cents per cubic yard of concrete; (2) in cents per square foot of 
concrete face to which forms are applied ; and ( 3 ) in dollars per M 
ft. B. M. of lumber used — in all three cases keeping the cost of ma- 
terials and labor separate. Furthermore, it is well to make a 
sketch of the construction of the forms, and attach the sketch to the 
record of cost. 

In estimating the probable cost of forms I find the following 
method most reliable : First, after ascertaining the time limit within 
which the work must be completed, determine the number of cubic 
yards of concrete that must be laid each day, after allowing liberally 
for delays. Knowing the number of cubic yards, estimate the num- 
ber of thousand feet board measure of forms required to encase the 
concrete to be placed in a day. This will give the minimum amount 
of lumber required, for it is never permissible to move the forms 
until the concrete has hardened over night, except when concrete is 
in a small arch, as in a sewer. This brings us to a very important 
question in economics. Thousands of words have been written on 
the advantages and disadvantages of using "wet" or "dry" con- 
crete, but I have never seen mention of one of the most forceful ob- 
jections to the use of concrete mixed so wet that it is sloppy. I 
refer to the slowness with which such concrete hardens. Obviously, 
the more slowly it hardens, the longer must the forms be left in 
place ; and the longer the forms are left in place the more lumber 
will be required ; the more the lumber, the greater the cost of forms 
per cubic yard of concrete. 

A concrete mixed "dry," and rammed, will harden over night, so 
that in retaining wall construction it is safe to remove the forms 
the next morning ; but, where the concrete has been mixed "sloppy," 
I have seen whole sections of wall fall out upon the removal of forms 
twelve hours after placing the concrete. In cold weather the setting 
Is further delayed, and in very cold weather it may cease entirely 
unless proper precautions are taken. Specifications relating to 
sloppy concrete usually provide that wall forms shall not be moved 
within 48 hrs. after placing the concrete; but in hot weather it is 
often safe to remove the forms in 24 hrs. or less. 

Forms for concrete arches or beams must obviously be left in 
place longer than in wall work, because of the tendency to fall by 
rupture across the arch or beam. Forms for small circular arches, 
like sewers, may be removed in 18 to 24 hrs. if dry concrete is used; 
but in 24 to 48 hrs. if wet concrete is used. Forms for large arch 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 565 

culverts and arch bridges are seldom taken down in less than 14 
days, and it is often specified that they must not be struck for 28 
days after placing tlie last of the concrete. Tliis last requirement is 
probably necessary where the backfilling over tiie arcli is put on at 
once ; but, except in the case of arches of great span, there appeal s 
to be no suflicient reason for keeping tlie centers so long under the 
arch, provided they can be used elsewhere. Indeed, I am inclined to 
think tliat a week's time is ample for arches having a span of 40 ft. 
or less, provided no filling is placed on the arch. In fact, a study of 
the compressive strength tests given in Falk's "Cements, Mortars 
and Concretes," pages 128, 131, etc., shows that the difference of 
compressive strength between 7-day and 28-day Portland cement 
mortar and concrete is often less than 25%, and averages about 50% ; 
and that in any case concrete a week old is amply strong enough to 
hold its own weiglit in an arch of moderate size. Progressive set- 
tlement of the abutments might in some cases be given as a reason 
for leaving centers a long time in place, but abutments founded 
on rock or on piles do not show progressive settlement after the 
striking of centers, unless the subsequent jarring of trains causes 
the piles to go down. 

Forms supporting concrete-steel floors and beams are usually left 
in a place at least a week. 

The consideration of the time element in the use of forms is es- 
sential in making an accurate forecast of the quantity of lumber 
that will be required in any given case. A few additional sugges- 
tions will not, therefore, be out of place. 

Often the uprights of studs used to hold the sheeting plank are 
also used as legs for a trestle to support a track or runway over 
which the concrete is transported. In such a case the amount of 
timber in the forms is considerably more than would be indicated by 
considering merely the length of time that the forms must stand be- 
fore removal ; for, so long as the uprights stand, it is impossible to 
remove the sheeting plank where ordinary kinds of forms are used. 
I have seen many instances of unnecessary expenditure of money for 
forms due to neglect to consider this fact. Bear in mind, therefore, 
that it may be cheaper to provide a movable derrick, or to use a 
cableway for delivering the concrete, rather than to use the up- 
rights of the forms as posts for a trestle. 

I have found it cheaper, as a rule, to build the coping of retaining 
walls after finisliing the wall itself. One of the reasons for this is 
that a projecting coping is apt to fall, due to its own weight, if the 
forms are not left in place longer than it is necessary to leave the 
forms for the wall below the coping. 

This leads us to the subject of building forms in panels that can 
be shifted from place to place without tearing the forms to pieces 
and building them up again. Wlien panels can be used, it is evi- 
dent that the cost of labor and lumber for forms may be reduced to a 
few cents per cubic yard of concrete. Examples of low cost of sewer 
work where the forms are thus shifted in sections will be found on 



566 • HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

subsequent pages. Even high retaining walls may thus be built with 
movable forms. 

There are few; classes of concrete work where, at the expense of 
a little thought in designing movable forms, a great expense in lum- 
ber may not be saved. 

Having estimated the quantity of lumber required for any given 
concrete job, and the number of times that it can be used, the labor 
cost of framing, erecting and taking down the forms may be calcu- 
lated thus: With carpenters' wages at 25 cts. per hour, and laborers' 
wages at 15 cts. per hour, working 1 laborer to 2 carpenters, my 
records show that ordinary forms for walls, arches, etc., can be 
framed and erected for $6 per M ft. B. M., when men are working 
for a contractor. The forms can be carefully torn apart, taken 
down and moved a short distance, for $1.50 per M; making the total 
labor cost $7.50 per M for each time that the forms are built up 
and torn down. Where the forms are built in panels and are not 
ripped apart and nailed together again at every move, there is only 
the cost of moving them each time after they have once been built, 
and this may not exceed 50 cts. per M for each move. Moreover 
forms used in panels last much longer since the lumber is not in- 
jured by being repeatedly torn apart. 

Retaining vpalls, bridge piers and abutments, etc., are commonly 
provided with forms consisting of 2-in. plank laid in horizontal 
courses against upright studs. The studs may be of 4 x 6-in. stuff 
spaced 214 ft. centers, or 3 x 6-in. spaced 2 ft. centers. In either 
case the lumber in the studs is about 40% as much as the lumber in 
the 2-in. sheeting plank. Hence there are 2 ft. B. M. of plank and 
0.8 ft. B. M. of studs, or a total of 2.8 ft. B. M. for each square foot 
of surface area of concrete. If telegraph wire is used to hold the 
studs from spreading (No. 9 wire weighing 0.06 lb. per ft.), no other 
lumber is required ; but in some designs of forms there are inclined 
braces against the stud, frequently containing more lumber than the 
studs themselves. Ordinarily the same forms are used several times, 
so that the 2.8 ft. B. M. per sq. ft. does not then mean per sq. ft. of 
concrete, but of forms, and must be divided by the number of times 
it is used to estimate the lumber per sq. ft. of concrete surface. 
Thus, if the forms are used 4 times, we have 2.8 -^ 4 = 0.7 ft. B. M. 
per sq. ft. of concrete surface. 

If lumber costs $25 per M, the cost of 2.8 ft. B. M. is 7 cts. 
It can usually be framed and erected for $8 per M, or 2% cts. per 
sq. ft. of forms containing 2.8 ft. B. M. Hence if the lumber is used 
4 times, we have 7-^4 = 1% cts., cost of lumber per sq. ft. of con- 
crete, plus 21/4 cts. per sq. ft. for labor if each time it is taken down 
and erected costs $8 per M, or a total of 4 cts. per sq. ft. of con- 
crete surface, or 36 cts. per sq. yd. Hence if the wall is 3 ft. thick 
and requires forms on two faces (front and rear) it will cost 2 X 36 
cts. = 72 cts. for forms per cu. yd. of concrete. If it is 6 ft. thick, it 
will cost 36 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete. If the same sizes of lum- 
ber were used for a wall only 1 ft. thick, the cost would be $0.36 X 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 567 

3 = $1.08 per cu. yd. Based upon the above assumptions as to 
amount and cost of lumber, number of times used (4), etc., we have 
tlie following rule : 

To ascertain the cost of forms per cubic yard of wall, divide $2.16 
by the thickness of the wall in feet. 

This rule can be expressed in a more general form as follows : 
To ascertain the cost of forms per cubic yard of wall, divide $S.80 
by the product of the thickness of wall in feet and the number of 
times the forms are used, to estimate the cost of lumber, and to this 
add the cost of labor determined by dividing $1.20 by the thickness of 
the wall in feet. 

In the case of a 3-ft. wall where forms are used 4 times, this rule 
would give us : 

$3.80 -^ (3 X 4) = $0.32 for lumber, to which add $1.20 -^ 3 = $0.40 
for labor, making a total of $0.72 per cu. yd. 

For any other price and amount of lumber for forms, a similar 
rule can readily be made. Such a rule shows very clearly the rea- 
son why thin concrete walls where form lumber is used only once or 
twice cost so much per cubic yard. Thus, if a wall were only 1 ft. 
thick and lumber were used but once, the above rule would give us 
a cost of $5 per cu. yd. for forms alone. 

For further data on the cost of forms see, particularly the sections 
on Buildings, Bridges, and Sewers. Consult the index under "Con- 
crete, Forms." 

Cost of Fortification Work at Fort Point, Cal. — Mr. George H. 
Mendell gives the following data: The work was the construction 
of fortifications at Fort Point, near San Francisco. The following 
experiments were made: 



-Experiment- 



No. 1 No 2 No. 3 

cu. ft. cu. ft. cu. ft. 

1 bbl. Portland cement measured loose 4.42 4.58 4.5* 

Water added 2.00 1.75 1.92 

Volume of stiff paste resulting 4.00 3.80 3.82 

Moist sand added 10.12 11.40 13.50 

Water added 2.00 2.50 2.00 

Volume of mortar resulting 10.12t 12.30 14.00 

Gravel addedl 36.50 36.90 

Volume of loose concrete 45.25 43.23 

Volume of concrete tamped in place 37.50 



♦This barrel measured 3^4 cu. ft. packed. 

tThere is some doubt as to the accuracy of this measurement, 
for it was recorded as 9.12 cu. ft. although it was probably 10.12. 

JThis gravel in experiment No. 1, was in %-in. sizes down to 
birdshot ; in experiment No. 2 it was the size of beans and smaller. 
The'-e was a cnnsirioT-nblp riprcentage of what should be called sand 
in the gravel, probably 20%. 

In making the concrete all materials were measured loose and a 
barrel of cement was assumed to measure 4 y^ cu. ft. The propor- 
tions of a batch were 1:3:8; the 8 being 8x41/0, or 36 cu. ft. of 
stone and gravel. In making a mass of concrete 60 ft. long, 40 ft. 



568 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

wide and 30 ft. high, a careful record was kept of the cost of sev- 
eral weeks' work, measuring 1,825 cu. yds. in place: 

Cost, per cu. yd. 

0.73 bbl. cement at $2.50 $1.82 

0.83 cu. yd. stone 1.40 

0.26 cu. yd. gravel 35 

0.31 cu. yd. sand 29 

Water 04 

Crushing stone,* mixing and placing concrete 80 

Total $4.70 



*"While it is not definitely stated I infer from what is said that 
the labor of crushing was about 15 cts. 

Wages were $2 per day of 8 hrs. for laborers, and $4 for foremen. 
The cost of timbering and incidental expenses is not included, other 
than the pay of the men and the foreman. The total volume of all 
the loose materials, exclusive of the water, was 2,767 cu. yds. before 
mixing; after mixing, and measured in cars holding 20 cu. ft. each, 
the volume was 2,433 cu. ft. ; after being rammed in place the 
volume was 1,825 cu. yds. The shrinkage of the concrete under 
the ramming was therefore 25%. A number of experiments were 
made on single carloads which showed that a carload of 20 cu. ft. 
of loose concrete made 15 to 15% cu. ft. compacted in place. 

The stone was quarried at Angel Island, and delivered on the 
wharf in sizes suitable for a Gates crusher, hauled in wagons to the 
crusher, which delivered it to the mixer, into which all the ingredi- 
ents were fed from hoppers automatically. The mixer was of the 
cylindrical continuous type, and there was difficulty in delivering the 
materials to it automatically and in the desired proportions. The 
concrete was delivered by the mixer into cars holding 20 cu. ft. 
When a car was filled, the door of the mixer was closed for a minute, 
during which minute another car was put in place, the concrete in 
the meantime accumulating in the mixer. The cars were pushed by 
men to the place of deposit, a variable distance of 300 to 600 ft., 
and discharged through a trestle having an extreme height of 30 ft, 
gradually diminishing to 4 ft. The concrete was then shoveled into 
wheelbarrows and wheeled 20 to 40 ft. 

During the month of August, 1892, concrete was mixed by hand by 
a gang of 20 men under 1 foreman. The average 8-hr. output was 
45 cu. yds. of concrete at a cost of $1 per cu. yd. for mixing and 
placing, wages being $2 a day. A batch consisted of 4 bbls. of 
cement and 144 cu. ft. of gravel and stone, giving 144 cu. ft. of 
concrete. The materials were piled conveniently around the mixing 
platform. The stone and gravel were delivered in barrows and 
spread to an even thickness on the platform. Upon this the sand 
was wheeled and spread with a straight edge. The cement, also 
leveled, formed the top layer. Water was added in the turning. 
The materials were turned twice with shovels, being well dispersed 
in turning. A third turning resulted from shoveling the concrete 
into wheelbarrows, and a fourth turning in distributing the concrete. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 5U9 

There was no ascent and the distances were short in wheeling 
the concrete, and the men were a picked lot. 

Cost of Fortification Work. — Mr. L. R. Grabill is authority for 
the following cost data : Tlie work was upon fortilications built in 
1839 for the U. S. Government, and was done by contract, working 
8 lirs. per day. The following is the average for 9,000 cu. yds. : 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

6 laborers wheeling materials to board $ 7.50 $0.16 

8 laborers mixing 10.00 .21 

8 laborers wheeling away 10.00 .21 

6 laborers placing and ramming 7.50 .16 

1 pumpman 1.25 .02 

1 water boy 1.00 .02 

1 foreman 2.00 .04 

Total, 48 cu. yds. a day $39.25 $0.82 

Each batch contained % cu. yd. of 1:2-2:3 concrete, and was 
turned four times. 

The cost of mixing 4,000 cu. yds. in a machine mixer by day 
labor (not by contract) was as follows: 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

32 laborers $40.00 $0.34 

1 pumpman 1.25 .01 

1 teamster and horse 2.00 .02 

2 water boys 2.00 .02 

1 engineman 1.70 .02 

1 derrick tender 1.50 .01 

1 fireman 1.50 .01 

1 foreman 2.88 .03 

Fuel (cement barrels largely) 1.25 .01 

Total, 118 cu. yds. per day $54.08 $0.47 

The average S-hr. day's work was 168 batches of 0.7 cu. yd. each. 
The best day's work was 200 batches. Seven revolutions of the 
4-ft. cubical mixer were sufficient. A 12-hp. engine operated the 
mixer and served also to hoist the material cars up the incline to the 
mixer. These cars were loaded through trap doors in a bin contain- 
ing the materials, then the cement was placed upon the load. The 
material cars moved up one incline, dumped, and passed down an- 
other incline on the opposite side. The concrete was dumped into an 
iron bucket resting on a car, hauled to one of the two boom der- 
ricks. These derricks had 80-ft. booms and were swung by bull- 
wheels. This plant cost about $5,000. The concrete was rammed 
in 6-in. layers in all cases ; and it was found advisable to have one 
rammer to every 20 batches deposited per day, in addition to the 
spreaders. 

Cost of Concrete Breakwater, Buffalo, N. Y. — Mr. Emile Low 
gives the following data on the cost of making concrete by contract 
for the Buffalo Breakwater, in 1902 : A 5-ft. cubical mixer was 
mounted on a scow and run by a 9 x 12-in. horizontal engine. The 
concrete was 1:2:1:4 cement, sand, gravel and stone. The voids 
in the sand and gravel were 27%, in the unscreened limestone, 39%, 
A bag of cement was assumed to be 0.9 cu. ft. The materials werQ 



570 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

stored in canal boats alongside. The sand was loaded by 3 shovelers 
into wheelbarrows holding 3.6 cu. ft. each, and wheeled in tandem 
to a steel charging bucket. Two more barrows, each holding 2.7 cu. 
ft. of gravel, were loaded and also dumped into the charging 
bucket ; then 6 bags of cement ( 1 1/2 bbls. ) were emptied into the 
bucket. Another bucket was loaded with 21.6 cu. ft. of stone by 8 
shovelers. These two buckets were hoisted by a derrick, in rapid 
succession, and dumped into the mixer. The dump man also attended 
to supplying water. A charging man started the mixer. The con- 
crete was dumped from the mixer into a skip on a car below, by 
2 men who pushed the car out where another derrick on the mixer 
scow hoisted it to the wall. There were 2 tagmen on each derrick 
to swing the booms, one paying out a tag rope while the other 
hauled in. A parapet wall, containing 841 cu. yds., was built in 
46 hrs. actual work, 18.2 cu. yds. being placed per hour, each batch 
containing 1.07 cu. yds. of rammed concrete. A parapet deck, con- 
taining 1,720 cu. yds., was built in 88 hrs., or 19% cu. yds. per hr., 
each batch being 1.08 cu. yd. The labor cost of making this con- 
crete (common labor being $1.75 per 10 hrs.) was as follows: 

• Concrete. 

Cost, per Cost, per 
Loading gang: 10-hr. day. cu. yd. 

1 assistant foreman $ 2.00 $0,011 

3 cement handlers 5.25 0.029 • 

3 sand shovelers 5.25 0.029 

2 gravel shovelers 3.50 0.020 

8 stone shovelers 14.00 0.076 

1 hooker-on 1.75 0.010 

Mixer gang : 

1 dumpman 1.75 0.010 

1 charging man 1.75 0.010 

2 car men 3.50 0.020 

2 enginemen, at $3.25 6.50 0.035 

4 tag men, at $2.00 8.00 0.044 

1 fireman 2.00 0.011 

"Wall gang: 

1 signalman 1.75 0.010 

1 dumper 1.75 0.010 

6 shovelers, at $2.00 12.00 0.065 

4 rammers 7.00 0.038 

1 foreman 4.00 0.022 

Total (182 cu. yds. per day) $81.75 $0,450 

This cost of 45 cts. per cu. yd. does not include fuel, forms or 
plant rental. 

Cost of Concrete Lock, Upper White River.* — Maj. Graham D. 
Fitch gives the following: 

A lock (No. 1) was built on the Upper White Kiver, at one end 
of a dam. The lock was built inside a cofferdam, the cost of which 
is given elsewhere (see index under Cofferdam). "Wages of com- 
mon laborers were $1.50 per 8-hr. day. Work was done by Govern- 
ment forces. 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 279. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 571 

The locks are of concrete masonry, 175 ft. long, between hollow 
quoins. The height of the lock walls is 15 ft. above the upper miter 
sill, 29 ft. above the lower sill and 30 ft. above the lock floor. Being 
founded on solid rock, each wall acts separately, and the design is 
that of a retaining wall. The land wall is slightly stronger than the 
river wall, but its top is narrow. Opposite the chamber it is 
stepped in the rear with 1-ft. offsets every Sy^ ft-, while the river 
wall is battered. Both walls are 14 1^ ft. thick at the bottom. At 
the top tlie thickness of the river wall is 6 ft., and of the land wall 
Is 4 ft. 9 ins. The ends of the lock walls are necessarily thicker 
than the side walls of the chamber, as they must not only support 
the pressure from the gates but also provide work room for the 
lock tenders. The tliiclcness of the lock walls at the heels of the 
gates was accordingly made 16 ft. The walls are in conformity wilh 
tlie usual practice, without batter inside. The available length of 
the lock chamber is 147 ft. and the width is 36 ft. The length of 
the wall below the lower quoin is 25 ft. and above the upper quoin 
37. The total length of the lock is 237 ft. 

The hollow quoins are shaped directly in the concrete, a form 
being used as for any other special surface. The shape is that of 
an arc of the same radius as the heel of the gate, namely, 10 ins. ; 
they are 110 degrees in length, with tangents at either end 6 ins. 
long. The gate recesses are 22 ft. long and 2 ft. deep. The miter 
walls are without batter. Part of the lower miter wall is prolonged 
downstream to the lower end of the lock, so as to protect the tail 
bay from being scoured out by the discharge from the culverts. 

The upper coffer wall, the function of which is to support a simple 
movable dam across the head of the lock when the upper gates or 
valves need repairing, has its sill 1 ft. below the upper miter sill. 
In coffering the head bay this sill forms the lower support for the 
needles used, the top support being a trussed beam, the ends of 
Which rest in slots in the main walls at such an elevation that the 
trussed beam will be as low as possible without being immersed 
at ordinary low-water stages. A similar arrangement of slot and 
sill is provided for coffering the tail bay. With the object of pre- 
venting the water from cutting behind the land wall, its upper and 
lower end is, in each lock, provided with a wing wall running per- 
pendicularly back into the bank far enough to join the rocky bluff 
Which is from 20 to 30 ft. in the rear. The thickness of these walls 
is 4 ft. 9 ins. on top, increasing downward by offsets until rock 
foundation is reached. 

There are two filling culverts each 3 ft. 3 ins. by 7 ft., which are 
placed in the gate recesses to keep them from filling with mud ; 
these culverts discharge into a large cross culvert in the upper miter 
wall and thence through 8 small lateral openings into the lock cham- 
ber, thus dividing the water into small streams emptying near the 
lock floor so as to cause little disturbance to boats. For emptying 
the lock there are two side culverts, each 4 by 5 ft., which pass 
around the heels of the lower gates entering near the gate re- 



573 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cess and discharging below the miter wall into the tail bay, thus 
serving to prevent ueposits there. 

Tiie forms used in the concrete work on the lock were of the usual 
type, namely, plank or lagging laid horizontally and held rigidly by 
outside posts, solidly braced to the ground so as to prevent the ram- 
ming from springing them. Yellow pine lumber was used. The lag- 
ging was 2 ins. thick and 12 ins. wide, and was dressed on all four 
sides. The posts were 4 x 6-in. scantling, spaced 4 ft. apart and were 
supported at about 8-ft. intervals by inclined braces of 4 x 6-in. 
scantling. The forms were built in separate alternate sections, the 
lagging for each section being carried to the full height before con- 
creting was started in that section, and the concreting for each 
section of wall being completed before another section was begun, 
as the work was in two 8-hr. shifts, the sections are not monoliths. 
These posts of the forms were tied together at the top of two 
rows of %-in. or %-in. round iron tie-rods. Forms were left in 
position from four to five days after concreting was completed. 

Cost of Forms. — The cost of the forms was as follows : 

Forms. 

Materials : Unit Cost. Total. Per M ft. 

Lumber, 159 M ft $11.40 $1,818 $11.40 

Iron and nails 360 2.26 

Total $2,178 $13.66 

Labor : 

Inspecting lumber, 15.6 M .3897 6 .04 

Hauling lumber 78 .49 

Erecting, etc.. 159 M ft 15.29 2,430 15.29 

Total $2,514 $15.72 

Grand total (159 M ft.) $4,692 $29.38 

The total labor time in days in erecting, etc., was 1,218% days, 
and the work done per man per day was 130.5 ft. B. M. 

Mixing. — The concrete mixer was a 4-ft. cubical box of %-in. riv- 
eted steel securely fastened at diagonally opposite corners to a 3-in. 
steel shaft bored for about half its length with a 1-in. hole for the 
admission of water. Near one corner was a 15 x 20-in. hinged door 
for the admission of the dry materials. The mixer was operated by 
a center crank engine with 6 x 7-in. cylinder and was located on the 
bank approximately opposite the center of the lock. The concrete 
was placed by derricks. A Y track led from the mixer parallel to 
and about 18 ft. back of the land wall to within easy reach of two 
stiff-leg derricks, so located as to command the entire lock wall. 
The mixer charge was dumped into skips, which were taken from 
the cars by derricks and the concrete deposited in place in the lock 
walls. Upon the completion of the land wall the derricks were 
placed oh this wall, where they commanded the river wall. The con- 
crete was placed in layers 10 ins. thick. 

In the concrete work Portland cement only was used, the brands 
being Lehigh and Alpha. The cement varied in price from $1.82 to 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 573 

$2.70 per barrel delivered on cars at Birds Point, Mo. ; from there 
it was transported as far as Newport, Ark., over a land-grant rail- 
road, and from Newport to Batesville, the freight cliarges were ap- 
proximately 11 cts. per barrel. The sand used was a coarse, sharp, 
clean sand from the Arkansas River, near Little Rock, and cost 
33 cts. per cubic yai'd delivered at Little Rock. To this sum should 
be added 26 cts. for freight and 38 cts. for hauling from the Bates- 
ville depot to the lock site. 

The gravel used was dredged by hired labor, from the river near 
the works ; it consisted of a mixture of pebbles of all sizes with 
about 19% sand. It was not washed, as bars were found where the 
gravel contained only clean sand. This river gravel contained 
usually from 17 to 21% of voids. It cost delivered in bin, including 
all charges, 35 cts. per cu. yd. The stone used was a sandstone, the 
so-called bluestone of Cabin Creek, Arkansas, which, tested at Water- 
town Arsenal, had shown an ultimate strength of 17,700 to 19,70') 
lbs. per sq. in. It cost 70 cts. per cu. yd. at Cabin Creek ; the freight 
charges amounted to 25 cts. per cu. yd. and the hauling from the 
depot to the works 60 cts. a cu. yd. All stone was broken into frag- 
ments small enough to pass through a 2-in. ring. The voids aver- 
aged 51%. The stone was required to be screened, though the run 
of the crusher would have been preferable. 

The proportions of the mix varied, the concrete being richer in the 
foundations, on exposed surfaces, and when gravel was used. It 
was the intention to use crushed stone concrete for a depth of 4 ft. 
on all exposed surfaces and gravel concrete elsewhere, but in the 
construction of this lock, owing to the irregularity of the delivery 
of the stone, gravel concrete was used whenever necessary to avoid 
stopping the work. Three mixtures were used in the walls, depend- 
ing upon the supply of materials on hand, viz. : 1 part cement, 2 % 
sand, and 6 % gravel ; 1 part cement, 3 sand, 6 % gravel ; 1 part 
cement, 3 sand, 4 gravel and 2 broken stone. Less sand was used 
with the straight gravel mixture than with the broken stone because 
of the large per cent of sand contained in the river gravel. The 
amount of water had to be varied frequently. It was regulated by 
judgment, according to the appearance of the mortar. 

The cost of mixing and placing the concrete for the lock, was as 
follows : 

Per 
cu. yd. 
Unit Con- 

Materials. Cost. Total. Crete. 

Cement, Lehigh, 4,051 bbls $2.45 $ 9,925 ?1.12 

Cement, Lehigh, 841 bbls 1.97 1,657 .18 

Cement, Alpha, 4,992 bbls 2.20 10,982 1.24 

Crushed stone, 2,256 cu. yds 70 1,579 .17 

Crushed stone, 92 cu. yds 3.25 299 .03 

Sand, 3,096 cu. yds 35 1,022 .11 

Gravel, 12.9 cu. yds 50 6 

Fuel 537 .06 

Illuminating oils 314 .03 

Total materials $26,322 ?2.94 



574 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Per 
cu. yd. 
Unit Con- 
Labor. Cost. Total. Crete. 

Mixer frame $ 153 $0,017 

Insp. of cement, 9,884 bbls $0,022 223 0.025 

Inspect'n of crushed stone, 2,348 cu. yds 101 238 .026 

Insp. of sand, 3,096 cu. yds 069 212 .024 

Storing cement, 2,500 bbls.. 079 199 .021 

Hauling cement, 9,690 bbls 08 775 .086 

Hauling crushed stone, 2,078 cu. yds 60 1,247 .140 

Hauling sand, 3,053 cu. yds 38 1,160 .130 

Dredging gravel, 6,125 cu. yds 105 646 .072 

Unloading gravel for hand mixed concrete, 

385 cu. yds 181 70 .008 

Hoisting gravel for machine mixed concrete, 

5,025 cu. yds 473 2,378 .266 

Mixing and placing miachine mixed concrete, 

7,858 cu. yds 568 4,464 .499 

Mixing and placing hand mixed concrete, 

1,081 cu. yds 1.83 1,981 .221 

Tamping machine mixed concrete, 7,858 

cu. yds 328 2,581 .288 

Tamping hand mixed concrete, 1,081 cu. yds. .443 479 .053 

Finishing top of lock wall, 548 cu. yds 104 57 .006 

Total labor $16,864 $1.88 

Grand total, 8,939 cu. yds. concrete $43,186 $4.83 

Cost of concrete, including forms $5.36 per cu. yd. 

Some of the labor items can be further summarized as follows : 

Work 

Work Labor done 

done time in per man 

bbls. days, per day. 
bbls. 

Inspection of cement 9,884 73 6/8 139.21 

Storing cement 2,500 94 5/8 26.32 

cu. yds. cu. yds. 

Inspection of crushed stone 2,348 71 21.15 

Inspection of sand 3,096 111 23.63 

Dredging gravel 6,125 306 2/8 20 

Unloading gravel for hand mixed concrete. . 385 41 9.39 

Hoisting gravel for machine mixed concrete 5,025 1,308 3.84 

Mixing and placing machine mi.xed concrete 7,858 2,384 3/8 3.29 

Mixing and placing hand mixed concrete. . . 1.081 1,103 4/8 .98 

Tamping machine mixed concrete 7,858 1,420 1/8 5.53 

Tamping hand mixed concrete 1,081 283 3.82 

Finishing top of lock wall 548 29 5/8 . 18.27 

Valves, Ladders, Etc. — The valves in the culverts previously 
mentioned, are butterfly or balanced valves of steel plates and angles 
turning on vertical shafts. There are two valves to each filling 
culvert because the valves had to be of low height in order to 
remain submerged during low water. They are 3 ft. 2 ins. by 3 ft. 
2 ins. in size. The wicket is set in a cast iron frame bolted to the 
concrete and is protected from debris by a movable screen sliding 
vertically in guides bolted to the walls. The valve operating gear, 
which is set in a covered recess in the coping, consists of a gear 
sector keyed to the top of the valve shaft and geared with a pinion 
turned by a rachet wrench and wheel. Two recessed ladders are 
placed in each chamber wall of the lock. 

The cost of the valves, ladders, etc., was as follows : 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 675 

Materials. Unit Cost. Total. 

New valves and foundry work on same, 2 $:i67.00 $ 534 

Iron, wrought, 5.3t)7 lbs 06 324 

Iron, cast, 7,737 lbs 045 348 

Steel, y,J76 lbs 065 543 

Total materials $1,749 

Labor. 

Hauling, iron, etc ... $16 

Placing 20,110 lbs $0.02 406 

Total labor $ 422 

Grand total 2,171 

Summai-y of Lock "Work : Unit 

Total Oost. 

Clearing site (4 acres) $ 204 $51.00 

Cofferaam (462 lin. ft.) 8,487 18.37 

Excavation (3,635 cu. yds.) 5,758 1.58 

Forms (lo9 M. tt.) 4,692 29.38 

Concrete (8,^39 cu. yds.) ■ 43,186 4.83 

Gates and sills 5,569 .... 

Valves, ladders, etc 2,171 .... 

Filling behind land wall (4,262 cu. yds.) 3,441 .805 

Grading and paving same (1,916 sq. yds.) 1,553 .810 

Excavating upper approach 388 .... 

Excavating lower approach 182 .... 

Upper land crib (30 M. ft.) 1,713 57.10 

Lower land crib (9.3 M. ft.) 806 86.66 

Lower river crib (46.2 M. ft.) 2,804 60.69 

Upper river crib (47.6 M. ft.) 2,761 58.00 

Total $84,715 

For the cost of the lock gates, see the section on Timberwork and 
Piling. Consult the index under "Timberwork, Lock Gates." 

Cost of Concrete Locks, Coosa River, Ala. — Mr. Charles Firth 
gives the following on the concrete locks on the Coosa River, Ala. 
Lock No. 31 has a length of 322 ft. between hollow quoins and a 
length of 420 ft. over all, with a width of 52 ft. in the clear. 
The lock walls are 34.7 ft. high and 16 ft. thick at the base The 
total quantity of concrete was 20,000 cu. yds., requiring 21,500 
bbls. of cement, half Atlas and half Alsen's. It was mixed 1:3:5^^, 
the stone being crushed mica-schist. Two mechanical 4-ft. cube 
mixers were used, being driven by a 10 X 16 engine. Each batch 
consisted of 3 cu. ft. cement, 9 cu. ft. sand and 16% cu. ft. stone, and 
was turned 4 times before and 6 times after adding the water, at a 
speed not exceeding 8 revolutions per minute. The top floor of the 
mixing house had a storage capacity of 2,000 bbls. of cement. The 
sand and stone were delivered in side dump-cars. The concrete was 
delivered into bottom-dump cars. The average output of these two 
mixers was 200 cu. yds. in 8 hrs., or 100 cu. yds. per mixer, but it was 
limited by the means of placing the concrete. Each batch of concrete 
measured 24 cu. ft. in the car, but it shrank 20% when rammed in 
place, so that it required 34 cu. ft. of concrete in the cars to make 
1 cu. yd. in place. The concrete was mixed quite dry and rammed 
in 6 to 8-in. layers, using 30-lb. iron rammers having a square face 
6 ins. on a side. On all exposed surfaces a 1 :3 mortar was placed 
as the work progressed, making a thickness of 6 ins. of mortar. To 



576 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

do this 2 X 12-in. planks were placed 4 ins. away from the forms, 
being kept at that distance by 2 X 4-in. strips of wood. After 
the backing concrete was in place and partly rammed, these 
planks were removed and the 6-in. space filled with mortar. The 
walls were carried up in lifts, each lift being completed all around 
the dock before the next was commenced. The first was 10.7 ft. 
high ; each succeeding lift was 6 ft., except the last which was 
4.5 ft., exclusive of the 18-in. coping. The coping was 5 ft. wide 
and made in separate blocl'.s 3 ft. long, which were placed after 
the walls were completed. The coping was 1:2:3 concrete, faced 
with 1 :1 mortar, and was cast in blocks face down, its edges 
being rounded to a 3-in. radius. The sides of the molds for these 
blocks were removed 3 days after making, and 10 days later the 
blocks were stacked away. 

In building the forms 6 X 8-in. posts 24 ft. long were set up 
on the inside of the lock in line, 5 ft. 7 ins. apart ; and a similar 
row of posts 12 ft. long was set up outside of the lock. The posts 
were capped with 6 X 8-in. caps which supported the track stringers 
for the concrete cars. Each line of posts was sheeted with 3 X 10-in. 
plank dressed on all sides, and the posts were well braced with 
inclined struts. After the first lift was completed, the back row of 
posts was lifted onto the offset on the back of the wall by the 
reduced width of the next lift ; but the long posts on the front 
face were not moved, the caps being simply unbolted from them and 
fastened near the top of the posts. The sheeting plank was of 
course moved up. No tie bolts were built into the concrete wall, 
which made the bracing of the forms rather elaborate as the wall 
grew higher. 

The bottom-dump concrete cars were dumped onto wooden plat- 
forms inside the forms, as it was found that even a slight drop 
caused the larger stones to separate and roll to the outer edges. 
These stones were shoveled back into the pile, and then the concrete 
was placed with shovels. The doors of the cars were hung at the 
sides, and upon dumping they would strike the stringers carrying 
the track, thus jarring the forms and frequently throwing them 
out of line. A better method would have been to have hinged 
the doors at each end of the car. It was found advisable to have 
plenty of head room at the end of each lift, otherwise the spread- 
ing and ramming were not properly done. During the year ending 
June, 1895, there were only 90 days when work was carried on 
uninterrupted by floods. The total quantity of concrete placed 
that year was 8,710 cu. yds., the work being done by day laborers 
for the Government (not by contract). Negroes at $1 per 8-hr. day 
were employed. The cost per cubic yard of 1:3:5% concrete Was 
as follows : 

1 bbl. cement $2.48 

0.88 cu. yd. stone, at $0.76 67 

0.36 cu. yd. sand at $0.34 12 

Mixing, placing and ramming 88 

Staging and forms 42 

Total, per cu. yd $4.57 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 577 

Had wages been $1.50 per day the cost would have been $1.32 per 
cu. yd. instead of 88 cts. for mixing. 

Cost of Locks, Cascade Canal. — In Gillette and Hill's "Concrete 
Construction," Chapter XI, on '■'Fortifications, Locks, Dams and 
Breakwaters," the methods of building and detailed costs are given. 
It will suffice here to state that the cost was $8 per cu. yd. for 
machine mixed concrete, and .?:) for hand mixed concrete, of which 
cost $5.50 was for materials, and $1.70 for plant and superin- 
tendence. 

Cost of Locks, III. and Miss. Canal. — In Gillette and Hill's "Con- 
crete Construction, pp. 196 to 197 ; a detailed illustrated description 
is given of the forms, plant, and methods of building these locks. 
The cost of two of the locks was $9 per cu. yd., of which $2 to 
$2.40 was labor and carpenter work. Cube mixers were used. For 
detailed costs consult the above reference. 

Labor Cost of Retaining Walls. — In canal excavation, in subway 
work in cities, and the like, it is often necessary to dig trenches and 
build retaining walls in the trenches before excavating the core 
of earth between the walls. The following example of this class 
of work is taken from some records that I have : A Smith mixer was 
used, the concrete being delivered where wanted by a Lambert 
cableway of 400 ft. span. The broken stone and sand were delivered 
near the work in hopper-bottom cars which were dumped through 
a trestle onto a plank floor. Men loaded the material into one- 
horse dump carts which hauled it 900 ft. to the mixer platform. 
This platform was 24 X 24 ft. square, and 5 ft high, with a 
planked approach 40 ft. long and contained 7,500 ft. B. M. The stone 
and sand were dumped at the mouth of the mixer and shoveled 
in by 4 men. Eight men, working in pairs, loaded the broken 
stone into the carts, and 2 men loaded the sand. Each cart Was 
loaded with about 70 shovelfuls of stone on top of which 35 shovel- 
fuls of sand were thrown. It took 3 to 5 mins. to load on the stone 
and 1 min. to load the sand. The carts traveled very slowly, 
about 150 ft. a minute — in fact, all the men on the job, including 
the cart drivers, were slow. After mixing, the concrete was dumped 
into iron buckets holding 14 cu. ft. water measure, making about 
Vsi cu. yd. in a batch. The buckets were hooked on to the cableway 
and conveyed where wanted in the wall. Steam for running the 
mixer was taken from the same boiler that supplied the cableway 
engine. The average output of this plant was 100 cu. yds. of 
concrete per 10-hr. day, although on many days the output was 
125 cu. yds., or 250 batches. The cost of mixing and placing was 
as follows, on a basis of 100 cu. yds. per day: 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

8 men loading stone into carts $ 12.00 $ .12 

2 men loading sand into carts 3.00 .03 

1 cart hauling cement 3.00 .03 

8 carts hauling stone and sand 24.00 .24 

4 men loading mixer 6.00 .06 

1 man dumping mixer 1.50 .01 

2 men handling buckets at mixer 3.00 .03 

6 men dumping buckets and ramming 'J. 00 .09 

12 men making forms at $2.50 30.00 .30 



678 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

1 cable engineman 3.00 .03 

1 fireman 2.00 ,02 

1 foreman 6.00 .06 

1 water-boy 1.00 .01 

1 ton coal for cableway and mixer. . . 4.00 .04 

Total $107.50 $1-07 

In addition to this cost of $1.07 per cu. yd. there was the cost 
of moving the whole plant for every 350 ft. of wall. This required 
2 days, at a cost of $100, and as there were about 1,000 cu. yds. 
of concrete in 350 ft. of wall 16 ft. high, the cost of moving the 
plant was 10 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete, bringing the total cost 
of mixing and placing up to 87 cts. per cu. yd. As above stated, the 
whole gang was slow. 

The labor cost of making the forms was high, for such simple and 
heavy work, costing $10 per M. of lumber placed each day. The 
forms were 2-in. sheeting plank held by 4 X 6-in. upright studs 2^^ 
ft. apart, which were braced against the sides of the trench. The 
face of the forms was dressed lumber and all cracks were carefully 
puttied and sandpapered. 

The above costs relate only to the massive part of the wall and 
not the cost of putting in the facing mortar, which was excessively 
high. The face mortar was 2 ins. thick, and about 3% cu. yds. of it 
were placed each day with a force of 8 men ! Two of these men 
mixed the mortar, 2 men wheeled it in barrows to the wall, 2 men 
lowered it in buckets, and 2 men put it in place on the face of the 
wall. If we distribute this labor cost on the face mortar over 
the 100 cu. yds. of concrete laid each day, we have another 12 cts. 
per cu. yd. ; but a better way is to regard this work as a separate 
item, and estimate it as square feet of facing work. In that case 
these 8 men did 500 sq. ft. of facing work per day at a cost of 
nearly 2^^ cts. per sq. ft. for labor. 

The building of a wall similar to the one just described was 
done by another gang as follows : The stone and sand were deliv- 
ered in flat cars provided with side boards. In a stone car 5 men 
were kept busy shoveling stone into iron dump buckets having a 
capacity of 20 cu. ft. water measure. Bach bucket was filled about 
two-thirds full of stone, then it was picked up by a derrick and 
swung over to the next car which contained sand, where two men 
filled the remaining third of the bucket with sand. The bucket was 
then lifted and swung by the derrick over to the platform of the 
mixer where it was dumped and its contents shoveled by four men 
into the mixer, cement being added by these men. The mixer was 
dumped by two men, loading iron buckets holding about % cu. yd. 
of concrete each, which was the size of each batch. A second 
derrick picked up the concrete bucket and swung it over to a plat- 
form where it was dumped by one man ; then ten men loaded the 
concrete into wheelbarrows and wheeled it along a runway to the 
wall. One man assisted each barrow in dumping into a hopper on 
the top of a sheet-iron pipe which delivered the concrete. The 
two derricks were stiff-leg derricks with 40-ft. booms, provided 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 679 

with bull-wheels, and operated by double cylinder (7 X 10-in. ) 
engines of 18 hp. each. About 1 ton of coal was burned daily 
under the boiler supplying steam to these two hoisting engines. 
The output of this plant was 200 batches or 100 cu. yds. of concrete 
per 10-hr. day, when materials were promptly supplied by the 
railroad ; but delays in delivering cars ran the average output down 
to 80 cu. yds. per day. 

On the basis of 100 cu. yds. daily output, the cost of mixing and 
placing the concrete was as follows : 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

5 men loading stone $ 7.50 $0,071/2 

2 men loading sand 3.00 .03 

4 men charging mixer 6.00 .06 

2 men loading concrete into buckets. . . 3.00 .03 

1 man dumping concrete from buckets. . 1.50 .01% 

10 men loading and wheeling concrete. . iS.OO .15 

1 man dumping wheelbarrows 1.50 -01 1/^ 

3 men spreading and ramming 4.50 ■OiVa 

2 enginemen 5.00 .05 

1 fireman 2.00 .02 

1 water-boy 1.00 .01 

1 foreman 6.00 .06 

10 men making forms 25.00 .25 

1 ton coal 4.00 .04 

Total $85.00 $0.85 

In addition there were 8 men engaged in mixing and placing the 
2-in. facing of mortar as stated above. 

Cost of Retaining Walls, Chicago Drainage Canal. — Mr. Jamea 
W. Beardsley gives the following data on 20,000 lin. ft. of concrete 
wall, built by contract. The work was let in two sections. Sees. 14 
and 15, which will be considered separately. In both cases a 1 :1% :4 
natural cement concrete was used, and it was faced with 1 :3 Port- 
land mortar 3 ins. thick, also coped with the same 3 ins. thick. The 
average height of the wall was 10 ft. on Sec. 14, and 22 ft. on 
Sec. 15, the thickness at the base being half the height. 

On Sec. 14, the stone for the concrete was obtained from the 
spoil bank of the canal, loaded into wheelbarrows and wheeled 
about 100 ft. to the crusher ; some was hauled in wagons. An Austin 
jaw crusher was used, and it discharged the stone into bins from 
which it was fed into a Sooysmith mixer. The crusher and the mixer 
were mounted on a flat car. Bucket elevators were used to raise the 
stone, sand and cement from their bins to the mixer ; the buckets 
were made of such size as to give the proper proportions of in- 
gredients, as they all traveled at the same speed. Only two laborers 
were required to look after the elevators. The sand and cement 
were hauled by teams and dumped into the receiving bins. There 
were 23,568 cu. yds. on Sec. 14, and the cost was as follows: 

Typical Wages per Cost per 
General force. force. 10 hrs. cu. yd. 

Superintendent 1.0 $5.00 $0,026 

Blacksmith 1.1 2.75 0.016 

Timekeeper 0.5 2.50 0.007 

Watchman 0.6 2.00 0.007 

Waterboys 3.9 1.00 0.022 



580 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Wall force. 

Foreman 0.9 2.50 0.013 

Laborers 8.6 1.50 0.073 

Tampers 2.3 1.75 0.022 

Mixer force. 

Foreman 1.2 2.50 0.017 

Bnginemen 1.8 2.50 0.025 

Laborers 6.7 1.50 0.057 

Pump runner 1.0 2.00 0.010 

Mixing machines 1.7 1.25 0.012 

Timber force. 

Foreman 0.6 2.50 0.008 

Carpenters 4.7 2.50 0.057 

Laborers 1.2 1.50 0.010 

Helpers 5.3 2.50 0.075 

Hauling force. 

Laborers 2.6 1.75 0.026 

Teams 6.3 3.25 0.116 

Crushing force. 

Foreman 0.5 $2.50 $0,007 

Engineman 1.7 2.50 0.023 

Laborers 3.5 1.50 0.032 

Austin crushers 1.7 1.20 0.011 

Loading stone. 

Foreman 1.7 2.50 0.023 

Laborers 32.9 1.50 0.280 

Total for crushing, mixing and placing $0,975 

The daily costs charged to the mixers and crushers include the 
cost of coal, at $2 a ton, and the cost of oil. 

The gang "loading stone" apparently did a good deal of sledging 
of large stones, and they also wheeled a large part of it in barrows 
to the crusher. 

The plant cost $9,600, distributed as follows: 

2 jaw crushers $3,000 

2 mixers 3,000 

Track 1,260 

Lumber 500 

Pipe 840 

Sheds 400 

Pumps 600 

Total ■. $9,600 

If this first cost of the plant were distributed over the 23,658 
cu. yds. of concrete it would amount to 41 cts. per cu. yd. 

The cost of the concrete was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Utica cement, at $0.65 per bbl $0,863 

Portland cement, at $2.25 per bbl 0.305 

Sand, at $1.35 per cu. yd 0.465 

Stone and labor, as above given 0.975 

Total $2,608 

First cost of plant $0,407 

On Sec. 15 the, conditions were much the same as on Sec. 14, just 
described, except that the limestone was quarried from the bed of 
the canal, and was crushed in a stationary crusher. No. 7 Gates. 
The stone was hauled 1,000 ft. to the crusher on cars drawn by a 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 581 

cable from a hoisting engine. The output of this crusher averaged 
210 cu. yds. per day of 10 hrs. Tlie crushed stone was hauled in 
dump cars, drawn by a locomotive, to the mixers. Spiral screw 
mixers mounted on flat cars were used, and they delivered the 
concrete to belt conveyors which delivered the concrete into the 
forms. 

The forms on Sec. 15 (and on Sec. 14 as well) consisted of 
upright posts set 8 ft. apart and 9 ins. in front of the wall, held 
at the toe by iron dowels driven into holes in the rock, and held 
to the rear posts by the rods. The plank sheeting was made up 
in panels 2 ft. wide and 16 ft. long, and was held up temporarily 
by loose rings which passed around the posts which were gripped 
by the friction of the rings. These panels were brought to proper 
line and held in place by wooden wedges. After the concrete had 
set 24 hrs. the wedges were struck, the panels removed and scraped 
clean ready to be used again. 

The cost of quarrying and crushing the stone, and mixing the 
concrete on Sec. 15 was as follows: 

Typical "Wages per Cost per 
General force. force. 10 hrs. cu. yd. 

Superintendent 1.0 $5.00 $0,024 

Blacksmith 0.9 2.75 0.011 

Teams 1.7 3.00 0.025 

Waterboy 4.5 1.00 0.022 

Wall force. 

Foreman 1.1 2.50 0.010 

Laborers 14.4 1.50 0.105 

Tampers 0.1 1.75 0.001 

Mixer force. 

Foreman 2.1 2.50 0.026 

Enginemen 2.1 2.50 0.022 

Laborers 23.1 1.50 0.180 

Mixing machines 2.1 1.25 0.022 

Timber force. 

Carpenters 0.8 3.00 0.013 

Laborers 0.7 1.50 0.005 

Helpers 10.2 2.50 0.125 

Hauling force. 

Foreman 0.7 2.50 0.009 

Enginemen 1.4 2.50 0.019 

Fireman 0.4 1.75 0.003 

Brakeman 2.2 2.00 0.018 

Teams 0.4 3.25 0.007 

Laborers 1.5 1.50 0.010 

Locomotives 1.4 2.25 0.015 

Crushing force. 

Foreman 1.0 2.50 0.014 

Enginemen 1.0 2.50 0.014 

Laborers 11.1 1.50 0.081 

Firemen 1.0 1.75 0.008 

Gyratory crusher 1.0 2.25 0.011 

Quarry force. 

Foreman 1.2 2.50 0.012 

Laborers 19.0 1.50 0.140 

Drillers 1.8 2.00 0.017 

Drill helpers 1.8 1.50 0.013 

Machine drills 1.8 1.25 0.011 

Total ?0.993 



582 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The first cost of the plant for this work on Sec. 15 was $25,420, 
distributed as follows : 

1 crusher, No. 7 Gates $12,000 

Use of locomotive 2,200 

Cars and track 5,300 

3 mixers 3,000 

Lumber 1,200 

Pipe 720 

Small tools 1,000 

Total $25,420 

This $25,420 distributed over the 44,811 cu. yds. of concrete 
amounts to 57 cts. per cu. yd. 

It will be noted that 2 mixers were kept busy. Their average 
output was 100 cu. yds. each per day, which is the same as for the 
mixers on Sec. 14. 

The total cost of concrete on Sec. 15 was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor quarrying, crushing and mixing $0,991 

Explosives 0.083 

Utica cement, at $0.60 per bbl 0.930 

Portland cement, at $2.25 per bbl 0.180 

Sand, at $1.35 per cu. yd 0.476 

Total $2,660 

First cost of plant $0,567 

It is not strictly correct to charge the full first cost of the 
plant to the work as it possessed considerable salvage value at the 
end. 

For the purpose of comparing Sees. 14 and 15 the following sum- 
mary is given of the cost per cubic yard of concrete : 

Sec. 14. Sec. 15. 

General force $0,078 $0,082 

Wall force 0.108 0.116 

Mixing force 0.121 0.250 

Timbering force 0.150 0.140 

Hauling force 0.142 0.081 

Crushing force 0.073 0.128 

Quarry force 0.303 0.275 

Cement, natural 0.863 0.930 

Cement, Portland 0.305 0.180 

Sand 0.465 0.476 

Plant (full cost) 0.407 0.567 

Total $3,015 $3,225 

It should be remembered that on Sec. 14 there was no drilling 
and blasting of the rock, but that the "quarry force" not only 
loaded but hauled the stone to the crusher. The cost of mixing 
on Sec. 15 is higher than on Sec. 14 because the materials were 
dumped on platforms and shoveled into the mixer, instead of being 
discharged from bins into the mixer as on Sec. 14. 

Cost of a Retaining Wall. — For building a retaining wall 7 ft. 
high, forms were made and placed by a carpenter and helper at $8 
per M., wages being 35 cts. and 20 cts. an hour, respectively. Con- 
crete materials were dumped from wagons alongside the mixing 
board. Ramming was unusually thorough. Foreman expense was 



COM'RETE CONSTRUCTION. 583 

high, due to small number in gang ; 2 cu. yds. were laid per hour 

by the gang. 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

7 mixers, 15 cts. per hr $10.50 $0.53 

2 rammers, 15 cts. per hr 3.00 0.15 

1 foreman, 30 cts. per hr., and 1 water 

boy, 5 cts 3.50 0.17 

Total labor $17.00 $0.85 

The total cost was as follows per cubic yard : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.8 bbls. Portland cement, at $2 $1.60 

Sand 0.30 

Gravel 0.70 

Labor mixing and placing 0.85 

Lumber for forms, at $16 per M 0.56 

Labor on forms, at $8 per M 0.28 

Total, per cu. yd $4.29 

The sheathing plank for the forms was 2-in. hemlock. 

Cost of Retaining Walls, Reference. — Different methods of building 
walls, designs of forms, plant, etc., togetlier with costs are given 
in "Concrete Construction," by Gillette and Hill. 

Cost of Filling Pier Cylinders With Concrete. — In this case the 
gravel and sand forming the concrete were wheeled in barrows a 
distance of 100 ft. to the mixing-board at tlae foot of steel pier 
cylinders, into which concrete was dumped after raising it 20 ft. in 
wooden skips. Two cu. yds. concrete laid per hour by the gang. 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 
6 men wheeling materials and mixing, 

15 cts. per hr $ 9.00 $0.45 

2 men dumping skips and ramming, 

15 cts. per hr 3.00 0.15 

1 team and driver, at 40 cts. per hr. . . . 4.00 0.20 

1 foreman, at 30 cts. per hr 3.00 0.15 

Total $19.00 $0.95 

Had the job been larger, more men would have been employed to 
reduce the fixed expense of team time, for a team can readily raise 
10 cu. yds. an hour, using a mast, or ginpole, with block and tackle. 
The foreman worked on the mixing-board himself. The concrete 
was perfectly mixed. The men worked with great energy. 

Cost of Concrete Harbor Pier, Superior Entry, Wis. — For cuts 
showing cross-section of this pier, the forms used in its construc- 
tion, and bucket used in depositing concrete under water, see Gillette 
and Hill's "Concrete Construction." 

The pier is 3,023 ft. long at Superior Entry, Wis. The work was 
done by day labor for the Government, under the direction of Mr. 
Clarence Coleman, U. S. Assistant Engineer. 

About 80% of the concrete was deposited in molds under water, 
according to a plan devised in 1902 by Maj. D. D. Gaillard, Corps 
of Engineers. The molds consisted of bottomless boxes, built in four 
pieces, two sides and two end pieces, held together by 114-in. turn- 
buckle tie-rods. Cast-iron weights were attached to the molds to 



584 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

overcome the buoyancy of the timber. The concrete was built in 
place, in two tiers of blocks, the lower tier resting directly on piles 
and entirely under water. The upper tier of blocks was almost 
entirely above water. A pile trestle was built on each side of the 
proposed pier, and a traveler for raising and lowering the molds, 
spanned the gap between the two trestles. After the mold for a 
block of concrete had been placed on the bottom, it was filled with 
concrete lowered in a bucket with a drop bottom. Twelve of these 
buckets were used, and were hauled from the mixer on cars to a 
locomotive crane, which lifted each bucket from the car and lowered 
it to place. The locomotive crane was elevated on a gantry frame 
so that a train of cars on the same trestle could pass directly under 
it without interference. This enabled two of these locomotive 
cranes to work on the same trestle. 

Each concrete bucket was provided with two 12-oz. canvas cur- 
tains or covers each 3X4 ft., quilted with 110 pieces of 
1/16 XIX 3-in. sheet-lead. The curtains were fastened, one to 
each side of the top of the bucket, and were folded over the concrete 
so as to cover it completely and protect it from wash while being 
lowered through the water. Occasionally, when an opportunity 
occurred to allow the top of the concrete in a bucket to be examined 
after being lowered and raised through 23 ft. of water, the concrete 
was invariably found in good condition. Discoloration of the water 
from cement was seldom noticed during the descent of the bucket. 
The concrete for this subaqueous work was mixed quite wet. 

The pebbles for the concrete were delivered by contract, and 
were unloaded from the scows by means of a clam-shell bucket into 
a hopper. This hopper fed the pebbles on to an endless conveyor 
which delivered them to a rotary screen. Inside this screen Water 
was discharged under a pressure from a 4-in. pipe, to wash the 
pebbles. From the screen the pebbles passed through a chute into 
4 -yd. cars, which were hauled up an incline to a height of 65 ft. 
by means of a hoisting engine. The cars were dumped auto- 
matically, forming a stock pile. Under the stock pile was a double 
gallery or tunnel, provided with eight chutes through the roof ; 
and from these chutes the cars were loaded and hauled by a hoist- 
ing engine up an inclined trestle to the bins above the concrete 
mixer. A system of electric bell signals was used in handling these 
cars. 

The sand was handled from the stock pile in the same manner. 
The cement was loaded in bags on a car at the warehouse, hauled 
to the mixer and elevated by a sprocket-chain elevator. 

Chutes from the bins delivered the materials into the concrete 
mixer which was of the modified cubical type revolving on trunnions 
about an axial line through diagonal corners of the cube (made by 
the Municipal Engineering and Contracting Co., Chicago, 111. ). It 
was driven by a 7 X 10-in. vertical single engine with boiler. The 
mixer demonstrated its ability to turn out a batch of perfectly 
mixed concrete every 1% mins. It discharged into a hopper, pro- 
vided with a cut-off chute, which discharged into the concrete 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 585 

buckets on the cars. Four buckets of concrete were hauled in a 
train by a locomotive to their destination. There were two locomo- 
tives and 23 cars. 

In the operation of this plant 55 men were employed, 43 being 
engaged on actual concrete work and 12 building molds and ap- 
pliances for future work. The work was done by day labor for the 
Government, and the cost of operation was as follows for one 
typical week when, in 6 days of 8 hours each, the output was 1,383 
cu. yds., or an average of 230 cu. yds. per day. The output on one 
day was considerably below the average on account of an accident 
to plant but this may be considered as typical. 

Pebbles from stock pile to mixer. Per cu. yd. 

•I laborers, at $2 $0.0348 

1 engineman. at $3 0.0131 

Coal, oil and waste, at $1.03 0.0043 

Sand from stock pile to mixer. 

5 laborers, at $2 0.0434 

1 engineman, at $2.50 0.0109 

Coal, oil and waste, at $0.82 0.0035 

Cement from warehouse to mixer. 

5 laborers, at $2 0.0434 

Mixing concrete. 

1 engineman, at $2.50 0.0109 

1 mechanic, at $2.50 0.0108 

Coal, oil and waste, at $1.29 0.0056 

Transporting concrete. 

4 laborers, at $2 0.0348 

1 engineman, at $3 0.0130 

Coal, oil and waste, at $0.66 0.0028 

Depositing concrete in molds. 

4 laborers, at $2 0.0348 

1 engineman, at $3 0.0130 

1 rigger, at $3 0.0130 

Coal, oil and waste, at $1.18 0.0051 

Assembling, transporting, setting and remov- 
ing molds. 

4 laborers, at $2 0.0347 

1 engineman, at $3.25 0.0141 

1 carpenter, at $3 0.0130 

1 mechanic, at $2.50 0.0109 

Coal, oil and waste, at $1.3 J 0.0060 

Care of tracks. 

1 laborer, at $2 0.0086 

1 mechanic, at $2.50 0.0109 

Supplying coal. 
3 laborers, at $2 0.0260 

Blacksmith work. 

1 laborer, at $2 0.0086 

1 blacksmith, at $3.25 0.0141 

Water boy, at $0.75 0.0032 

Total per cu. yd $0.4473 

Add 75% of the cost of administration 0.1388 

Total labor per cu. yd $0.5861 



586 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The total cost of each cubic yard of concrete in place is estimated 
to be as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Ten-elevenths cu. yd. pebbles, at $1.085 $0.9864 

Ten-twenty-seconds cu. yd. sand, at $0.00 0.0000 

1.26 bbls. cement, at $1.77 2.2302 

Labor, as above given 0.5861 

Cost of plant distributed over total average. . . . 0.8400 

Total yardage $4.6427 

It will be noticed that the sand cost nothing, as it was dredged 
from the trench in which the pier was built, and paid for as 
dredging. The cost of the plant was distributed over the South 
Pier work and over the proposed North Pier work, on the basis 
of only 20% salvage value after the completion of both piers. It is 
said, however, that 80% is too high an allowance for the probable 
depreciation. 

The cost of the trestles was included in the cost of the plant. 
The Washington fir used in the trestles cost $16 per M. delivered in 
the yard. The cost of framing and placing the timberwork (exclu- 
sive of the piles) was $3.25 per M. 
The cost of the plant was as follows : 

Machinery $30,055.98 

Piles and pile driving 13,963.00 

Lumber for trestles and molds 12,094.26 

Iron and castings 7,572.36 

Labor on plant 15,760.40 

Total $79,446.00 

The item of "labor on plant" includes all work in building trestles, 
laying track, building molds, mold traveler and all appurtenances for 
performing the work. The cost of plant per cu. yd. of concrete was 
estimated thus : 

First cost $79,446 

20% depreciation during use on South Pier.... 15,889 
Estimated increase in size of plant for use on 

North Pier 3,972 

Total for both piers » $99,307 

Salvage value of plant 20% 19,861 

Net $79,446 

$79,446^94,000 cu. yds. = $0.84 per cu. yd. 

The proportions of the subaqueous concrete were 1 :2.5 :5 by 
volume, or 1:2.73:5.78 by weight, cement being assumed to weigh 
100 lbs. per cu. ft. The proportions of the superaqueous concrete 
were 1:3.12:6.25 by volume, or 1:3.41:7.22 by weight. The dry 
sand weighed 109.2 lbs. per cu. ft., the voids being 35.1%. The peb- 
bles weighed 115.5 lbs. per cu. ft., the voids being 31%. 

As above stated, the molds were bottomless boxes built in four 
pieces, two sides and two ends, held together by tie-rods. The 
114 -in. turnbuckle tie-rods passed through the ends of beams that 
bore against the outside of the mold. These tie-rods had eyes at 
each end, in which rods with wedge shaped ends were inserted. 
The mold was erected on the trestle by the locomotive crane, and 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 587 

was then lifted by the mold traveler, carried and lowered to place. 
The largest one of these molds, with its cast-iron ballast, weighed 
40 tons. When it was desired to remove a mold, after tlie concrete 
block had hardened, tlie nuts on the wedge-ended rods were turned, 
thus pulling the wedge end from the eye of the tie-rod, and releasing 
the sides of the mold from the ends. The locomotive crane then 
raised the sides and ends separately and assembled them ready to be 
lowered again for the next block. The time required to remove one 
of these 40-ton molds, reassemble and set it again rarely exceeded 
60 mins., and had been accomplished in 45 mins. 

As already stated, the concrete was built in alternate blocks ; 
then the intermediate blocks were built, the ends of the concrete 
blocks just built serving as end molds for the new blocks. The two 
sides of the mold (without the end pieces) were assembled by the 
aid of templates, and were bolted together by tie-rods. To hold 
the sides apart when the templates were removed, it was necessary 
to surround each of the six tie-rods with a box of 1-in. plank. These 
boxes rpeasured 4 ins. square on the inside ; and were left buried 
in the concrete. Their purpose was to act as horizontal struts to 
hold the sides of the mold apart, and to permit removal of the tie- 
rods after the concrete block had been built. The removal of these 
rods was accomplished by withdrawing the wedge-ended rods. 

The mold traveler deserves a brief description. It Was provided 
with a four-drum engine, and the drums were actuated by a worm 
gear which was positive in its movement in lowering as well as in 
raising. The drums act independently or together, as desired. 
The hoisting speed was 6 ft. per min., and the traveling speed, 100 
ft. per min. The load was suspended on four hooks, depending by 
double blocks and %-in. wire ropes from four trolleys suspended 
from the truss, which allowed lateral adjustment of the mold. The 
difficulty of using so broad a gage as 31 ft., on a curve having a 
radius of 563 ft., was overcome by using a differential gear in the 
driving shaft of the propelling gear, thus compensating for the 
greater distance traveled by the wheels on the outer rail. The whole 
machine' was carried on six trucks having two double-flanged wheels 
each; The four forward trucks were swiveled on steel bed plates 
with 3-in. king bolts. The two rear trucks were fixed to the chord 
and had idler wheels, which slid on their axles so as to accommodate 
themselves to the curve. 

Rubble Concrete Data. — By some engineers it is believed that 
rubble concrete, particularlj^ for dam construction, is a very new 
form of masonry. In Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., 1875, Mr. J. J. R. Croes 
describes work on the Boyd's Corner Dam on the Croton River, near 
New York. This work was begun in 1867, and for a time rubble 
concrete was used, but was finally discontinued, due to the impres- 
sion that it might not be water-tight. In those days "sloppy" con- 
crete would not have been allowed, which probably accounts for the 
difficulty of getting a water-tight rubble concrete. The specifications 
called for a dry concrete that had to be thoroughly rammed in be- 
tween the rubble stones ; and, to give room for this ramming, the 



588 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

contractor was not permitted to lay any two stones closer together 
than 12 ins. As a result, not more than 33% of the masonry was 
rubble stones, the rest being the concrete between the stones. Mr. 
Croes states that most of the bidders erred in assuming that 66% 
to 75% of the masonry would be rubble stones. 

The form of the rubble stones as they come from the quarry 
should be considered. Stones that have flat beds, like many sand- 
stones and limestones, can be laid upon layers of "dry" concrete, 
and can have their vertical joints readily filled with concrete rammed 
into place. But granites and other stones that break out irregularly, 
can not be well bedded in concrete unless it is made so soft as 
to be "sloppy." In thin retaining walls, small, irregular stones may 
be forced into concrete by jumping upon them, men wearing rubber 
boots. 

When stones come out flat bedded, if it is desired to economize 
cement, make the bed joints of ordinary mortar (not concrete) and 
fill the vertical joints with concrete. 

Generally it is an absurd practice to break up. large blocks of 
stone in a crusher for the purpose of making the whole of a heavy 
wall of concrete, since rubble concrete requires not only less cement 
but effects a saving in crushing. There are exceptions, however. 
For example, the anchorages of the Manhattan Bridge in New York 
City were specified to be of rubble concrete, doubtless because the 
designer believed this sort of masonry to be cheaper than concrete. 
In this case an economic mistake was made, for all the rubble 
stone must bS quarried up the Hudson River, loaded into scows, 
unloaded onto cars, and finally unloaded and delivered by derricks. 
This repeated handling of large, irregular rubble stones is so 
expensive that it more than offsets the cost of crushing, as well as 
the extra cost of cement in plain concrete. Crushed stone can 
be unloaded from boats by means of clam-shell buckets at a low 
cost (see data in the section on Rock Excavation). It can be trans- 
ported on a belt conveyor, elevated in a bucket conveyor, mixed With 
sand and cement, and delivered to the work, all with very little 
manual labor where the installation of a very efficient plant is 
justified by the magnitude of the job. Large rubble stones, on the 
other hand, can not be handled so cheaply nor with as great 
rapidity as crushed stone. Each particular piece of work, therefore, 
must be treated as a separate problem in engineering economics ; 
for no unqualified generalization as to the relative cheapness of this 
or that kind of masonry is to be relied upon. 

In the construction of a dry dock at the Charleston Navy Yard, 
rubble concrete was used. The rubble stones averaged about % cu. 
yd. each, and were spaced about 18 ins. apart. About 67% of the 
masonry was 1:2:5 concrete, leaving 33% of rubble stones. 

The Spier Falls Dam on the upper Hudson River is of cyclopean 
masonry, the rubble stones being very large pieces of granite, 
which are bedded in 1:2%:5 concrete. At the time of my visit 
to the dam, it was estimated that about 33% of the masonry Was 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. o80 

concrete. I have recently been informed by Mr. C. E. Parsons, the 
chief engineer, that about 1 bbl. of cement was used in each cubic 
yard of masonry. This liigh percentage of cement may be accounted 
for by the fact that there was a good deal of plain rubble laid in 
1 : 2 cement mortar, no accurate record of which was kept. At the 
time of my visit, three Ransome mixers were being used, two for con- 
crete and one for mortar. Each concrete mixer averaged 200 batches 
in 10 hrs., of 23 cu. ft. of concrete per batcli. I am inclined to think, 
from inspection of the masonry during the time it was being laid, 
that about 40% of the dam was rubble stones and the remaining 
60% was concrete and mortar. The stones and concrete were 
delivered by cableways to stiff-leg derricks, which deposited the 
material in the dam. There were two laborers to each mason em- 
ployed in placing the materials, wages being 15 cts. and 35 cts. per 
hr. respectively. The labor cost of placing the materials was 60 cts. 
per cu. yd. of masonry. Mr. Parsons states that the 155,000 cu. yds. 
of Cyclopean masonry actually cost $5.71 per cu. yd., exclusive of 
the plant depreciation, and that calling the plant depreciation 40% 
of its first cost, it would add 10% to the cost of tlie masonry, or 
57 cts. per cu. yd., making a total of $6.2 8 per cu. yd. This does not 
include the cofferdam. 

For a rubble concrete dam across the Chattahoochee, 17 miles 
north of Atlanta, Ga., tlie stone was a local gneiss that came out of 
the quarry in large slabs with parallel beds, some stones containing 
4 cu. yds. each. About 40% of the dam was of this rubble and 60% 
of concrete between the rubble stones. The concrete was a 1:21/^:5 

mixture. 

t 

The breakwater at Marquette, Mich., was built of rubble concrete, 

the rubble stones amounting to 27% of the volume of the breakwater 
masonry. 

The Hemet Dam, California, is built of granite rubble concrete, 
the concrete being a 1:3:6 mixture. The face stones of the dam 
were laid in mortar. There were 31,100 cu. yds. of masonry, which 
required 20,000 bbls. of cement, or 0.64 bbl. per cu. yd. The cement 
was hauled 23 miles over roads having grades of 18% in places, the 
total ascent being 3,350 ft. The cost of hauling was $1 to $1.50 
per bbl. The sand was conveyed 400 ft. from the river to the dam 
by an endless double-rope carrier provided with V-shaped buckets 
spaced 20 ft. apart, the rise of the conveyor being 125 ft. in the 
400 ft. This was a simple and inexpensive conveyor. 

The Boonton Dam, Boonton, N. J., is of cyclopean masonry, that is, 
of large rubble stones bedded in concrete. The concrete was made 
so wet that when the stones were dropped into it the concrete flowed 
into every crevice. The granite rubble stones measured from 1 to 2 14 
cu. yds. each. The materials were all delivered on cars, from which 
they were delivered to the dam by derricks provided with bull- 
wheels. On the dam were 4 laborers and 1 mason to each derrick, 
and this gang dumped concrete and joggled the rubble stones into it. 
A derrick has laid as much as 125 cu. yds. of masonry in 10 hrs. 



590 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA, 

With 35 derricks, 20 of which were aying masonry and 15 either 
passing materials to tlie otlier derricks, or being moved, as much as 
21,000 cu. yds. of masonry were laid in one month. The amount of 
cement per cubic yard of masonry was 0.68 bbl., the cyclopean stone 
occupying 45 to 50% of the volume of the dam. 

Cost of the Boonton Dam, Cyclopean Masonry. — In the preceding 

paragraph the character of this masonry is given. Mr. B. L. Harri- 
son informs me that the rock was syenitic granite, "not quite so 
hard to quarry as trap rock." About 50% was concrete, mixed 1: 9, 
and 0.68 bbl. cement was required per cu. yd. of the masonry, at 
$1.50 per bbl. Wages of common laborers were $1.55 per 10-hr. 
day, and the cost to the contractor would have been $4 per cu. yd. 
had he furnished the cement. 

Mr. J. Waldo Smith has stated that 45% of the dam was cyclopean 
stone and that the cost to the conti-actor was ?3.23 per cu. yd. ex- 
clusive of cement. If we add $1.05 for cement, we have $4.28 
per cu. yd. 

Some English Data on Rubble Concrete. — The following is an ab- 
stract of an article from London "Engineering" : Railway work, 
under Mr. John Strain, in Scotland and Spain, involved the building 
of abutments, piers and arches of rubble concrete. The concrete 
"was made of 1 part cement to 5 parts of ballast, the ballast consist- 
ing of broken stone or slag and sand mixed in proportions determined 
by experiment. The materials were mixed by turning with shovels 
4 times dry, then 4 times more during the addition of water through 
a rose nozzle. A bed of concrete 6 ins. thick was first laid, and on 
this a layer of rubble stones, no two stones being nearer together 
than 3 ins., nor nearer the forms than 3 ins. The stones were 
rammed and probed around with a trowel to leave no spaces. Over 
each layer of rubble, concrete was spread to a depth of 6 ins. The 
forms or molds for piers for a viaduct were simply large open boxes, 
the four sides of which could be taken apart. The depth of the boxes 
was uniform, and they were numbered from the top down, so that, 
knowing the height of a given pier, the proper box for the base 
could be selected. As each box was filled, the next one smaller 
in size was swung into place with a derrick. The following bridge 
piers for the Tharsis & Calanas Ry. were built : 

Length Height 

of of Cu. Yds. Weeks 

Bridge. Piers. No. of in to 

Name. Ft. Ft. Spans. Piers. Build. 

Tamujoso River 435 28 12 1,737 14% 

Oraque 423 31 11 1,590 15 

Cascabelero 480 30 to 80 10 2,680 21 

No. 16 294 28 to 50 7 1,046 16% 

Tiesa 165 16 to 23 8 420 4 

It is stated that the construction of some of these piers in ordi- 
nary masonry would have taken four times as long. The rock 
available for rubble did not yield large blocks, consequently the 
percentage of pure concrete in the piers was large, averaging 70%. 
In one case, where the stones were smaller than usual, the percentage 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 591 

of concrete was 76'^%. In other work the percentage has been us 
low as 55%, and in still other work where a rubble face work was 
used the percentage of concrete has been 40%. 

In these piers the average quantities of materials per cubic yard 
of rubble concrete were : 

448 lbs. (0.178 cu. yd.) cement. 

0.36 cu. yd. sand. 

0.68 cu. yd. broken stone (measured loose in piles). 

0.30 cu. yd. rubble (measured solid). 

Several railway bridge piers and abutments in Scotland are cited. 
In one of these, large rubble stones of irregular size and weighing 
2 tons each were set inside the forms, 3 ins. away from the plank 
and 3 ins. from one another. The gang to each derrick was : 
1 derrickman and 1 boy, 1 mason and 10 laborers, and about one- 
quarter of the time of 1 carpenter and his helper raising the forms. 
For bridges of 400 cu. yds., the progress was 12 to 15 cu. yds. per 
day. The forms were left in place 10 days. 

To chip off a few inches from the face of a concrete abutment that 
was too far out, required the work of 1 quarryman 5 days per cu. yd. 
of solid concrete chipped off. 

Concrete was used for a skew arch over the River Dochart, on the 
Killin Ry., Scotland. There were 5 arches, each of 30 ft. span on 
the square or 42 ft. on the skew, the skew being 45°. The piers were 
of rubble concrete. The concrete in the arch was wheeled 300 ft. on 
a trestle, and dumped onto the centers. It was rammed in 6-in. 
layers, which were laid corresponding to the courses of arch stones. 
As the layers approached the crown of the arch, some difficulty was 
experienced in keeping the surfaces perpendicular. Each arch was 
completed in a day. 

In a paper by John W. Steven, in Proc. Inst. C. B., the following 
is given : 





Concrete 

per 

cu. yd. 


Rubble 
Concrete 

per 

cu. yd. 


Per Cent 
of Rubble 
in Rubble 
Concrete. 


Ardrossan Harbor 

Irvine Branch 

Calanas & Tharsis Ry. . 


$6.00 

7.00 

. ... 7.08 


$5.00 
3.68 
3.43 


20.0 
63.6 
30.3 



Cost of a Rubble Concrete Abutment — Mr. Emmet Steece gives 
the cost of 278 cu. yds. rubble concrete in a bridge abutment at 
Burlington, la., as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

0.82 bbl. Saylor's Portland at $2.60 $2.14 

0.22 cu. yd. sand, at $1 0.22 

0.52 cu. yd. broken stone, at $0.94 0.49 

0.38 cu. yd. rubble stones, at $0.63 0.24 

Water 0.07 

Labor (15 cts. per hr. ) 1.19 

Foreman 0.01 



Total $4.44 



592 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The concrete was 1: 2% : 4%, laid in 4-in. layers, on which were 
laid large rubble stones spaced about 6 ins. apart. Concrete was 
rammed into the spaces between the rubble, which was then covered 
with another 4-in. layer of concrete, and so on. A force of 28 men 
and a foreman averaged nearly 40 cu. yds. of rubble concrete per 
day. The cost of lumber for the forms is not included. The abut- 
ment was 3 ft. wide at top, 9 ft. at the base and 30 ft. high. . 

Cost of a Rubble Concrete Dam in the Central States.* — This 
article describes the earthwork and concrete construction incident to 
a hydro-electric development in the middle West. Although neither 
the name of the contractor nor the locality of the work can be given, 
it will serve all statistical purposes to state that the work was 
located within 200 miles of Chicago in a small country town, whose 
population was made up almost entirely of those employed on the 
construction, but one whose railroad facilities were all that could 
be desired. The river is one of the upper tributaries of the Mis- 
sissippi, draining over 1,200 square miles of densely wooded forest 
land, flowing through a series of broad marshes and swift rapids, 
deep cut in the narrow valleys, until it empties into the mother 
stream. At the chosen site there is an average depth of 6 ft. and 
flow of 600 cu. ft. per second, which will impound a reservoir with 
an area of 650 acres and a maximum depth of 50 ft., 10 ft. of which 
is available, as the river here narrows down from a wide marsh 
plain to a deep rocky channel, making an ideal spot for water 
storage. 

The dam is a structure of cyclopean masonry, having a spillway of 
490 ft. flanked on eacli side by abutments of the same material and 
earth dikes extending 1,500 and 2,800 ft. from each end. Tlie dam 
itself has a maximum height of 49 ft. and a width of base of 49 ft., 
its section being of a standard "ogee" type. The earth dikes have 
an extreme height of 31 ft., side slopes of 2 to 1, 4-ft. berms, and 
are made impervious by concrete core walls founded on bedrock. 
These have a thickness of 2 ft. at the top and a batter of 12 on 1 on 
each side. 

The preliminary construction work, consisting of the erection of 
a camp for the working force of 4 00 men and the clearing of the 
dam site, was commenced April 10, but it was not until the follow- 
ing June that the organization was complete and the work well under 
way, the first concrete being laid July 9. The actual work of har- 
nessing the river was accomplished by building above the dam loca- 
tion a timber rock-fllled cofferdam, 500 x 150 ft., with a maximum 
height of 16 ft., the natural bank forming one side, thereby divert- 
ing the water into the east half of the river channel and allowing 
the excavation to be carried in the dry to bedrock. 

Concrete mixing plants were erected on each side of the river, con- 
taining three No. 4 Ransome mixers. An excellent granite quarry 
was opened up on the east side of the river, where a, crushing plant 



* Engineering-Contracting. Oct. 7. 190S. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 593 

of considerable capacity was erecte.l, the broken stone being carried 
from tliere to tiie bins of the niixiny plants by construction trains 
of Western dump cars. Sand and gravel were obtained from a 
nearby borrow pit with drag scrapers, screened and brought to the 
bins in dump-car trains. Cement was kept in an adjacent store- 
liouse and wheeled by hand to cliutes immediately above the mixers. 
The mixture was in 1 cu. yd. batches in the proportions of 
1:2%: 5, using Atlas Portland cement. About 150 cu. yds. is the 
average daily output of each mixer. The concrete was delivered in 

1 cu. yd. tipping buckets and placed in the forms by means of push 
cars and 5-ton, CO-ft. boom, guyed derricks, operated by Lidger- 
wood and American double-drum engines, which were the limiting 
factors in the daily progress. Plum stones up to 1 cu. yd. in vol- 
ume were bedded in the concrete and formed about 25% of its mass. 
I^ifts of 3 to 8 ft. a day were secured, care being taken in filling 
the forms to complete a horizontal course over the whole surface. 
Successive fills were bonded together by the use of large stones im- 
bedded so as to project half way above the surface of the lower 
course and lock with the subsequent layer. 

The forms were built of 2-in. dressed pine planks, braced with 
-I X 6-in. studding, spaced 3 ft. apart on centers and stiffened With 
G X 8-in. horizontal waling pieces attached every 4 ft. The forms 
were anchored with heavy iron wire, or %-in. band iron, and were 
not interchangeable, being knocked down as each section was 
stripped, and rebuilt for the next. 

The dam was constructed in alternate sections, 40 ft. long, bondeJ 
together with vertical keys, 3 ft. apart in the clear and terminating 

2 ft. below the upper surface. Upon reaching the center, the enJ 
cofferdams were removed and rebuilt across the east channel, send- 
ing the water through five 10 x 10-ft. sluiceways left temporarily in 
the structure. The excavation was then pushed forward in the east 
channel, and on Dec. 3 the last bucket of concrete was placed in the 
closing sluices. 

The earth dikes were filled by drag and wheel scrapers drawn by 
Missouri mules, the former being used for all hauls under 200 ft. 
The corewalls were first constructed on bedrock, the concrete being 
wheeled in barrows an average of 200 ft. from construction train to 
forms. Care was taken to bring no unnecessary stress on the wallq 
by maintaining the fill at equal heights on each side of the core. 
Clay puddle and riprap protect the sides from erosion. 
The plant and construction costs were as follows: 
Camp. — The camp consisted of the following buildings : 

Floor Area, 
Sq. Ft. 
8 dormitories for 283 men 15,000 

2 mess halls for 80 men 3,000 

3 individual shacks for 3 men 864 

1 storehouse 1,136 

1 machine shop 900 

1 blacksmith shop 100 

Total floor area 21,000 



59-t HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of constructing these buildings was as follows : 
Item. Cost. 

158,000 ft. B. M. of lumber at $22.50 $3,575 

15 carpenters 48 days at $3 2,160 

30,000 sq. ft. tar paper at $0.0225 675 

Nails ,145 

Total 21,000 sq. ft. at $0.31 $6,555 

Interest and depreciation 5,500 

The cost per square foot of building was as follows: 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Lumber $0.17 55 

Labor 0.10 32 

Roofing and hardware 0.14 13 

Total $0.31 100 

The carpenter work cost $13.70 per 1,000 ft. B. M., which is a high 
cost. 

Sand and Gravel. — The excavation and screening of the sand and 
gravel required the following plant : One screening plant, 6 wheel 
scrapers, 7 spans of mules and harnesses, 6 living tents, 2 mule 
tents, % dinkey engine, 6 Western dump cars and % mile of track. 
The investment cost of the plant was $11,500 ; the daily plant charge 
was as follows for 165 days: 

Per day. 

Interest and depreciation, $5,000 $30.30 

Coal for boiler 2.00 

Coal for Va dinkey 0.50 

Oil for engine 0.40 

Oil for 1/3 dinkey 0.10 

Feed and care of mules 7.50 

Total ,. $40.80 

Broken Stone. — The plant for quarrying and crushing the broken 
stone was as follows : One No. 5 Austin crusher, 1 hoisting engine 
and boiler, 1 60-ft. derrick, 4 steam drills, 6 scale boxes, 1,200 ft. 
track, % dinkey engine, 6 Western dump cars, 1 blacksmith's shop 
and 1 winch. The investment cost was $13,000 ; the daily plant 
charges were as follows for 170 days: 

Per day. 

Interest and depreciation, $5,500 $32.30 

Coal for boilers 5.50 

Coal for % dinkey 1.00 

Oil for engines 0.30 

Oil for dinkey 0.20 

Explosives 22.50 

Total $61.80 

Mixing. — The mixing plant consisted of 2 mixing plants (3 No. 4 
Ransome mixers, 1 cu. yd. batch), 3 cement trucks, 700 ft. of track 
with trestle, 2 cement houses, 1 sand chute and 2 sand cars. The 
investment cost of the plant was $7,900 ; the daily plant charges 
were as follows for 168 days: 

Item. Per day. 

Interest and depreciation, $2,900 $17.20 

Coal 2.10 

Oil 0.15 

Total, 180 cu. yds., at $0.10 $19.45 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 595 

Placing. — The plant required for placing concrete was as follows : 
Six hoisting engines and boilers, 7 derricks, it tipping buckets, 800 
ft. of track, 6 flat cars, 500 ft. of trestle, 1 dinkey, 4 Western dump 
cars, 15 wheelbarrows and 18 shovels. The investment cost was 
$18,000 and the daily plant charge was as follows: 

Item. Per day. 

Interest and depreciation, $5,600 $31.75 

Coal 5.00 

Oil 1.00 

Total, ISO cu. yds., at $0.21 $37.75 

Wages. — The wages paid labor were as follows : 

Class. Per day. 

Foremen $3.00 to $5.00 

Engineers $2.25 to $3.50 

P'iremen $1.75 to $2.75 

Tagmen $2.00 

Carpenters $2.00 to $3.50 

Rivermen $3.00 

Electricians $3.00 

Riggers $2.50 to $3.50 

Mechanics $2.75 to $3.50 

Cooks $2.00 

Laborers $1.75 to $2.25 

Water boys .$1.50 

Main Dam and Concrete. — The cost in place of the 30,000 cu. yds. 
of rubble concrete in the main dam inclusive of labor and plant 
charges was as follows : 

Skilled Cost 

Foremen. Laborers. Laborers. Per cu. yd. 

Stone 3 8 6 $1.26 

Sand 1 2 10 0.46 

Cement .. .. 2.31 

Forms 3 25 1 0.62 

Mixing 4 3 32 0.58 

Placing 3 6 46 0.69 

Total $5.92 

Referring to the forms, the cost of material per foot board meas- 
ure was : 

Per ft. B. M. 

Lumber $0,022 

Nails 0.001 

Wire 0.005 

Total $0,028 

The forms were used three times and the average cost of forms 
per square foot of surface covered was 24 cts., which is a very high 
cost. 

Concrete Corewallj East Dike. — This corewall averaged 11.2 ft. in 
height, contained 2,893 cu. yds., and took 78 days, including Sun- 
days and idle days, to build with a force of 5 foremen, 10 skilled 
laborers and SO laborers. Sectional forms 4 x 12 ft. of 1-in. boards 
and 2 X 6-in. studding, were used. The concrete was delivered to 
trestle running 1,000 ft. by train. The cost of the corewall was as 
follows : 



596 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Item. Total. 

3,350 bbls. cement, at $2.31 % 6,675 

964 cu. yds. sand and gravel, at 75 cts 725 

1,928 cu. yds. broken stone, at $1.08 2,082 

Mixing concrete (2,983 cu. yds., at 42 cts.) 1,215 

Placing concrete (2,893 cu. yds., at $1.01) 2,947 

22,400 sq. ft. forms, at 43 cts 1,232 

Total $14,876 

1,450 cu. yds. excavation, at 98 cts 1,424 

Grand total $16,300 

The cost per cubic yard of concrete work proper was thus $5.14 
and the cost including excavation was $5.66 per cu. yd. 

Earthwork. — The cost of the earthwork in the dikes was as 
follows : 

East dike: Volume, 21,900 cu. yds., sandy loam; force, 2 foremen, 
44 laborers, 60 mules; lead, 600 ft; plant, No. 2 wheel scrapers; 
unit cost, 28 cts. per cu. yd. 

West dike: 8,900 cu. yds., sandy loam; force, 1 foreman, 14 
laborers, 20 mules; lead, 60 ft.; plant, drag scrapers; unit cost, 
26 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of Concrete Fence Post. — Mr. J. A. Mitchell gives the fol- 
lowing : 

Fence posts need not contain more than 0.6 cu. ft. of concrete, if 
the posts are made tapering. They should be reinforced with gal- 
vanized wire, for the metal is so close to the surface of the con- 
crete that it is likely to rust. Two men will make 100 such posts 
per day, or 2.22 cu. yds. ; while three good men have made 200 
posts per day, or about 1.5 cu. yds. per man. A double mold for 
making two parts is used, and should be collapsible, so that it can 
be removed in 24 to 48 hrs. Wooden molds that have been in use 
three years are still in service. Such posts can be made for 11 to 
12% cts. each, which is equivalent to about $5.40 per cu. yd., prices 
being as follows : 

Cement, per bbl $1.50 

Gravel, per cu. yd 0.40 

Galvanized wire, per lb 02% 

Wages, per day 1.59 

Mixtures of 1 : 3 and 1 : 4 are best. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Telephone Poles.* — The possibilities 
for reinforced concrete poles in transmission line work have re- 
cently been very carefully investigated by the Richmond (Ind. ) 
Home Telephone Co., which has constructed a line across the White- 
water River, using poles ranging from 45 to 55 ft. in height of the 
construction shown by Fig. 2, invented by Mr. Wm. M. Bailey, Vice- 
President and General Manager of the company. The following 
account of these investigations and of the studies made by the 
American Concrete Pole Co., Richmond, Ind., which has been organ- 
ized to market the poles, has been compiled from information given 
us by Mr. Bailey. 

For poles 30 ft. long and under, the molding is done horizontally 



*Engineering-Contracting, March 11, 1908. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



597 



on the ground and the pole erected when hard like a wooden pole ; 
for poles over 30 ft. long the molding is done in forms set vertical in 
the pole hole. The following figures, Table IX, are given as the cost 
without royalty of concrete poles molded as described. These costs 
are for poles erected excluding the material cost of steps but In- 



Fig. 




EnqrContr 



-Concrete Telephone Pole. 



cludnig labor cost of setting steps, and they are based on the fol- 
lowing wages and prices : 

Foreman, per day $3.00 

Laborers, per day 1.75 

Cement, per barrel -. 2.00 

Stone, gravel or sand, per cu. yd 1.00 

For sake of comparison, the cost of cedar poles has been added to 
the table ; these costs include poles, unloading, dressing, gaining, 
roofing, boring, hauling and setting. All figures are as furnished by 
Mr. Bailey. Regarding the methods of constructing concrete poles, 
Mr. Bailey says : 

"All of the larger concrete poles (that is, poles over 30 ft. in 
height), are built upright in position ready for use, the forms being 
set perpendicularly over the hole in which the pole is to be placed, 
the hole having been dug to conform with the size pole prior to the 
Betting of form ; thus when the concrete is poured in at the top of 
form, the hole is entirely filled and the concrete knit firmly to the 



598 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 












.-I 


o in 


lO 


o 


o 


o 


o m 








i3 


r-l N 


tH 


lO 


eq 


c- 


CO t- 








o 


•^ 00 


tH 


U5 


eq 


to 


eo OS 








H 


eo- 


iH 


tH 


c^ 


C<I 


00 CO 








^ 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o o 




£5 a 


lO o 


■«< 


in 


o 


in 


in o 




iH N 


w 


CO 


in 


to 


00 o 




««• 










t-i 


03 


t4 
















H 


d 


, 














1 


(]1 


X! . 


O U5 


U3 


o 


o 


o 


o m 


C 


3 


°!3 


to M 


t^ 


o 


cq 


cq 


00 t- 






eq to 


00 


cq' 


t-^ 


O 


T)! e» 


% 






fe" 


e«- 




i-H 


iH 


cq 


cq cq 


















a 




^ 














H 




Acq 














U 




g-s 


t- t- 


t- 


00 


00 


00 


00 00 


Q 


















iz; 
















EH 


cj <tJ 


;|5 


;^ 










■s " 


r-l CO 


U5 


\a 


00 


© 


CO o 


o o 
ho 


t- to 

to 00 




o 


rH 




OS to 
r-i to 


u 




W3- 


I-( 


iH 


CM 


CJ 


CO CO 


^ 
















o 
















O 


















o 

>3 


o o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


in o 


C- <M 


c- 


eq 


t~- 


eq 


OS t^ 


o 


■A ei 


N 


•<a< 


\a 


t-^ 


00 r-1 


§ 


t» 










<H 


fa 
















Ph 

fa 
o 


■s^ 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O O 


U.S 


c<i cq 

r-i r-i 
*9- 


1H 




lO 
r-i 


00 


00 00 

r-i r-i 




A 














H 
















m 
















a 




•* ■* 


TtC 


■<«< 


eq 


o 


■>»< ■«<« 


»<«2 


M OS 


to 


O 


o 


o 


00 in 




^ o O o 


N cq 


CO 


in 


to 


t> 


t-^ 00 


S 




;? 


;^ 










a 


ai*j ^ 


t~ 05 


tH 


iH 


to 


o 


■* to 


o o oS 
CO " 
o 


lo cq 


OJ 


CO 


in 


in 


CO in 


o 

9 




CO 


to 


00 


OS 


CO r)i 
rH r-t 


1 


u 














« 


• . o 














M 


Pr.C 


tO T-H 


to 


to 


CO 


o 


to r-t 


f3 






r-i cq 


c<l 


CO 


■* 


in 


in CO 



Mm ' 



I ss!^;?;;^tsj^' 



W ■>-'-' 



OrHClintOb-000» 



tototot^t-t-c-c» 



ijjj inoinoinoioo 
bB")-! cqcocoM-Miinioce 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 599 

solid earth that has never been disturbed. There is no replacing of 
earth or tamping required. 

"All poles under 30 ft. in height, up to the present time, have 
been built on the ground and set after they have been seasoned, al- 
though there is some doubt in my mind and I believe that witli the 
proper equipment and a little practice that it will be discovered that 
even the smaller poles can be built more economically upright. As 
to the cost of setting these poles, it is true that they will have to be 
handled with a derrick or gin pole, but with tliis equipment they can 
be handled very rapidly, and, I believe, almost as cheaply as the 
wooden pole. One can readily see that as the larger poles are built 
upright in position which they are to occupy, that there is no heavy 
material to handle — consequently, there will be no necessity for any 
heavy rigging or equipment. The hole is first dug and the form is 
set directly over the same. After the form has been placed, the 
reinforcing rods and binding wires are placed and the form is then 
ready to receive concrete. After the concrete has been poured in, it 
is left for about three or four days, depending on the weather, be- 
fore the forms are removed. The most economical way of handUng 
concrete is with a small mixer, capable of mixing 2 or 3 cu. yds. per 
hour and the old-fashioned grain elevator. With this equipment, the 
concrete Is placed as rapidly as it is mixed and with the same power. 
The pouring in of the concrete into the top of the form tamps it 
thoroughly and it shows a solid compact concrete. 

"This proposition is like a great many others — at first sight it ap- 
pears impractical on account of first cost, but on investigation we 
find that this is only a phantom and that after all is done and said, 
the proposition is economy. 

"I give you here the exact cost data on one of the 55-ft. poles 
erected over the Whitewater river at Richmond, Ind. : 
Materials: 
4 1-in. steel rods 40 ft. long, and 4 %-in. steel 
rods, 15 ft. long including "U" bolts 

with which they were tied together $13.34 

56 cu. ft. of concrete 7.84 

1 set of binding wires 1.80 

Total materials ?22.98 

Labor: 

4 men setting form, placing rods, and binding 
wire, guying, truing same ready for con- 
crete, one day : 

1 man, at $3.00 $ 3.00 

1 man, at $2.50 2.50 

2 men, at $2.00 4.00 

4 men and one horse mixing and placing concrete, 

2 hrs. and 11 mins 2.28 

2 men taking down form and touching up pole, 

3 hrs 1.35 

Total labor .$13.13 

Total materials and labor $36.11 

"You will note that this cost is $4.18 in excess of m> tabulated 
statement (Table I). This was due to the location of the lead. 



600 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

These poles were set in over rough ground and in a river bottom 
where we had water to contend with and the conditions were very 
unfavorable to the erection of any kind of poles. It would have cost 
considerable more to set wood poles in the same place. We were 
also obliged to use labor inexperienced on this class of work. I be- 
lieve that after the men are properly broken in and equipment work- 
ing properly, that concrete poles can actually be built for less than 
flrst-class cedar complete, set in the ground. There is no compari- 
son between wood and concrete when we take into consideration 
strength, durability, and its lack of destruction from other causes, 
such as birds, insects, lightning, etc. The more thought and test 
that the writer applies to this method of construction, the more en- 
thusiastic he has become and he expects to see the day when no 
first-class consti'uction will consider anything but steel, iron or 
concrete poles." 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Poles.* — Mr. F. J. Hunt is author of 
the following: 

The prime factors in the construction of concrete poles are the 
materials forming the grout. This is true of all concrete construc- 
tion, but particularly so in the construction of concrete poles, where 
the cross-section is small and the greatest possible tensile strength 
is desired. Unless the best quality of crushed stone and sand is 
used, desired results cannot be obtained. Fig. 3 shows the method 
of molding concrete poles on which these and the following remarks 
are based. 

The steel reinforcing rods are placed 1 in. from the surface of the 
pole in 3 sets ; four rods extend to the top of the pole, four rods 
two-thirds of the length of the pole and four rods one-third of the 
length. In testing the finished pole to destruction this distribution of 
the steel was found to be practical, giving a uniform stress from top 
to ground line. A 30-ft. pole with 6-in. top and 9-in. base deflected 
3 ft. at the top from a plumb line, and straightened when the load 
was removed without any apparent damage to the pole. A 30-ft. 
pole must stand a strain of 2,500 ft. lbs., at the groundline. The fea- 
ture to be reckoned with in the building of a line of concrete poles 
is the transportation and erection. A 30-ft. pole, with a 6-in. top, 
will weigh 2,000 lbs. It is a practical proposition to build this length 
pole in a yard, in forms on the ground. A pole of any greater length 
should be built in place, from the ground up, although I have erected 
45-ft. poles that weighed 5,600 lbs. The 30-ft. reinforced concrete 
pole can be built in Chicago for $7.50 and erected with proper equip- 
ment for ?1 each. 

The reinforced 30-ft. concrete pole with 6-in. top and 10-in. base, 
and corners chamfered to 1-in. radii contains % cu. yd. of concrete 
and 200 lbs. of steel, the cost being as follows: 

200 lbs. of steel, at $1.85 per 100 lbs $3.70 

V2 cu. yd. concrete, at $7.50 per yd 3.75 

Total $7.45 



*Enffineering-Contracting, Feb. 26, 1908. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



601 



The estimate of the cost of the finished pole is based on the fol- 
lowing prices: Crushed stone, $1.25 per cu. yd. ; sand, $1.10 per cu. 
yd. ; cement, $1.75 per bbl., and labor, 20 cts. per hr. In erecting 
concrete polos, the equipment will vary to suit the conditions. On 
traction lines, where the poles are close to the track, the most con- 
venient method of erection is to rig a hinged stifE-leg derrick on a flat 
car, with a boom of sufficient length to pick up poles on cars at 




Fig. 3. — Molding Poles. 

either end of the derrick car. This derrick should be hinged so as to 
be conveniently lowered to pass under grade-crossings and obstruc- 
tions of any nature. On steam railway construction, where the pole 
line is often 60 to 70 ft. from the track, a derrick truck with jack- 
arms is used in the same manner as the car, picking up the delivered 
poles from the ground instead of from the car. 

Bills of Materials and Cost of Concrete Poles.* — The increasing 
cost of wooden poles for telephone, telegraph, trolley line and other 
electric transmission line work is leading engineers seriously to 
search for some substitute material. This material is believed by a 
number of engineers to be reinforced concrete and within the last 
year or two there have been quite extensive studies of reinforced 
concrete pole construction. The results of some of these studies 
are given in the succeeding sections, and in connection with them the 
reader will do well to consult the article published in our issue of 
Nov. 20, 1907, describing the construction of 150-ft. transmission line 



'Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 23, 1908. 



602 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

poles for the Lincoln Light & Power Co. in Ontario and giving the 
methods adopted for computing the stresses. 

Comparative Strength Tests of Concrete and Cedar Poles. — In 1906 
two forms of reinforced concrete poles were tested in comparison 
with two 30-ft. selected cedar poles for Mr. G. A. Cellar, Superin- 
tendent of Telegraph, Pennsylvania Lines west of Pittsburg. The 
concrete poles were made and the tests conducted by Mr. Robert A. 
Cummings of Pittsburg, Pa. Both poles were 8 ins. in diameter at 
the top and 13 ins. in diameter at the base and both poles Were 
molded hollow, with shells from 1% ins. to 3 ins. thick, for about 
two-thirds of their heiglit and solid for the rest of the height. One 
pole was octagonal in section and one was square in section with 
chamfered corners. Each pole weighed approximately 3,500 lbs. 
Both poles were designed to carry 50 wires each coated with ice 
enough to make it 1 in. in diameter, and to resist a wind load of 30 
lbs. per sq. ft. The poles were assumed to stand 100 ft. apart and 
were made 30 ft. high. These conditions are approximately equiva- 
lent to a concentrated load of 1,000 lbs. applied near the top of 
the pole. The reinforcement for both poles consisted of a peripheral 
ring of eight 24-ft. bars of round steel and alternately % in. and 
% in. in diameter. "Wooden blocks were molded into the poles for 
attaching clips and braces and through holes cored for cross-arm 
bolts. Both the wooden and the concrete poles were set approxi- 
mately 5 ft. into 3x3x5 ft. concrete bases. 

Mr. Cummings describes the method of conducting the tests as 
follows : 

"The load was applied through a band 10 ins. from the top of the 
pole by means of two %-in. wire ropes which passed over two 12-in. 
sheaves near the end of an inclined A-frame. These ropes received 
the hook supporting a differential chain hoist of 5 tons capacity. 
The base of the A-frame rested freely upon the front edge of the 
concrete foundation and inclined away from the poles at an angle 
of 45°. A pulley suspended from the extreme end of the A-frame 
carried the differential hoist, the lever arm and counterweight. The 
initial load applied at the top of the pole was thus reduced to 50 lbs. 
The total amount of applied load was measured by a simple lever. 
One end of which was supported on the platform of a 2,500-lb. 
capacity weighing scale, while the other end was attached to chain 
hoist. The two acted through a rocker fulcrum suitably supported. 
The load was applied or released by operating the differential hoist, 
In applying the load the hoist would reduce the distance between the 
hooks at any rate of speed desired. A graduated rule was fastened 
at the top of the pole being tested and extended back parallel with 
the line of poles crossing the arm containing a gage pin, from which 
point deflections were read. This arm was nailed to a rigidly braced 
upright erected near the rear telegraph pole. Deflections (Table X) 
were also read 12 ins. above the foundations by means of a movable 
rule. The platform for supporting the observer reading deflections at 
top of poles was suspended from a nearby bridge. The accompany- 
ing table gives the loads and corresponding deflections of four poles 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



(J03 



tested. The white cedar poles broke about 7 ft. above the founda- 
tion. The concrete poles failed by crushing of the concrete in the 
base of poles at the level of the foundation." 

Table X. — Loads and Deflections for Four Poles Tested. 



Test 
No. 


Deflection 

at 

top, ins. 


Load, 
lbs. 


Deflection 
at bot- 
tom, ins. 


Time. 


Remarks. 






Octagonal Concrete Pole. 




1 


3% 
5% 


1,830 
2,230 


1/32 
1/16 


3:17 
3:18 




2 


8 
11% 


50 
2,630 
3,030 


1/32 


3:i9 
3:20 


Temp, deflec. — % in. 
Crks. Nos. 1 and 2. 


3 


1% 

14 y* 

18 
25 Va 


50 
3,430 
3,210 
3,150 


1/16 

% 
% 


3':24 
3:25 
3:26 


Temp, deflec. — 2 in. 
Cracks Nos. 3 and 4. 
Crk. 5 crshd. at bot. 
Pole brk. at grnd.lev. 






Square Concrete Poles. 




1 


21/2 

3V^ 


50 
1,830 
2,230 


•• 


2 :02 
2 :04 
2:08 




2 


4 Vl6 
SVa 


50 
2,630 
3,030 


i/ie 


2':i6 
2:11 


Temp, deflec. — \ in. 


3 


31 

34 Va 


50 
3,290 
3,430 


% 


2': 14 


Crk. No. 1. 


4 


21% 
39 


50 
3,690 




2:19 


Temp, deflec. — 22 ins. 
Crks. 2, 3, 4, pl.crshd 
Crkd. at grnd. lev. 




- 


Wooden Pole 


No. 1. 




1 


20 

22V4 
29 
35 

36 y^ 
38 y, 

50 
56 
66 


1,830 
2,230 
2,630 
2,870 
2,950 
3,030 
3,370 
3,430 
3,494 






11:50 
11:51 
11:52 
11:53 
11:54 
11:55 
11:56 
11:57 
12:00 


First crack. 

Pole brk. suddenly. 






"Wooden Pole 


No. 2. 




1 


14 
37 

47 


172 
2,230 
2,530 


• 




li":63 


Pole brk. suddenly. 



Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. — Fig. 4 shows the stand- 
ard reinforced concrete pole designed to support bridge wai'nings 
by Mr. Hunter McDonald, Chief Engineer, Nashville, Chattanooga 
& St. Louis Ry. Originally the pole was molded with pole, cross- 
arm and brace all of concrete and in one piece, but this was found 
too expensive and the gas pipe cross-arm and brace were substituted. 
One pole of each construction has been in use over three years. 
The one with the concrete cross-arm shows considerable bending, 
but the other does not. The bill of materials for the concrete pole 
shown by Fig. 4 is as follows : 



604 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




■.nq-Contr 



Fig. 4. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 605 

Shaft: Y2 cu. yd., platform screenings, \i cu. yd. sand, and 2% 
bags Portland cement. 

Base: IVi cu. yds. crushed stone, % cu. yd. sand, and 6 bags 
Portland cement. 

Fort Wayne d Wabash Valley Traction Co. — This company oper- 
ating some 150 miles of street and interurban trolley line proposes 
to make its renewals with concrete poles of the construction shown 
by Figs. 5 to 8. Fig. 5 shows the 4 2 -ft. pole complete and Figs. 6, 
7 and 8 show, respectively, the 32 and 30-ft. pole reinforcement. The 
weight and dimensions of the pole and the bill of material required 
are given for each size. Regarding the construction of these poles 
Mr. H. L. Weber, Chief Engineer of the road, writes : 

"The cost of constructing concrete poles depends so mucn upon 
the location of the materials with respect to the points where the 
poles are to be erected that general figures are difficult to state. 
Having several good gravel banks at convenient points along our 
right of way, which is 120 miles in length, and having our road 
already built and the equipment available for handling materials 
and poles, we have been able to build concrete poles for about the 
same cost as a wooden pole all fitted up and painted. We figure 
that a 33-ft. pole costs $7.50 and a 45-ft. pole costs $15, at pit. It is 
difl^cult to figure the cost of molds, as one mold should be good for a 
number of poles, depending on the care that is taken of it. 

Bill of Material^ Fig. 5. 
Item. Lbs. 

4 pes. %-in. X 42 ft. twisted steel bar 321.2 

8 pes. y2-in. X 32 ft. twisted steel bar 217.6 

8 pes. %-in. X 16 ft. twisted steel bar 61.2 

20 pes., total weight of steel 600.0 

Concrete, 237 cu. ft., weight 3,030.0 

Approximate weight of pole 3,630.0 

Surface area of steel 14,176 sq. in. 

Base area of steel 5,375 sq. in. 

Bill of Material, Fig. 6. 
Item. Lbs. 

12 pes. %-in. X 30-ft. twisted steel bar 172.0 

8 pes. %-in. X 20 ft. twisted steel bar 76.6 

8 pes. %-in. X 10 ft. twisted steel bar 38.3 

28 pes., total weight of steel 286.9 

Concrete, 13.7 cu. ft 1,758.0 

Approximate weight of pole 2,044.9 

Surface area of steel 10,800.0 sq. in. 

Base area of steel 3.93 sq. in. 

Bill of Material, Fig. 7. 
Item. Lbs. 

4 pes. y2-in. x 30-ft. twisted steel bar 102.0 

12 pes. %-in. x 20 ft. twisted steel bar 114.7 

8 pes. %-in. x 10-ft. twisted steel bar 38.3 

24 pes., total weight of steel 255.0 

Concrete, 13.7 cu. ft., weight 1,758.0 

Approximate weight of pole 2,013.0 

Surface area of steel 10,5 60 sq. in. 

Base area of steel 3,812 sq. in. 

No records of cost were kept. 



606 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




JX Ground 

T\T"T"; 



I 



-JV'foiofTracA _\ 



:''Lijie. of_ PQ/e__ 

,i'in iZ' PoJe.. 
{ A-ir>4l'Po/e\ 



H 












n 

i W 



J 



Cross 5ecf /on at 
Ground 

"Ena-Confr Copper PJaJ-e 

Fig. 5. — Concrete Trolley Pole. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



60V 




Elncf-contr 



j't) D a a 
Q.ya'-x>'o' 

a 
a 
a 
a Q a a 



Q Q 



D D 

a 
o 

D 



Q 

a 

D 

a a D D 



_ 944" J 



IJ 



Fig. 6. 




a 
a 

D 
D 

p 



Enq-Contr 



^y^'t-zo'O" 

zi%"-iO'o' 
D a a 



Fig. 7. 



"t 



i.J 




Fig. 8. 



1)08 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Bill of Material, Fig. 8. 
Item. Lbs. 

4 pes. %-in. X 32-ft. twisted steel bar 108.8 

8 pes. y2-in. X 24-ft. twisted steel bar 163.2 

8 pes. %-in. x 16-ft. twisted steel bar 61.2 

20 pes., total weight of steel 333.2 

Conerete, 15.1 cu. ft 1,960.0 

Approximate weight pole 2,293.2 

Surfaee area steel 9,546 sq. in. 

Base area steel 4.125 sq. in. 

Pittsburg, Ft. Wayne d CMvago By. — -In 1906 this company 
erected 53 poles for a mile of telegraph line near Maples, Ind. The 
general construction of these poles is shown by Fig. 9. They ranged 
in height from 25 to 34 ft. The 25-ft. pole shown by Fig. 9 was 
8 ins. square at the butt and 6 ins. square at the top, the corners 
being chamfered to a face 2 ins. wide, so that above ground the pole 
was octagonal. The poles were set 4 ft. into the ground, and packed 
around with stone screenings. Some of the poles were erected 
within five days after molding. 

Marshall Concrete Pole. — The following is a description of a- test 
pole mode by Mr. Wallace Marshall, Lafayette Engineering Co., ' 
Lafayette, Ind. 

"In November, 1905, I made a box form of three sides, having the 
top open, for a test pole. It was 35 ft. long. The lower 5 ft. was 
10 ins. square; commencing at that point it tapered on all sides to 
5 ins. at the top. From the 5-ft. point I put a triangular piece In 
each corner of the form of about 1 y^ ins. wide at the bottom and 1 
in. at the top to chamfer the corners of the pole. At proper places of 
a standard line pole for line bracket, cross-arms and telephone box 
I bored holes through the forms, put machine bolts through it and 
let them extend about 2 ins. in the forms, screwing the nuts the full 
length of thread. In the top of the form, which was brought to a 
round point, I placed a 1%-in. pin in the center to leave a hole or 
an insulator pin. I then filled the form with concrete mixed by 
hand consisting of 1 part of cement to 6 parts ordinary gravel, except 
a facing of about % in. of cement and sand 1 to 3. After covering 
the bottom of the form about 1% ins. I laid in the large end two 
%-in Thatcher bars 25 ft. long, and in the top part two %-ln. 
Thatcher bars, lapping them about 4 ft. I left them in the form six 
days. At the expiration of 30 days we tested it as follows: We 
planted it firmly in the ground 5 ft. deep. At 25 ft. distance we 
planted a large cedar telephone pole. At the level of 21 ft. from the 
ground we fastened a wire cable from one pole to the other, which is 
about the height of a trolley wire. In the center of this cable we 
suspended a barrel. Into this barrel we loaded steel rivets gradually 
and watched results. The two poles began to bend as the load was 
applied. When the two were deflected about 21 ins. each toward the 
other I observed a small check come in the concrete pole about 10 ft. 
from the ground, and simultaneously checks appeared from the 
cable to the ground. We immediately stopped loading, took off the 
ballast, weighted it and calculated the horizontal strain and found 
it to be 975 lbs. The maximum moment would be at the ground. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



609 



t 



I 



-h 



^ 






/ 


/ 




\ 


\ 














1 
i 
















Encj-ContT 

Fig. 9. — Concrete Telegraph Pole. 



610 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

but the guess at size we made was about right, since the concrete 
cracked from ground to cable at almost the same time. When the 
load was removed the pole resumed its plumb position and remains 
so to-day, although being used for heavy guy wires. The bolts were 
unscrewed before moving them, leaving the nuts imbedded in the 
pole. After concrete set we screwed the bolts into the nuts and 
could not loosen them with an ordinary wrench. It took several 
heavy blows with a sledge hammer to break out the top socket. My 
conclusions were, however, that a wire ring or two of reinforcement 
should be placed about the pin for safety. Careful estimates were 
made as to costs of such a pole 35 ft. long if made in quantities 
in proper forms with material at the then market price, and 
gravel in pit at $7 actual cost. Comparing that cost with present 
price of pine poles and add to the latter the cost of trimming, 
chamfering, framing and painting, the concrete pole can be made 
for less money than the wood, provided no profit is paid a 
contractor. Figuring the moments on the pole tested I found the 
concrete failed at just about the time the limit of elasticity of the 
steel was reached, providing that it would be of no value without 
the steel. I believe that the concrete pole is practicable, and the 
only reason I have not put it to practical use has been the lack of 
time to do so." 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Piles for a Building Foundation. — In 
Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 24, 1909, a paper by Sanford E. 
Thompson and Benjamin Fox is published, of which the following 
is an abstract. 

Arrange molding platform if possible so that butts of pile are 
placed to be drawn direct by pile driver. 

Design butt so that pipe connection does not interfere with snatch 
ring. Place pipe connection so that hose can be connected before 
raising pile and supporting rope will not interfere with derrick 
hook. 

If piles are made in cool weather and are to be driven in 30 
days, strengthen concrete mix at butt by working some dry cement 
into it while ramming. 

Use perfect rolls under driver to facilitate quick moving. The plan 
found best at Cambridge with the 4,700-lb. hammer was to begin 
driving by churning and water jet, using this method as long as 
possible. The chain connecting pile to hammer was then discon- 
nected and driving began with hammer drop of about 2% ft, 
increasing drop as driving became harder ; 4 ft. may sometimes be 
used at the start. 

In ground not too hard it may be advisable after completing 
churning to give the chain a slack for a %-ft. drop, and raise pile 
a little with a jerk after each blow. This appears to be effective 
only in ground soft enough so that the pile can be readily raised, 
and as it takes time to adjust chain, is hard on engine, and tends 
to start head crushing, it is of very doubtful value. 

As tip of pile should have good bearing on ground undisturbed 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 611 

by water jet, the water should be shut off before the pile is down 
to grade. 

The 8x8-in. tip was found to be slightly preferable to the lOxlO-in. 
tip in time of driving. The 2-in. jetting pipe gave the best results, 
and it is suggested for future use tliat this be reduced to 1 in. or 
1% ins. for the last 12 or 18 ins. at the tip. 

For piles of 30 ft. or less length the longitudinal reinforcement 
may be %-in. rods instead of %-in., but for piles of over 30 ft. 
computations should be made so that the longitudinal reinforcement 
will be strong enough to stand the vibrating weight of the pile 
when it is being raised to the gins of tlie machine. 

Design. — The piles as designed by Mr. Fox were made 30 ft. 6 ins. 
long, 14 ins. square at the butt end, and in general 9 ins. square at 
the tip. A number of soundings were taken at the site of the 
power house which indicated a fill of from 6 to 8 ft. ; below this to a 
depth of 29 ft. 7 ins. to 31% ft. from the surface, fine sand and 
mud (practically all may be considered sand) ; and below the sand 
a clay hard pan was reached which was tested to a depth of 13 ft. 
These tests, together with a consideration of the requirements, 
determined the length of the pile. 

Of the 48 piles which were made, 6 were 8 ins. square and 6 
were 10 ins. square instead of 9 ins. at the tip. The object of this 
variation in size of the tip was to determine which size gave the 
best results. The irregularity of water pressure proved a very 
great handicap to making accurate comparisons and also affected 
very seriously the results obtained during the actual driving of each 
pile. Enough piles were observed, however, to give fairly good 
averages. 

Averages of the time of actual driving the piles with different 
sized tips give the following results, which indicate that the 8-in. 
tip is slightly preferable in time of driving. The variation in the 
character of the ground as well as the water pressure may influence 
in a measure the relative times. 

Time Driving Piles with Different Sized Tips. 





Range in 


Average 


Size of Tip. 


Time Driving. 


Time Driving. 


Ins. 


Mins. 


Mins. 


8 


26 to 107 


66 


9 


22 to 166 


76 


10 


40 to 130 


85 



Piles were reinforced with four %-in. corrugated steel rods 
extending to within 2 ins. of the ends of the pile, and imbedded 
2 ins. from the face near the butt and 1% ins. from the face at the 
tip. Loops of %-in. corrugated bars were placed around the 
principal steel, spaced about 12 ins. apart except near the butt, 
where the spacing was decreased to 4 ins., there being 34 loops in 
all. The butts of the piles were also extra reinforced, some with 
%-in. and some with Va-in. rods, varying in length from 2 to 3 ft. 
A %-in. rod about 5 ft. long was imbedded in the concrete with a 
loop sticking out through the concrete near the top of the pile 
on one side for hooking with derrick. 



612 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A galvanized iron pipe was cast in the center of the pile for the 
water jet. For experimental purpose the sizes of pipes were varied, 
being 2 ins., 1% ins., 1^4 ins. and 1 in. To carry out the experi- 
ment still further some of the piles were made with one of the 
larger size pipes for ab.out half the length of the pile and there 
connected with one of the smaller pipes which extended down to 
the tip. 

The times of driving piles with different sizes of pipe in the 
interior of the pile were plotted, but the variation in each due to 
other causes was so great that no practical conclusion could be 
reached. The results simply indicate that the pile with 1-in. pipe 
took slightly longer to drive than the piles with larger sized pipe. 

The friction of water running through pipe of small size is very 
great, so that it is known without experimenting that the largest 
size of pipe which it is practicable to insert in a pile will give the 
least loss of head and therefore be the best. To increase the 
velocity of the water, and thus increase its power to loosen earth 
(note that it is the velocity, not the pressure, which is increased), 
the size of the tube should be reduced near the tip. The reduction 
must be made far enough from the tip of the pile to prevent 
clogging under heavy blows. There is no danger of the nozzle filling 
while the water is flowing freely, and therefore no danger while the 
pile is being churned down in the first few blows. The danger 
is apt to occur when the driving becomes hard, and at this time 
the penetration per blow is so small that it would seem that a 
nozzle 12 ins. long would be suflficient to prevent any material work- 
ing up into the larger pipe. A 2-in. pipe is probably as large as is 
practicable, and it is therefore suggested that this size be used 
to within 12 ins., or if preferred, 24 ins. from the tip, and there 
reduced to 1 in. 

Methods Employed in Making Piles. — The method of construction 
is as follows : A 2-in. platform of rough plank is built on ground 
of sufficient area to hold all of the piles. On this platform chalk 
lines are struck and V strips to form a 1-in. chamfer nailed so that 
the lines of the piles are about 6 ins. apart, alternating points and 
butts. The casting of the piles with tips and butts alternating is 
economical of space, but where the piles are cast so as to be handled 
directly by the pile driver, without any intermediate handling, it is 
best to cast them all with the butts toward the machine on account 
of the saving of time in getting the pile in the gins. Two 8-in. 
unplaned (to assist in skin friction) spruce planks form the sides of 
each pile. The piles are made in lots of about five. The outside 
form is cleated with 2x4's, and the other sides have the plank simply 
set on edge with pairs of wedges between them. There are seven 
cleats or wedges in the length, and seven pieces 2x4 nailed across 
the top of each. After setting the plank sides, beveled pieces are 
nailed to locate the upper surface and form a chamfer. 

Steel is wired together on a table consisting of plank on three 
horses. The reinforcement when made is suspended in form by two 
wires attached to each of the 2x4 cross pieces. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 613 

Two days were usually allowed before striking the forms. 

Gang Making Piles. 

One foreman 

2 laborers on miscellaneous work, at $0.25 

4 laborers wheeling and mixing concrete, at 0.25 

2 laborers ramming, at 0.25 

4 carpenters, at 0.43% 

4 steel men (2 carpenters and 2 laborers), aver- 
aging 0.40 

The concrete gank mi.xed and placed concrete in 10 piles in 10 
hours. It took 4 carpenters 3% hours each, or a total time of 15 
hours, to set up sides for 5 piles (10 sides), and 4 carpenters '^ hour 
each, or a total of 2 hours, to take down the sides for 5 piles. 
It took one carpenter and one laborer 10 hours each to wire up 5 
reinforcing frames and place them in form ready for concreting. 

Eack frame was composed of four %-in. rods in corners running 
full length of pile, i/4-in. hoops 12 ins. on centers except for 2 ft. at 
the top, wliere hoops were spaced 4 ins. on centers. Four additional 
%-in. rods 2 ft. long and a %-in. bent rod for hooking the pile 
were placed at this same end. A li/^-in. pipe was also placed in the 
center of the pile. 

The concrete was mixed by hand in the proportion of 1-2-4, using 
%-in. trap rock, the sand and cement being first made into a mortar 
and the stone added. A thorough mix is of course essential. 
Mixing was started in March, precautions being taken at night 
against possible frost and the piles wet down every day for two 
weeks. 

The age of the piles when driven ranged from 30 to 41 days, the 
larger part of them being nearer the shorter age, the average 
being 33 1/^ days. The first pile was molded on March 24 and driven 
on April 24, and during this period the temperature was low, 
averaging between 40° and 50° F., so that the piles had not attained 
nearly their full strength. After the driving was commenced the 
weather became much warmer, and the piles after the first few 
were noticeably harder and entirely satisfactory, even although the 
age was practically the same, that is, about one month. The first 
pile driven lost its water pressure when about 6 ft. below the 
surface, and during the process of driving, which reached 700 blows, 
it is probable that it broke when about half-way down. The head 
of this pile was badly crushed, whereas subsequent piles which had 
hardened more thoroughly because of the higher temperature were 
uninjured, even with a similar number of blows and higher drops 
of the hammer. 

It may be said, therefore, that a period of one month for season- 
ing piles is sufficient during, say, the months between May 1 and 
October 1, but during the colder months a longer period should be 
allowed unless artificial heat can be used to hasten hardening. 

Pile Driver and Hammer. — It was decided, after a careful in- 
vestigation of records of concrete pile driving both in this country 
and Europe, to use a 4,700-lb. hammer. With a view to the use 
of the heavy hammer and the side strains brought to bear on the 



614 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

machine by the dragging of the piles from the casting platform, a 
special driver was built. The driver was made as follows : 

Long leaf hard pine was used throughout. The bed timbers 
were 8x10 ins., 18 ft. in length, the gins 8x8 ins., 42 ft. long. The 
braces of 8x8 ins. timber were run from the bed timbers to the 
head of the machine with intermediate braces and ties to give the 
necessary rigidity. The sheave was of extra heavy pattern and the 
whole framework was bolted up and tied together with rods. The 
cushion head, which was perhaps the most essential item, as it was 
desired to avoid fracture of the pile from the blows of the 4,700-lb. 
hammer, consisted of a plate iron collar 16 ins. square on the inside 
and 3 ft. in height, which incased an oak block 16x16x18 ins. on to 
the bottom of which six thicknesses of rope and four layers of 
rubber belting were nailed. The cushion head was held in place 
in the gins of the machine by four perpendicular pieces of oak on 
the outside of the collar and bolted through the incased oak block. 
A 25-hp. Lambert engine was used and a single block for hoisting 
and churning the piles. 

The water for jetting was furnished through a 2J^-in. Bay State 
hose, using a compound piston pump having 7xl2-in. high pressure, 
and 12xl2-in. low pressure cylinders, and a capacity of 100 gallons 
per minute. This was the most unsatisfactory part of the entire 
work, the water pressure being invariable and uncertain and 125 lbs. 
the limit of pressure obtainable at the pump. 

Driving Piles. — The usual process of driving consisted, after 
moving the pile driver, in hooking and dragging the pile and lifting 
it to place and attaching the hose, or attaching the hose first and 
then hoisting. 

As already shown the casting of the piles with tips and bUtts 
alternating is economical of space, but where the piles are cast so 
as to be handled directly by the pile driver, without any inter- 
mediate handling, it is best to cast them all with the butts toward 
the machine on account of the saving of time in getting the pile 
into the gins of the machine. When the pile is cast with the butt 
end toward the machine the pile can be lifted directly into the gins, 
while, when the pile is cast with the tip end towards the machine, 
it must be chained and dragged in front of the machine before it 
can be hooked in the usual manner and lifted to place. 

Care must be taken when making the pile to place the hook for 
hoisting in relation to the projecting nozzle for jetting so that the 
hoisting rope will not foul the hose when the pile is' being raised 
into position. To facilitate setting the pile into the gins, a crutch 
of 1-in. iron was made with a~12xl2-in. square key at one end with 
a long handle to replace the peevy or cant dog ordinarily used for 
wood piles. As soon as the hose was attached and the pipe in place, 
the water was turned on and the pile usually penetrated for a short 
distance without the hammer. The hammer was then placed on 
the cushion and the pile sank further to a depth depending upon 
the nature of the fill. Next the hammer was attached to the pile 
with a chain and the churning commenced. There was enough play 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 615 

in the chain connection between the hammer and the pile to give 
about a 10-in. blow of the hammer each time the pile was lifted. 
When this churnine: became ineffective, the chain was disengaged 
and the pile was driven with blows in the usual manner. 

Gang on Pile Driving. 

1 foreman, at $0.50 per hr $ 4.00 

1 engineman, at $0.50 per hr 4.00 

1 pump man, at $0.25 2.00 

7 men, at $2.50 per 8 hrs 17.50 

Total gang per 8 hrs $27.50 

In addition to this gang 2 carpenters were called in occasionally 
for repairs, and 2 other laborers were busy most of the time in 
connection with cutting off piles, digging holes and odd work. 

Gross Times Driving. — For convenient reference gross times driv- 
ing piles are tabulated in Table I (not reproduced here) together 
with some of the more important details. The times, for example, 
are separated into "Moving Driver," "Placing Pile," "Driving" and 
"Delays;" and the "Number of Blows," the "Range in Drop" of 
hammer, and the drop and penetration under "Last Blow" are also 
given. 

The total average time per pile is 2 hrs. and 15 mins., of 
which 29 mins. is moving driver, 23 mins. placing pile and 83 
mins. driving (not including 27 mins. delays from various causes). 
This corresponds to an average of 3i/. piles per 8 hrs., which agrees 
with the time that can be figured directly from the beginning to 
end of the job. As the men became more expert in moving the 
driver and placing the piles, it was possible to reduce the time to 
1% hrs., as shown by the average during the last four days. Even 
this includes about one-half hour moving pile driver, which was 
unnecessarily long because of imperfect rolls. 

The time driving was greatly increased by the poor water pres- 
sure. Taking an average of 16 piles whose time was less than 60 
mins. and which, therefore, might be assumed to have gone down 
fairly well, the time during the driving was 44 mins., thus giving a 
total of 1 hr. and 24 mins. per pile, or 5.75 piles per day instead of 
3.5 piles per day. 

It therefore may be assumed on another jol> of similar character 
that an average of at least 5 % piles may be driven per day. By 
using perfect rolls, molding piles with butts toward pile driver, 
and using good water pressure, this number may be still further 
increased. From a study of the individual items, times may be 
selected and estimates made which will apply to other locations and 
other conditions. 

Each pile received an average of 589 blows. 

lyistances of Hard Driving. — One of the first piles that was driven 
probably struck a large bowlder at 18 ft. below the surface. The 
pile was given 735 blows, using drops of the hammer of from 
18 to 30 in. At this stage the head was so badly crushed that the 
driving was stopped and the projecting portion of the pile cut off. 
To see what effect this tremendous pounding with a 4.700-lb. hammer 



616 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

'had on the pile, after squaring off the crushed head it was sent to 
the WatertoWn Arsenal to be tested. The Arsenal report was as 
follows : 

Tests by Compkession, Concrete Pile No. 13,822. 

Length, 9 ft. 3 ins. . 

Size of butt, 12.9 ins. by 13.75 ins. 

Size of tip, 11.15 ins. by 11.75 ins. 

Weight, 1,458 lbs. 

Cross-sectional area (smaller end), 128.59 sq. ins. 

Ultimate strength, 497,000 lbs. = 3,865 lbs. per sq. in. 

Remarks. — Pile failed at smaller end, opening oblique and longi- 
tudinal cracks. 

Attention should be called to the fact that the pile failed at the 
smaller end and not at the end receiving the hammer blows. This 
indicates that the pile was not materially damaged by the severe 
hammering It received, except at the immediate point of contact. 
An examination of tests of reinforced columns at the Watertown 
Arsenal shows, for columns of the same proportions of concrete and 
same age, and reinforced with four longitudinal rods varying from 
% in. to IVs ins. a range of 2,000 to 3,000 lbs. per sq. in. based on 
the total cross section of the concrete and steel. It will, therefore, 
be seen that notwithstanding the severe treatment of the pile in 
driving, the ultimate strength was considerably higher than the 
average strength of similar columns. Evidently the strength of the 
pile was not appreciably affected by the driving or by the crushing 
of the head. 

Cost. — The cost of the materials and the labor are tabulated in 
detail in Table XI. The labor costs are taken from the timekeeper's 
record, but are sufficiently subdivided to be useful for other jobs 
of a different character. The items which vary directly with the 
number of piles are separated from the costs which are independent 
of the number of piles, but must be applied to any job as a constant 
expense. Only a few items depend upon the character of the ground. 

The lumber for the forms (except the platform) is assumed to 
be a constant for any job, because it can be used over and over. 
The size of the platform must vary with the number of piles. 

The pile driver for any one job is figured at 25 per cent of the 
initial cost for depreciation and interest, but the cost of repairs is 
included in the items which vary with the number of piles. 

The costs which are variable are given per linear foot of pile 

for subsequent use. It will be seen that the total cost per linear 

foot of pile on this particular job was about $1.63. If the length 

of piles differed greatly from those given, it might, be necessary 

still further to separate the cost to provide for this. 

A study of the various items taken in connection with a study 
of the detail times suggests various places where the cost may 
be altered for other jobs. 

For example, an inspection of the costs shows that the cost of 
the reinforcing steel is over one-third the cost of the piles. From 
the fact that piles withstood the severe usage given by the pile 
driving, it is probable, if the piles are not over 30 ft. long, that 
%-in. steel instead of %-in. could be used for the corner rods. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 



(517 



Table XI. — Cost op Driving Piles on B. W. H. & R. Company Job. 

Per lin. ft. 

Total, of pile. 

(1) 6.000 ft. B. M. plank for platform @ $0.25.4. .$ 37.50 $0.0256 
(Liumber cost $25 per thousand and assumed 

to be used for four times.) 

(2) 360 ft. B. M. for chamfer @ $30 10.50 0.0072 

(3) 25 lb. spikes for platform (ai .03 

(4) 20 lb. yd. @ .03 

(5) 8 lb. 4d. @ .04 1.67 0.0011 

(6) 50 tons crushed stone @ $1.50 75.00 0.0512 

(7) 18y2 yd. sand @ $1.00 18.50 0.0126 

(8) 691/2 bbl. cement @ $1.82 126.49 0.0864 

(9) 192 pes. % in. by 30 corrugated bars, 15,333 

lb., @ 2.65c 406.32 0.2670 

(10) 3414-in. bars, by 48 piles by 5 ft. in., 1,958 

lb., @ 3.00c 58.74 0.0401 

Cll) 8,160 ft. No. 14 wire, 163 1/5 lb., @ $0.04ya 7.34 0.0050 

(12) 4 pes. Vi-in. bars by 48 piles by 2 ft. 6 in. = 

480 ft. = 408 lbs., @ $2.85 11.62 0.0079 

(13) 48 2-in. nipples, 12 in. long, @ $0.15 7.20 0.0049 

(14) 48 2-in. by ly^-in. ells, @ $0.12 5.76 0.0039 

(15) 1,440 ft. g. i. pipe @ $3.51 per 100 50.56 0.0346 

(16) 48 hooks, @ $0.25 12.00 0.0082 

(17) Bending and placing reinforcement 122.62 0.0838 

(18) Labor on pile platform 33.03 0.0226 

(19) Labor on forms 83.72 0.0572 

(20) Labor on concrete 111.07 0.0751 

(21) Superintendence 31.20 0.0213 

(22) Pile driving labor 399.42* 0.2722t 

(23) Cutting slot in tip of pile 3.00 0.0020 

(24) Repairs to pile driver and cushion 22.40 0.0152t 

(25) Cutting off broken piles 23.51 0.0161t 

(26) Rent of engine 30.00 0.0207 

(27) Superintendence 42.00 0.0286t 

Total cost $1,731.17 

Cost per ft. varying with number and length 

of piles $1.1705 

Items Constant for Each Job. 

(28) 2,800 ft. B. M. plank for pile sides @ 25.4...$ 17.50 

(29) 300 ft. B. M. plank for ends @ $25 7.50 

(30) Pile driver 25% of $198.21 49.55 

(31) Getting ready, 2 days, @ $30 60.00 

(32) Teaming, pile driver, etc 34.55 

(33) Removing driver 34.61 

Total cost per job $ 203.71 0.1391 

Total estimated net cost per lin. ft. job has 48 piles $1.3096 
Add 2b%. for pumping, connections, contingencies 

and profit .3274 



$1.63 



♦After deducting $60 assumed as constant "getting ready." 
tOnly items affected by character of ground. 

with extra reinforcement near the butt, as in the present case. The 
size of these rods can be determined by figuring the stress in them 
during the process of raising the pile to place. The pile is then 
a beam supported at the ends and carrying its own weight, which 
must at least be doubled to provide for swaying incident to the 



(il8 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

raising. The cost of the item of steel and labor would in such 
cases be varied accordingly. 

The labor on concrete appears large, and might probably be 
reduced on another similar job from $111 to about $74. This Is 
based on the fact that, while on the average only 6 . piles were 
made, toward the latter part of .the making 9 piles were made 
on one day and 10 piles on another, so that an average of 8 piles 
should be possible with the given gang. This is especially probable 
because the cost of making and placing the concrete was $2.32 per 
pile, or $2.25 per cu. yd., whereas the writer's data on hand mixing 
indicate that the cost should not have exceeded $1.50 per yd. 

"With reference to the time and cost of the driving, it must be 
taken into consideration that the job was a small one, only 48 piles 
being needed ; that the work was of an untried character ; and also 
that the conditions were unfavorable, especially as regards the water 
pressure. On a large job, in ordinary ground, where large stones 
or obstructions are not likely to be encountered, the number of 
piles driven per day should be greatly increased. A study of the 
detail log of the driving tests and a comparison of these times With 
detail records taken on other jobs, indicate that the average time per 
pile driven with the aid of a water jet may be easily reduced to 
one hour, while if the ground is very soft, the average time per pile, 
including the moving of the driver, need not be over 40 mins. 
One hour per pile corresponds to 8 piles per eight-hour day, instead 
of 3% piles per day. The estimated time on the items near the 
foot of the cost table, which is inversely proportional to the total 
number of piles given, would be decreased on a job having 200 
piles from $0,139 to $0,035 per foot of pile. This, together with 
the reductions noted above, and the assumption of 8 piles driven 
per eight nours, would bring the estimated cost per linear foot 
down to $1 net, or, with 25 per cent allowance for pump hose 
connections, incidentals and profits, to $1.25 per linear foot. In soft 
ground, and where conditions are specially favorable, a still lower 
estimate is possible. 

A few of the items, such as the nipples and short bars, are 
constant per pile, that is, are independent of the lengths of the 
pile, so that in a close estimate for longer or shorter piles they 
should be separated out or allowed for by inspection. 

As it assumed in the estimate in the last column that 5% piles 
are driven in 8 hrs., the total cost for harder or softer ground 
can be estimated by assuming the number of piles to be driven 
per day and varying the items marked with a t accordingly. 

Records of six of the typical piles are plotted and the curves 
are shown on the diagram (Fig. 10). 

The full curves in Fig. 10 show the portion of the driving where 
the water pressure was on and the dotted lines the driving after 
it had been cut off by the filling of the pipe at the tip of the pile. 
This stoppage was not necessarily due to the design of the pile or 
to the method of driving, but chiefly to the insufficient capacity ot 
the pump. 

The flattening out of the curves indicates difficulties in driving, 



CONCRETE COXSTRUCTION. 



Ci9 



Penetration in Feet. ^ 
^ > »» N 

_§ S s_ 




Fig. 10. — Records of Pile Driving. 



620 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

usually because of the poor water pressure. In certain cases Irreg- 
ularities indicate the striking of obstructions, and when the pile Is 
slightly jerked ground is lost instead of gained. 

Curves of piles N, F and Y are given to show good driving, the 
pressure remaining on most of the time, and the total net time, 
omitting all unnecessary delays, being from 23 to 30 mins. 

Piles F and Y show also that if a greater drop of hammer had 
been used at the start they would probably have approached nearer 
the N. 

In driving pile N at 24-ft. depth, the hammer was allowed just to 
tap the top of the pile with no impact, and the pile being slightly 
churned, the loss of progress is shown by slight drop in curve. Then 
by increasing the height of the blow it started down again. Time, 23 
mins. with 118 blows. 

On pile F they first began jerking the pile after each blow, anil 
this method appears to be effective provided ground is soft enough 
actually to lift pile readily. In hard ground it is ineffective. Drop 
of hammer was increased from 0.5 to finally 4 ft. Time driving, 
24 minutes with 185 blows. 

Pile Y was not churned or lifted after first blow or two, but 
went down with light blows. Time, 30 mins., 225 blows. Pres- 
sure good. 

The curve of pile B is given to illustrate hard driving, due to 
lack of water pressure. The water pressure stopped at ll^^-ft., as 
shown by the sudden break in curve at this point. Total time 
driving pile was 83 mins. with 895 blows. 

In the curve of pile O there is an interesting break at the depth 
of about 20 ft., where an effort was made to assist the pile by 
churning or jerking, and ground was lost by doing so, and the 
pipe was also allowed to plug. As soon as the hammer was allowed 
to drop in the usual way the penetration began again, but 647 blows 
and 70 mins. by net time were required to carry it to its full 
depth. At a depth of 2i^ ft. an obstruction was met, as indicated 
by the curve, and a small broken piece of timber came tip beside the 
pile. Another reason for the flat curve of pile O is that the ground 
was unusually hard. 

Pile 17 was driven in an experimental fashion to determine the 
effect of the jerk at the end of each blow. The curve is uniform 
throughout, showing that this jerk is absolutely ineffective in hard 
ground. In this pile, as noticed, the height of drop was increased 
to 8% ft. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Piles for an Ocean Pier.* — In re- 
constructing in reinforced concrete the old steel pier at Atlantic 
City, N. J., some 116 reinforced concrete piles 12 ins. in diameter 
were molded in air and sunk by jetting. The piles varied in length 
with the depth of the water, the longest being 34% ft. Their con- 
struction is shown by the accompanying drawing (for these draw- 
ings see Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction"), which also 



* Engineering Contracting, Nov. 28, 1906. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 621 

show the floor girders carried by each pair of piles and forming 
with tliem a bent, and the struts bracing tlie bents together. In 
molding and driving the piles the old steel pier was used as a 
working platform. 

The forms for the piles were set on end on small pile platforms 
located close to the positions to be occupied by the piles and were 
braced to the old pier. The forms were of wood and the bulb 
point, the shaft and the knee braces were molded in one piece. 
Round iron rods were used for reinforcement. The concrete was 
composed of 1 part Vulcanite Portland cement, 2 parts of fine and 
coarse sand mixed and 4 parts of gravel 1 in. and under In size. 
The mixture was made wet and was puddled into the forms with 
bamboo fishing rods, which proved very efficient in working the 
mixture around the reinforcing rods and in getting a good mortar 
surface. The concrete was placed in small quantities ; it was mostly 
all hand mixed. The forms were removed in from 5 to 7 days, 
depending on the weather. 

The piles were planned to be sunk by water jet and to this 
end had molded in them a 2-in. jet pipe as shown. They were sunk 
to depths of from 8 ft. to 14 ft. into the beach sand. Water from 
the city water mains at a pressure of 65 lbs. per sq. in. was used 
for jetting ; this water was furnished under special ordinance at a 
price of $1 per pile, and a record of the amount used per pile was 
not kept. The piles were swung from the molding platforms and 
set by derricks and block and fall. The progress of jetting varied 
greatly owing to obstructions in places in the shape of logs, old 
Iron pipes, etc. In some cases several days were required to get rid 
of a single pipe. In clear sand, with no obstructions, a 12-in. pile 
could be jetted down at the rate of about 8 ft. per hour, working 1 
foreman and 6 men. The following is the itemized actual cost of 
molding and sinking a 26-ft. pile with bulb point and knee braces 
complete : 

Cost per 
Forms. Total. pile. 

Lumber, 340 ft. B. M. @ $30 $10.20 

Labor (carpenters @ $2.50 per day) 12.00 . . . . ■ 

Oil, nails, oakum, bolts, clamps, etc 1.20 .... 

$23.40 $ 3.90 
Times used 6 .... 

Reinforcement. 
275 lbs. of plain %-in. steel rods @ 2 cts. 

per lb $ 5.50 .... 

Preparing and setting, 4/10 ct. per lb 1.10 6.60 

Jet Pipe. 
26% ft. of 2-in. pipe @ 10 cts. per ft. in 
place 2.65 

Setting Forms. 
6 men @ $2.50 per day =: $15, set 4 piles ... ■3.75 

Material. 

90/100 cu. yds. gravel @ $1.50 per yd 1.35 

45/100 cu. yds. sand @ $1.50 per yd 67 

1.50 bbls. cement @ $1.60 2.40 4.42 



622 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

Concrete and labor foreman 3.00 ' .... 

6 laborers, mixing and placing by hand, 

$1.75 each 10.50 

$13.50 $ 3.38 
Average number of piles concreted per day 4 .... 

Removing Forms. 
4 men @ |2.50 remove and clean in half 

day 4 columns 1.25 

1 man @ $2.25 plastering column with 

cement grout (4 per day) .56 

Jetting 10 ft. into Sand. 

Foreman $ 3.00 

4 men, $2.25 each, handling hose and 

traveler 9.00 .... 

$12.00 $ 3.00 

Average number of piles jetted per day. . . 4 .... 
City water pressure used for jetting @ 

$1.00 per pile 1.00 

Superintendence @ $5.00 per day 1.25 

Caring for trestle, traveler, material, etc. ... 4.84 

Total cost per pile $36.G0 

The pile being 26 ft. long, the cost in place was $1.41 per foot. 
Subtracting the cost of sinking, amounting to $7.09 per pile, we have 
the cost of a 26-ft. pile molded and ready to sink coming to about 
$1.10 per foot. It should be noted that this is the cost for a pile 
of rather complicated construction ; a plain cylindrical pile should be 
less expensive. 

During a visit to Atlantic City one of the editors of this journal 
took occasion to examine closely these 12-in. piles. They were 
then about four or five months old, and were in all respects as 
sound and smooth examples of concrete work as could be wished. 
The surface texture of the piles was notably good ; the piles appeared 
to have a surface film or skin.wliich he then took to be some saline 
incrustation coming from the sea water. A statement since received 
from Mr. D. A. Keefe Consulting Engineer, Athens, Pa., who was 
resident engineer of the pier work, and to whom we are indebted 
for the figures of cost given above, mentions that the piles are cov- 
ered With a coating of organic and inorganic nature which fills the 
pores of the concrete and will in time form a coating of considerable 
thickness which should have the effect of shutting out the sea water 
and preventing any disintegration. In conclusion, it should be noted 
that the design of the concrete steel work employed in reconstruct- 
ing this pier was worked out by the Concrete Steel Engineering Co., 
of New York City, and that the contractors for the work were C. W. 
Snyder & Co., of Atlantic City, N. J. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Pile Dike.* — The work described 
Is a relpforced concrete pile dike built opposite St. Joseph, Mo., 
on the Missouri River improvement work. This is the first dike of 
reinforced concrete to be constructed on the Missouri River and 



'Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 20, 1909. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 623 

is an experiment to secure a better and more durable structure 
than is provided by tlie usual timber pile dike having a life of from 
7 to 10 years. Several plans were considered and are described by 
Maj. Edward H. Schulz. 

The plans considered besides the one adopted were: (1) Sinking 
a core with shell, withdrawing core, and filling the shell witli 
concrete; (2) casting the pile In place, the form being gradually 
removed as the filling proceeds; (.3) rolling and making the pile 
on the ground by special machine. The adopted plan was to use 
cast piles of rectangular or octagonal section and to drive them 
by hammer and water jet combined. Bids were asked for supervis- 
ing the work and furnishing forms and reinforcement, the Govern- 
ment to furnish all other materials, to make the piles and to drive 
them. The lowest bid was 80 cts. per lin. ft. of pile. 

The dike structure consists of 3-pile bents connected at tops of 
piles, and at about water level with horizontal transverse and longi- 
tudinal braces. The lengtli of tlie dike is 150 ft., of whicli 40 ft. 
at the shore end consists of timber piles. A length of 110 ft. was 
constructed of concrete piles. The bracing was all wood except in 
two panels, where as an experiment concrete braces were used. 
The total number of concrete piles was 36, varying in lengtli from 32 
to 50 ft., and having a total length of 1,457 lin. ft. The piles were 
14 ins. square at top and 8 ins. square at the point. Eacla was 
reinforced with 4 1-in. bars tied every IS ins. witli 1^/4 -in. bars. The 
concrete was a 1:2:4 mixture, using Ash Grove Portland cement 
and 1-in. stone. The piles were driven at the age of 10 days ; the 
average penetration was 21 ft. 

The piles were cast on a foreshore at an elevation of about 6 ft. 
above tlie deck of a barge in the river. Skids were placed from 
the foreshore to the bai-ge, and as the forms were removed the piles 
were slid on-board, somewhat similar to the handling of wooden 
timbers of like size. The approximate weight of a 50-ft. pile is 
8,700 lbs. 

On account of the excessive weight of these piles over wooden 
piles of the same length, wire cable was used, using a single and 
double block for increasing the purchase. The hitch for raising the 
head of the pile was placed about 8 ft. from head. The ordinarj' 
pile line was used to raise the point of pile, the sling being placed 
about 15 ft. from the small end of pile. This arrangement takes 
the spring out of the pile. The catenary of a 50-ft. pile is about 
5 ins. without injury to pile. 

A device, known as a guide, was placed around the pile near the 
head in such manner as to hold the pile squarely in the leads. The 
pump used was a single cylinder, double action, 6-in. suction, 3-in. 
discharge, 1%-in. nozzle, 60 strokes per min., and 80 lbs. steam pres- 
sure. A piece of l^^-in. pipe was placed in the end of the pile, to 
which the jet was attached. Other than this the method of sinking 
was the same as for wooden piles of like size. 

The piles were driven near shore, where unusual difficulties ex- 
isted, due to parts of old dike and rock buried in river bed. Under 



624 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

normal conditions, where only sand is encountered, the pile was 
jetted in 3 to 5 mins. ; no hammer was used, but occasionally the 
pile itself was lifted and dropped to hasten the work. It is believed 
a judicious use of jet and hammer will be found advisable for future 
work. 

Tliis dike was examined after going through an ice and flood 
season and was found to have stood very satisfactorily. Not a pile 
or concrete brace was injured, though several wooden braces were 
broken. Should results continue with similar success, it is probable 
that concrete dikes will receive serious consideration as a permanent 
substitute for timber piles on river regulation. 

The cost of the dike was as follows: 

Per 

Item. Total. lin. ft. 

Supervising, forms and steel rods $1,200.00 $0.8236 

86% bbls. cement at $1.25 108.44 0.0743 

55.9 tons crushed stone at $1.30 72.67 0.0498 

32 cu. yds. sand at 20 cts 6.40 0.0043 

Labor on forms 117.00 0.0803 

Labor making piles 257.70 0.1768 

Labor driving piles 215.00 0.1475 

Total $1,977.21 $1.3566 

In regard to these figures Mr. Schulz says : "The actual cost, de- 
ducting profit of contractor and cost of special supervision, would be 
$1 per ft. On extensive work this could probably be reduced to 
40 cts. per lin. ft. of pile, as compared to 20 cts. for long-leaf yel- 
low pine." 

Cost of Raymond Concrete Piles.* — The following figures of the 
cost of constructing concrete piles by the Raymond process have 
been computed from records obtained in constructing the pile founda- 
tions for the concrete laundry building of G. L. Hooper & Sons, of 
Salem, Mass. The building is of concrete throughout, the walls 
being of concrete block and the columns, floors and roofs of re- 
inforced concrete. There are four stories and the general dimensions 
are 60 x 100 ft. The floor and wall loads are transferred to wall 
columns and to two rows of interior columns. The columns are 
spaced 14 ft. apart on centers in one direction and 19 ft. in the 
other direction. Each column and its footing rests upon four con- 
crete piles spaced 3 ft. apart on centers in the form of a square. 
The spandrels between wall columns are reinforced concrete. The 
groups of four piles are each capped with a concrete slab 5 ft. 6 ins. 
square and 24 ins. thick, making the projection of the capping be- 
yond the center of the piles 15 ins. Each pile was finished so as to 
allow a projection into the capping of 6 ins. A concrete chimney, 
48 ins. in diameter and 100 ft. high, located at one corner of the 
building, is supported upon a group of nine piles. Bach of these 
piles has embedded in it a steel rod which projects into the walls of 
the chimney, forming an anchorage. 

As firm bearing soil was some distance below the ground, piling 
of some sort was necessary, and wood piles were originally consid- 



*Engineermg-Contracting, Feb. 13, 1907. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 025 

ered. This would have made it necessary to cut off the wood piles 
below low tide, a distance of 12 ft. below the level of the ground 
floor, and using a large amount of concrete in the stepped footings 
above. Instead, concrete piles were used which were cut off 5 ft. 
below the ground floor, effecting considerable saving of concrete 
foundations. Another feature which made the use of concrete piles 
desirable in this instance was the fact that the site of the building 
was formerly occupied by an old wharf, the timbers of which were 
many of them yet in the ground. Had wood piles been used, difficul- 
ties would probably have been experienced due to the "brooming" of 
the piles when striking such obstructions. With the steel driving 
form used for the concrete piles, delays from this source were 
avoided. The piles are designed for a load of 30 tons each, and each 
takes the place of two wooden piles in the original design. They 
are 6 ins. in diameter at the small end and have a uniform taper 
each side of the center of Vs in. to a foot, making a 21-ft. pile 20 ins. 
in diameter at the top. 

In constructing concrete piles by the Raymond process, as many 
of our readers will remember, a thin steel shell enveloping a metal 
core is driven and then the core is collapsed and withdrawn, leaving 
the shell, which is afterwards filled with concrete in which metal 
is embedded if a reinforced pile is desired. In this particular work 
no reinforcement was used in the piles. 

The piles were driven by means of a No. 2 Vulcan steam hammer, 
with a plunger having a weight of 3,000 lbs. and a fall of about 3 ft., 
delivering 60 blows per min. A steel driving form encased in a shell 
of about No. 20 gage iron was first driven to the required depth ; the 
steel driving form was then withdrawn, leaving the shell in place, 
and the concrete afterwards deposited in this shell. A total of 172 
piles were driven, the minimum lengtli being 14 ft. and the maxi- 
mum 37 ft., the average being about 20 ft. Sixteen working days 
were occupied in driving the piles after the driver was in position, 
driving being commenced Aug. 17 and completed Sept. 6, 1906. The 
greatest number driven in one day was 20, and the average was 11 
piles per day. When in position for driving the average time re- 
quired to complete driving was 12 mins. The total number of blows 
varied from about 310 to 360, the average being about 350. The 
piles were driven until the penetration produced by 8 to 10 blows 
equalled 1 in. When in full operation, a crew of 5 men operated 
the pile driver. Seven men were engaged in making the concrete 
and 5 men working upon the metal shells. 

Assuming the ordinary organization and the wages given below, 
W8 have the following labor cost per day : 

1 foreman at $5 $ 5.00 

1 engineman at $3 3.00 

4 laborers on driver at $1.75 7.00 

6 laborers making concrete at $1.75 10.50 

5 laborers handling shells at $1.75 8.75 

Total $34.25 

As 172 piles averaging 20 ft. in length were driven in 16 days. 



ti2{i HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the total labor cost of driving, given by the figures above, is 
16X$34.25 = $548, or practically 16 cts. per lin. ft. of pile driven. 

The concrete used in the piles was a 1 : 3 : 5 Portland cement, sand 
and 1%-in. broken stone mixture. A 20-ft. pile of the section de- 
scribed above contains about 20 cu. ft. of concrete, or say 0.75 cu. yd. 
We can then figure the cost of concrete materials per pile as follows : 

0.85 bbl. cement at $1.60 $1.36 

0.36 cu. yd. sand at $1 . . 0.36 

0.60 cu. yd. stone at $1.25 0.75 

Total per pile $2.47 

The steel shell has an area of about 72 sq. ft., and as No. 20 gage 
steel weighs 1.3 lbs. per sq. ft., its weight for each pile was about 
94 lbs. Assuming the cost of coal, oil, etc., at $2.50 per day, we have 
the following summary of costs: 

Per lin. ft. 
of pile. 

Labor driving and concreting $0.16 

Concrete materials 0.123 

94 lbs. steel shell at 3 cts 0.145 

Coal, oil, etc 0.011 

Total $0,439 

This cost does not include interest on plant, cost of moving plant 
to and from work and general expenses, nor royalty on the Ray- 
mond patent. 

The contract was awarded for a fixed number of lineal feet of pile 
at the rate of $1.50 per lin. ft., with a provision for additional 
length of piling to be furnished at $1.40 per lin. ft., the contractors 
providing all -tools, machinery, material and labor required for the 
work. The owners, through the contractor for the building proper, 
made the necessary excavations and provided clear and level space 
for the pile driver, braced all trenches. 

For the cost of Raymond piles at another place, see "Concrete 
Construction" by Gillette and Hill. 

Cost of Rolled Concrete Piles.* — The abutments of the Chicago 
& Northwestern Ry. bridge over the Root River at Racine, Wis., are 
founded on reinforced concrete piles manufactured by the Cheno- 
weth rolling process. The cost of these piles is given by Mr. L. 
C. Winkelhaus as follows : "The contract price for these piles was 
60 cts. per lin. ft., or $9.60 per pile 16 ft. long. The, railway com- 
pany furnished all the materials, costing $6.46 par pile, or 40 cts. 
per ft. The general contractor received 50 cts. per ft. for driving, or 
$8. Hence, the cost to the railway company was $24.06 per pile in 
place, or $1.50 per ft. The cost to the American Concrete Co. for 
rolling was 25 cts. per ft., or $4 per pile, approximately. The 
machine and plant cost the concrete company about $3,000. How- 
ever, this machine can be moved from place to place and used a 
great many times, as it is all bolted together." 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 027 

The method of making concrete piles by rolling, and detailed cost, 
will be found in "Concrete Construction" by Gillette and Hill. 

Cost of Simplex Piles. — Mr. Constantine Shuman gives the fol- 
lowing relative to work done in Pittsburg in 1904 : 

One gang working on Simplex piles 30 ft. long averaged 450 lin. 
ft. per day, or 15 piles, but the best day's work was 31 piles, or 
930 lin. ft. The crew was as follows, and I have assumed rate of 
wages, etc. : 

Per day. 
1 foreman ? 4.00 

1 engineman 3.00 

2 winch head men, at $1.75 3.50 

3 riggers, at $2.00 6.00 

Total pile driver gang $16.50 

6 concrete mixers, at $1.75 10.50 

Total gang $27.00 

Rent of driver and apparatus, and fuel 18.00 

Total, exclusive of materials $45.00 

This is equivalent to 10 cts. per lin. ft. 

The piles are 17 ins. diameter, composed of l:2i/a:5 mixture. 
There are 1 .58 cu. ft., or 0.059 cu. yd. per lin. ft. of pile. 

For description of methods of making Simplex piles and the spe- 
cial pile points, see Reid's "Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Con- 
struction." 

Cost of Concrete Oil Tank.* — Mr. C. F. Leonard gives the fol- 
lowing data: 

The wall forms a building housing a circular steel oil tank ; it is 
42 ft. inside diameter, 25 ft. high and 12 ins. thick. The reinforce- 
ment consists of %-in. twisted steel rods located 2 ins. inside the ex- 
terior face and spaced apart from 3i^ ins. at the bottom to 30 ins. 
at the top. Vertical rods 9 ft. apart around the wall held the hori- 
zontal rods in place. To tie the wall to the bottom L-shaped i^-in. 
rods 7 ft. long were used. Lap splices 33 ins. long were employed. 

The forms were made in panels 6x8 ft., of %-in. spruce boards 
6 ins. wide dressed on one side and both edges and nailed to three 
segments of 2 x 12-in. plank cut to curve. For the first three shifts 
the forms were braced on both sides. A %-in. rope with turnbuckles 
was passed around the steel tank, and the forms were drawn against 
spacing blocks, set between the steel tank and the inside form and 
also between forms, by wire ties fastened to the wire rope. The out- 
side panels were also braced from the ground. Above this level 
the panels were held in position by bolts through the concrete wall. 

The concrete for the bottom 15 ft. of the wall was a 1:2:3% 
1-in. stone mixture ; above this level the cement content was re- 
duced. It was mixed wet by hand and wheeled up inclines to the 
tops of the forms. The first ring 5% ft. high, was concreted in one 
day ; afterwards the forms were shifted for about one-third the cir- 
cumference at a time and the concreting was done in a spiral course. 



* Engineering-Contracting , Oct. 21, 1908. 



628 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Grooved joints were made whenever work was stopped. Frames for 
windows and doors were cast separately and set in place as the 
concreting progressed. The wall was painted with two coats of neat 
cement both inside and outside. 

The cost of the wall was as follows: 

Item. Per cu. yd. 

Cement at $1.70 per bbl $ 2.81 

Sand at $1.35 per cu. yd 0.66 

Stone at $1.20 per ton 1.42 

Labor at $1.75 per 9 hrs 4.25 

Reinforcement 1.65 

Lumber, nails and supplies 1.46 

Carpenters' labor 5.25 

Total $17.50 

The cost of carpenter work was over twice what it should have 
been, owing to local conditions. 

Cost of Concrete Tanks, References. — See section on Waterworks 
for data on this subject. Also see Chapter XXI, Methods and Cost 
of Construction Reservoirs and Tanks, in Gillette and Hill's "Con- 
crete Construction." 

Cost of Small Cement Pipes.* — Mr. Albert E. Wright is author 
of the following: The pipe discussed here was 6 to 12 ins. 
inside, made of Portland cement and clean, sharp sand of all 
sizes up to very coarse. The mortar was mixed rather dry, but very 
thoroughly, using 14.1 cu. ft. of sand to 1 bbl. of cement, or very 
closely a 1 to 4 mixture. From six to seven buckets of water were 
used to each barrel of cement, except for the 6-in. pipe, for which 
the mortar had to be made somewhat stiffer in order to remove • 
the inner form, which is not made collapsible as in the larger sizes. 

The forms were sheet iron cylinders with a longitudinal lap joint 
that could be expanded after molding the pipe, and removed with- 
out injuring the soft mortar. The inner form was self-centering, 
so that there was little variation in the thickness of the pipe. 

Four men are required in making cement pipe by hand ; one mixes 
the mortar, and wheels it to the place of work ; another throws it 
into the form a little at a time with a' hand scoop ; a third rams 
it with a tamping iron, and a fourth keeps the new pipe sprinkled, 
and applies a coat of neat cement slurry to the inside when it is 
sufficiently hard. In molding, the form of the bell at the bottom is 
secured by an iron ring that is first dropped into the form, and 
the reverse or convex form at the top is made with a second ring. 
While still in its form the pipe is rolled or lifted into its place in the 
drying yard, and the form is then carefully removed. A very slight 
blow in removing the form will destroy the pipe, and a considerable 
number, especially of the larger sizes, collapse in this way, and 
have to be remolded. To avoid ha.ndling, the pipe is Stacked on end 
a few feet from the place of mixing, the form being moved as the 
yard fills with pipe. One crew of four men can make about 25© 
joints or 500 lin. ft. of pipe a day. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 4, 1907. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 629 

As soon as hard enougli, the pipe is turned end for end, and is then 
kept wet for several weelts before being laid. The coating of neat 
cement on the inside is applied with a short whitewash brush, and is 
a small item in the cost. In laying, the trench is carefully finished 
to grade in order to have the joints close nicely, and the ends are 
well wet with a brush. The mason then spreads mortar, mixed 1 to 
2, on the end of the pipe, and lays a bed of mortar at the bottom of 
the joint. I-Ie then jams the section into place, and swabs out the 
inside of the joint with a stiff brush, to insure a smooth passage for 
the water. A band or ring of mortar is spread round the outside of 
the joint as an additional reinforcement. One barrel of cement will 
joint about 300 sections of pipe. The materials cost as follows: 
Portland cement, per bbl., $4.45 ; labor, per day, $2 ; foremen, per 
day, $2.50 to $3; hauling, per load mile (1 cu. yd.), 20 cts. ; sand, 
free at pit ; water, free. 

The pipe was all of a 1:4 sand and cement mortar, and the 
amount of cement in one foot of pipe is arrived at by assuming as 
in Gillette's "Hand Book of Cost Data" that where the sand has 
voids in excess of the cement used, the mortar will occupy 1.1 times 
the space of the dry sand, which yields the following formula : 
Where — 

c=cost per bbl. of cement, or $4.45. 

n = cu. ft. in one bbl. (taken at 3.5 here). 

s = ratio of sand to cement, or 4. 

d = inside diameter in Inches. 

t = thickness of pipe in inches. 

I = length of pipe considered, or 1 ft. here. 

Then: 

cXlXTrX(dt+t^) 

Cement-cost per foot = , 

nXsXl. 1X144 

4.45X1X3.142 (dt+t2) 

which gives here = 

3.5X4X1.1X144 

=: 0.00631 idt + t-). 

This gives the following cement costs per lineal foot : 
Diameter, Thickness, Cost 

ins. ins. per foot. 

6 11/4 $0.0571 

8 1% 0.0730 

10 1% 0.0998 

12 11/2 0.1278 

The sand cost is based on 15 cts. per cu. yd. for loading, and a 
haul of two miles of 1 cu. yd. to the load, making five trips per day, 
at $4 for man and team. It bears a constant ratio to cement cost, 
being 11.2% of the cement cost. The labor cost of making is based 
on the foreman's estimate that a foreman, tamper, mortar mixer, 
and water man should finish 250 joints a day of 6 or 8-in. pipe. For 
the 10 and 12-in. pipe, the labor is assumed to be greater in pro- 
portion to the material. The foreman is taken at $3, one man at 
$2.50 and two at $2. The cement for painting the inside is neglected. 
Hauling the pipe to place is taken at twice the cost of hauling the 



030 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

sand per niile, and a haul of 4 miles is assumed. The cost of laying 
is based on a foreman's estimate of 2 cts. per foot for trench, anJ 
that one man to lay, one man to plaster the joints, one helper and 
one man to backfill will lay 600 ft. per day of 6 or 8-in. pipe. The 
larger sizes are assumed to cost more in proportion to their material. 
These various costs give the following results for small size pipe 
us made and laid at Irrigon, Ore., for the Oregon Land & Water Co. : 

Cost per foot for 

6-in. 8-in. 10-in. 12-in. 
pipe. pipe. pipe. pipe. 

Cement $0,057 $0,073 $0,099 $0,128 

band 0.006 0.008 0.011 0.014 

Labor 0.019 0.019 0.026 0.034 

Hauling 0.024 0.032 0.044 0.056 

Layinc,- 0.024 0.024 0.032 0.042 

Trench 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 

Totals $0.15 $0.18 $0.23 $0.29 

The above costs show that the pipe in place costs about twice as 
r.iuch as pipe in the yard, even with cement at $4.45, and illustrates 
the danger of accepting cement manufacturers' estimates Without 
examining local conditions, especially as to handling. 

(For further data on cement pipes, see the sections on Water- 
woi-ks and on Sewers.) 

Cost of Concrete Pipe.* — The following estimates of cost of con- 
crete pipe manufactured by force account on the Shoshone Project 
are based on the results of five days' work in November, 1907. The 
cost of cement was $3.05 per bbl., of sand about $1.40 per cu. yd., 
and of labor $5 per day for 1 foreman, $3 per day each for 2 men 
and $2.75 per day each for 2 men. Plant depreciation and admin- 
istrative expenses are not included in the unit costs given. The 
concrete was made of 1 part cement and 3 parts sand. The size and 
the thickness of the pipe, the weight and the unit cost per linear foot 
thereof and the number of linear feet manufactured in the five days 
are tabulated below : 

Diam. Thick. Wt. per lin. ft. No. ft. Cost 

Ins. Ins. lits. made per ft. 

12 11/. 56 144 $0.25 

IS 1% '94 248 0.37 

24 2 143 56 0.57 

36 3 366 54 1.15 

Cost of Cement and Concrete Pipes and Sewers, References. — See 

the sections on Waterworks and on Sewers. See Chapter XXI, 
Methods and Cost of Aqueduct and Sewer Construction in Gillette 
and Hill's "Concrete Construction." 

Cost of a Band Stand.— Mr. W. F. Creighton gives the following 
data : 

The band stand was built much like a mushroom, the roof being 
32 ft. in diameter, supported by a central post. The floor was 
concrete also. The concrete was a 1:2:4 stone dust, % to 1%-in. 
broken stone mixture. It was mixed by hand and hoisted in wheel- 



* Engineering-Contracting, March IS, 1908. 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 631 

buriows by means of a gallows frame and snatch block operated by a 
mule. The forms for the sliaft and underside of the stand consisted 
of steel plates nailed to vertical radial ribs built to the designed 
cuive. These ribs were made of 2-in. lumber. Toward the upper 
ends where the radial spread between ribs was largest cross-struts 
were built between ribs. The outer ends of the ribs were supported 
by staging ; they were also braced at the tangent points on the 
center column or stem. The amount of concrete was 80 cu. yds. and 
it cost as follows : 

Materials. Total. Per cu. yd. 

119 bbls. cement at $2.65 $ 319.95 $3.95 

40 cu. yds. stone dust at $1.1U 44.00 0.55 

80 cu. vds. broken stone at $1.10 88.00 1.10 

5,500 lbs. reinforcement 229.00 2. 86 

2,500 ft. B. M. lumber and shopwork. . 76.21 0.95 

Total 

Labor. 

Mi.xing and placing concrete 

Bending and placing steel 

Falsework and wood forms 

Steel forms (labor and material) .... 
12-in. pipe (furnishing and erecting) . 
Unloading and hauling stone V^ mile. 

Finishing 

Excavating 



$ 754.16 


? 


9.41 


$ 171.00 


$ 


2.14 


40.00 




0.50 


113.90 




1.43 


164.00 




2.05 


86.25 




1.08 


60.00 




0.75 


12.00 




0.16 


5.00 




0.06 



Total $ 652.15 $8.17 

Superintendence 42.00 0.53 

Foreman 39.00 0.48 



Total $ 81.00 $1.01 

Grand total 1.487.31 18.59 

Cost of Sylvester Wash and Sylvester Mortar. — Mr. W. C. Haw- 
ley is authority for the following: A covered concrete clear water 
well of the Apollo Water-Works Co. leakea, so it was plastered 
with a Sylvester mortar. A light-colored soft soap was dissolved In 
water, l\i lbs. soap to 15 gals, of vvatei-. 'Xuen 3 lbs. of powdered 
alum were mixed with each bag of cement. The mortar was 1 : 2. 
Two coats of this plaster were applied to the dry walls, giving a. 
total thickness of % in. Leaking was thus stopped completely. The 
cost was : 

2 lbs. soap (with 24 gals, water), at 71/2 cts $0.15 

12 lbs. alum, at 31/0 cts 0.42 



Total $0.57 

Or 57 cts. for soap and alum per barrel of Portland cement. 
In repairing the bottom of a reservoir lined with 4 to 6 ins. of con- 
crete which leaked, a Sj'lvester wash was used. The soap solution 
was % lbs. of Olean soap to 1 gal. of water, and the alum solution 
was % lb. alum to 4 gals, water ; both well dissolved, soap solution 
being boiled. On the clean dry concrete the boiling hot soap solu- 
tion was applied , 24 hrs. later the alum wash ; 24 hrs. later the 
soap wash ; 24 hrs. later the alum wash. Two men applied the 
solutions, using whitewash brushes, while a third man carried pails 
of the solution. In making the soap solution 2 men attended I 



fi32 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

kettles, 1 man kept up fires, 2 men carried solution to men applying 
it. Tiie alum solution required fewer men, being made cold in bar- 
rels. After applying the second soap wash to the concrete slopes, 
men had to be held by ropes to keep from slipping. The rope was 
placed around two men, who started work at top of the slope, a third 
man paying out on the rope. The work was done in 8i^ days, and 
the cost as follows : 
Labor. 

1,140 hrs. labor at 15 cts $171.00 

83 hrs. foremen at 30 cts 24!90 

83 hrs. waterboy at 6 cts 4^98 

Add for supt. 15% 30.13 

Total labor $231.01 

Materials. 

900 lbs. Olean soap at 4% cts $ 39.00 

210 lbs. alum at 3 cts 6.30 

6 whitewash brushes (10-in.), at $2.25 13.50 

6 stable brushes, $1.25 7.50 

Total materials $ 66.30 

Total labor and materials 297.31 

This covered 131,634 sq. ft., hence the cost of the two coats of 
eoap and alum was $2.26 per 1,000 sq. ft, or 0.23 ct. per sq. ft. 
All leaks but one from a slight crack were stopped. 

The concrete lining of a new reservoir near Wilmerding was 
waterproofed by using caustic potash and alum in the finishing 
mortar coat. The stock solution was 2 lbs. of caustic potash, and 5 
lbs. of alum to 10 qts of water. This was made in barrel lots, from 
Which 3 qts. were taken for each batch of finishing mortar, which 
consisted of 2 bags of cement mixed with 4 bags of sand ; a batch of 
mortar covered an area 6 ft. x 8 ft. 1 in. thick. The extra cost of 
this waterproofing was : 

100 lbs. caustic potash at 10 cts $10.00 

70 lbs. caustic potash at 9 cts 6 30 

9Q0 lbs. alum at 314. 3% and 4 cts 34.38 

60 hrfs. mixing at 15 cts 9. 00 

Freight, express and hauling 11.50 

Total for 74,800 sq. ft .$71.18 

So the cost was 95 cts. per 1,000 sq. ft., or less than 0.1 ct. per 
sq. ft. Hence the cost was less than by using Sylvester's wash and 
the result was better, for with Sylvester's wash the penetration is 
only 1/16 to %-in. It was found that if less than 2 parts of sand to 
1 part of cement were used the mortar cracked in setting. Clean 
sand was imperative as any organic impurities soon decomposed, 
leaving soft spots. Do not use an excess of potash ; a slight excess 
of alum, however, does not decrease the strength of the mortar. 

Cost of Waterproofing With Tar Felt and Asphalt.* — The follow- 
ing data relate to the cost of waterproofing the concrete on the Long 
Island R. R. subway : 

The specifications for the waterproofing will be found in Gillette 
and Hill's "Concrete Construction." 



'Engineering-Contracting, July 18, 1906. 



CONCRETE COXSTRUCTION. 633 

During the year 1903 there were laid 9,056 sq. yds. of this water- 
proofing on the roof of the subway. The labor cost of placing the 
two layers of felt and the three coats of tar pitch was as follows: 
206 days labor at a cost of $498 (or an average of ?2.41 per day) 
for the 9,056 sq. yds., which is equivalent to 5i/i cts. per sq. yd. for 
the labor. Since this is for two layers of felt, the labor cost was 
2% cts. per sq. yd. of single layer, which is a high cost as we shall 
see presently. 

The labor cost of mixing and placing the 1-in. layer of cement 
mortar over the felt was as follows: It required 589 days, at a cost 
of $1,306 (or an average of $2.22 per day) to place this 9,056 sq. 
yds. of cement plaster, which is equivalent to 141/2 cts. per sq. yd. 

The total cost of labor for the two layers of tar felt and the layer 
of cement mortar was, therefore, 20 cts. per sq. yd. on this Long 
Island R. R. work. 

For comparison, we will now repeat some of the cost data given in 
our February issue, relating to the New York Subway. On the 
New York Subway, the specifications were somewhat similar, ex- 
cept that no mortar coat was specified. The roof of the New York 
Subway was waterproofed with four layers of asphalt felt and 
asphalt. The floor of the subway made two layers of asphalt felt 
placed between two layers of concrete. We may say, therefore, that 
the average number of layers of felt used in waterproofing the New 
York Subway was three. The records of cost for this work were 
kept in terms of one layer of felt, so that it is necessary to multi- 
ply the following costs by three in order to get the cost of the 
three layers. For estimating the quantities of materials used, the 
following rules were deduced : 

Reduce the area to square yards, and add 15% for laps, to obtain 
the square yards of asphalt felt per single layer. 

Multiply the square yards by 0.37 to get the number of gallons 
of asphalt per single layer of felt. 

Where brick are laid in asphalt, allow 650 brick per cu. yd. ; and 
multiply the number of cubic yards of brick by 0.3 to get the num- 
ber of tons of mastic. 

The cost of some 98,000 sq. yds. waterproofing on the New York 
Subway, was as follows per single thickness of felt : 

Per sq. yd. 

(single). 

cts. 

1.11 sq. yds. asphalt felt at 4% cts 5 

0.37 gal. asphalt at 12 cts 4 14 

Labor 5 14 

Total 15 

This is for one thickness of felt, so that for 3 thicknesses the 
cost would be 45 cts. per sq. yd. for labor and materials. Both the 
labor and materials were high in cost. The labor was high because 
the men were poorly supervised. There were 2 waterproof "fore- 
men" at $3 per 8-hr. day, and 7 waterproofers (laborers) at $1.50 
per day, so that the average wage was $1.83 per day. The "fore- 
men" were skilled waterproofers who worked with the gang. 



C34 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The material was high priced, because asbestos felt dipped in 
asphalt was specified. The felt weighed 10 lbs. per 100 sq. ft. 

To illustrate how unusually inefficient the waterproofers were, the 
following records are given. These records were kept by the writer, 
and relate to the waterproofing of brick walls. The wall was built 
up one brick thick (4 ins.), and was then waterproofed with three 
layers of tar felt mopped with tar pitch. The layers lapped on one 
another like the shingles of a roof, the exposed face of each layer 
being 1 ft. wide. Three men were engaged in the work: one man 
melted and carried the tar in buckets, one man mopped it on, and the 
third man laid the tar felt. Tlie bricks were first mopped with tar, 
then the felt was laid on and mopped with tar ; then a second layer 
of felt, and so on. The two men mopping and laying felt easily 
averaged 120 sq. yds. in 8 hrs. Since this was 3 -layer work, the 
men averaged 360 sq. yds. of single layer per day. Skilled roofers 
were employed placing and mopping the felt at $3.75 a day, and the 
laborer helping them received $2 a day, so that the gang received 
$9 for 360 sq. yds., or 21/2 cts. per sq. yd., wages averaging $3 per 
8-hr. day per man engaged. As a matter of fact, only one skilled 
man was needed ; and, had there been enough work to do, one 
laborer could have melted and delivered enough tar for two gangs. 
It usually requires about % gal. tar per layer of felt, which would 
mean 120 gals, of tar per day per gang of two men laying. Tar 
weighs about as much as water, or 8% lbs. per gal., hence 1,000 lbs. 
tar would be used by the gang of two men in a day. [In the Water- 
works section of this book will be found the cost of waterproofing a 
large reservoir. This work was done on a large scale. Two men 
heated and delivered the asphalt to one man who spread it with a 
mop made of twine. The man with the mop spread 5,000 lbs. of 
asphalt per day of 10 hrs., covering an area of 1,000 sq. yds., which 
is equivalent to 0.6 gal. per sq. yd. Since two men boiled and de- 
livei-ed the asphalt, each of these two men averaged 2,500 lbs. or 300 
gals, per day. It took one cord of wood to boil about 20,000 lbs., or 
2,400 gals., from which it will be seen that the item of fuel is prac- 
tically negligible.] 

"V^Tiile men engaged in mopping tar or asphalt over layers of felt 
cannot be expected to accomplish as much work as men mopping 
tar over an extended area, still comparisons such as the above are 
valuable because they show where money may be saved. In this in- 
stance the comparison shows that a man boiling and delivering tar 
is not kept busy unless he is handling at least 300 gals, a day. 

When one man is mopping on the tar and a secon* rnan is laying 
the felt, one of the two is usually idle while the other is busy. 
Provided each man works with great rapidity when he is actually 
working, very little time is really lost ; but, if left to themselves, 
the workmen will take a very slow gait, and thus more than double 
the cost. 

Finally, unless labor unions interfere, there is really no need of 
high-priced labor on work of this character. Common laborers can 
be used for all work except laying the felt, and, even in that work, 



CONCRETL CONSTRUCTION. U36 

a grade of skill only slightly above the average of the common 
laborer is needed. 

As for the felt itself, there is no necessity of anything better than 
a good grade of tar felt weighing about 15 lbs. per 100 sq. ft., and 
costing about IVi cts. per lb., or 2 cts. per sq. yd. We are speaking 
now of felt for waterproofing, not of felt for roofing that is exposed 
to the air. 

The writer has seen felt that had been laid in coal tar pitch ; and, 
after 32 years service, it was as flexible as the day it was laid. This 
felt had been used to waterproof the outside of the masonry arch 
forming the roof of the Park Avenue Tunnel, N. Y. C. & H. R. Ry., 
built in 1872. The felt was laid in two layers and covered with 
2 or 3 ft. of earth. Wherever it had been covered it was in perfect 
condition when taken out in 1904. Mr. A. B. Corthell. Terminal 
Engineer, New York Central Ry., New York City, has specimens of 
this old felt. As the process of making coal gas has not changed in 
the last 30 years, it is obvious that as good coal tar pitch is to be 
had to-day as ever. There are petroleum residues that are sold as 
pitch which are not of a durable nature, and such products have, 
perhaps, given a black eye to pitch in general. 

Let us see what two layers of tar felt can be laid for : 

Two layers 

per sq. yd. 

cts. 

2 sq. yds. tar felt at 2 14 cts 5 

% gal. asphalt at 12 cts 8 

Labor (?2 a day) 3 

Total for 2 layers felt 14 

This is equivalent to 7 cts. per sq. yd. of single layer. In the 
above estimate, 12% has been added to the price of the tar felt to 
allow for laps. The labor is assumed at a lower rate than would 
probably be paid in cities where labor unions control such work, but 
it is as high as would be paid outside of cities. 

Cost of Waterproofing Batteries With Coal Tar and Sand.* — Coal 
tar and sand was used in waterproofing the superior crests of three 
batteries at Fort Mott, N. J. The tar was applied hot and was 
spread over the concrete surfaces with rubber squeegees and then 
sanded. Joints were filled with hot tar. A surplus of sand was put 
on and left for a few days and was then swept off. Two coats were 
put on over the traverses and one coat over the parapets. The total 
surface covered, two coats, was 14,700 sq. ft., and one coat, 19,600 
sq. ft; 211/2 bbls. of coal tar were used, or about 1 bbl. per 2,279 
sq. ft. The tar cost $4.25 per bbl. delivered, and the cost of the 
waterproofing, including materials and labor, was $0.0074 per sq. ft., 
one coat. In two of the batteries practically all percolation was 
stopped. 

Cost of V/aterproofIng Bridge Floor, Pennsylvania Ry.t — Mr. A. L. 
Bowman is author of the following: 



* Engineering-Contracting, April 3, 1907. 
■fEngineering-Contracting, Nov. 4, 1908, p. 290. 



636 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Metnod of Applying Waterproofing. — First. The steel floor plate 
was thoroughly cleaned and painted with one coat of red lead 
and oil. 

Second. A filler of mastic asphalt was placed along the webs 
of the girders. 

Third. Five layers of Hydrex felt cemented together with Hydrex 
compound were then put on the floor plate and carried as far as 
possible up under the flashing angles, which were fastened along the 
webs and around the stiffeners and the ends of the girders. The felt 
was not cemented to the floor plate but was thoroughly cemented 
to the webs of the girders. 

Fourth. A layer of brick laid flat was then placed on the felt 
in a hot layer of compound, the brick being laid lengthwise of the 
bridges. 

Fifth. The joints between the brick were thoroughly poured with 
compound and the whole surface mopped with compound. 

Sixth. The stone ballast ties and rails were then placed on the 
bridge (Fig. 11). 

Labor and Time on Waterproofing After Steel Work Was Erected. 



^BricHs laicfcin^ Joints f/J/eaf vy/th hcpt Hprex i^i^^P^ f^c^ 



1^ f.\VW/7/k\-V st////kVNS|//^/J-~^;^V|/Ay/ k^V\ UX^Tr^r^Tr^rrrp^f^ 










^fw^ffJlW^ 



Er7(j.-Confr. 



'^i"xio"5t-one Baits 
Fig. H. — ^Waterproof Bridge Floor. 



— The skilled and common laborer employed per square (100 sq. ft.) 
was as follows: Foreman, 1.66 hrs. ; waterproofers, 11.71 hrs. ; 
laborers, 7.75 hrs. The overtime to complete a floor of 750 sq. ft. 
was 1.4 days of 10 hrs. The best time for one track, 750 sq. ft., was 
one day of 10 hrs. 

Cost. — The cost of waterproofing materials per square foot of floor 
surface was 20% cts. The cost of labor per square foot was 10% 
cts. Materials Per Square (100 sq. ft). — Brick, 440; Hydrex com- 
pound, 41.2 gals.; Hydrex felt, 1.46 rolls (400 sq. ft. per roll). 

Result. — The bridges are watertight with the exception of a few 
points immediately over columns. 

During a severe storm the water leaks down to some extent, be- 
tween the main and side walk girders. It seems impossible to 
keep these points absolutely tight. 

The vibration and reflection of the girders break the bond of any 
material which is placed between the ends of the girders. From a 
close observation of these bridges it seems impossible to make the 
compound adhere to the steel for any length of time, due to the 
vibration of the steel work and the hardening of the material during 
cold weather. 



I 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 637 

It is necessary to protect the edges of the waterproofing along 
the girders from water running down behind after the waterproofing 
has broken loose. This was done by means of the flashing angles 
referred to above. 

No attempt should be made to fit the brick along the web of 
irackets, the brick being simply shoved as tight as possible and then 
"he openings poured with the compound. Afterward the opening 
under the Hashing angles should be filled with concrete to keep the 
edges of the felt from curling over. 

The felt was carried well over and down the back walls, drainage 
being had by putting the bridges on a grade and allowing the water 
to run behind the abutments, which were drained by pipes running 
through the abutments to the gutters. 

Cost of Waterproofing, References. — For further data on this sub- 
ject consult the index under "Waterproofing." See Chapter XXV, 
Methods r.nd Cost of Waterproofing, in Gillette and Hill's "Concrete 
Construction." 

Cost of Removina Efflorescence With Acid. — Efflorescence, or 
"whitewash," on a concrete bridge at Washington, D. C, was re- 
moved by using liydrochloric (muriatic) acid and common scrubbing 
brushes; 30 gals, of acid and 36 scrubbing brushes were used to 
clean 250 sq. yds. of concrete. The acid was diluted with 4 or 5 
parts water to 1 of acid ; and water constantly played with a hose 
on the concrete while being cleaned to prevent penetration of the 
acid. One house-front cleaner and 5 laborers were employed, and 
the total cost was $1.50, or 60 cts. per sq. yd. This high cost was 
due to the difficulty of cleaning the balustrades. It is thought that 
the cost of cleaning the spandrels and wing walls did not exceed 20 
cts. per sq. yd. The cleaning was perfectly satisfactory. An experi- 
ment was made with wire brushes without acid, but the cost was 
$2.40 per sq. yd. The flour removed by the wire brushes was found 
by analysis to be silicate of lime. Acetic acid was tried in place of 
muriatic, but required more scrubbing. 

For further data on cleaning with acid, see the section on Stone 
Masonry. Consult the index under "Masonry, Cleaning." 

Cost of Bush- Hammering Concrete. — Mr. C. R. Neher states that 
a concrete face can be bush-hammered by an ordinary laborer at the 
rate of 100 sq. ft. in 10 hrs., at a cost of li/^ cts. per sq. ft. The 
cost of forms saved by using rough lumber goes a long way toward 
covering the cost of bush-hammering. The front of the Dakota 
elevator in Buffalo, N. Y., was bush-hammered. Bush-hammering 
removes stains due to efflorescence. 

Ransome says that bush-hammering concrete costs 1% to 2% cts. 
per sq. ft., wages of common laborers being 15 cts. per hr. The 
Ransome Concrete Mchy. Co., Dunellen, N. J., make a toothed ax 
especially designed for bush-hammering concrete. 

The walls of the Pacific Borax Co. factory at Bayonne, N. J., were 
dressed by hand at the rate of 100 to 200 sq. ft. per day ; but most 
of the dressing was done with a pneumatic hammer, with which a 
man was able to dress 300 to 600 sq. ft. per day. 



638 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

At the Harvard Stadium I timed men working with pneumatic 
hammers, using a tool like an ice chopper with a sawtooth cutting 
blade. One man dressed a wall at the rate of 50 sq. ft. per hr., but 
I was told that 200 sq. ft. was a 10-hr. day's work. I am inclined to 
think, however, that much more than 200 sq. ft. a day could be aver- 
aged. Common laborers are used for this sort of work. 

For the cost of operating pneumatic hammers, when gasoline is 
used for power consult the index under Pneumatic Hammer. 

A common method of finishing concrete surfaces is to remove the 
forms before the concrete is very hard, say in 24 hrs., and scour 
the surface with a wire brush to as much as half the depth of the 
pebbles of gravel or stone. This can be done for 7 cts. per sq. ft. 

The average cost of bush-hammering the concrete blocks for the 
Connecticut Ave. Bridge, at Washington, was 26 cts. per sq. ft. 
The work was done by stonecutters who received $4 per day, which 
partly accounts for the high cost. Moreover a very high grade of 
work was required. The cost ranged from 14 cts. per sq. ft. to 47 
cts. per sq. ft., and is given in detail in Gillette and Hill's "Concrete 
Construction." 

Cost of Excavatina Concrete. — Mr. Ernest W. Shader gives the 
following. A hole was cut through a concrete dam 10 yrs. old at 
Ithaca, N. Y The concrete was crushed shale, and a mixture of 
natural and Portland cement had been used. The concrete was soft 
but tough. A pneumatic plug drill was used, and the concrete was 
chipped out with flat chisels 1% ins. wide. A narrower chisel was 
not so good, and plug and feathering was impracticable because the 
drill would stick in the hole. (Perhaps a water jet would have over- 
come this difficulty.) Two Italian laborers alternated in holding the 
pneumatic machine, and they averaged exactly 1 lin. ft. of hole 
5% ft. diameter per 9-hr. day, for 16 days. The air pressure was 
70 lbs. This is equivalent to 22% cu. ft., or 0.S3 cu. yd. per day 
by two men with a pneumatic machine. 

A liberal supply of sharp chisels was provided. The chisel was 
sunk into the concrete until the blows of the hammer caused a 
piece to chip off. The time per chip ranged from a few seconds to 
10 minutes. When the men become experienced they drove two or 
three chisels along a line and thus wedged off as much as % cu. ft. 
of concrete. This worked well when the lower part of the hole was 
advanced ahead of the upper part. 

For comparison with the data above given, see Gillette and Hill's 
"Concrete Construction," p. 107, where it is stated that it took a 
quarryman 5 days to chip off 1 cu. yd. of concrete from the face 
of a concrete abutment that projected too far. Also see p. 653, etc., 
of the same book for methods and cost of blasting concrete. 

For cost of excavating a concrete pavement base see the section 
on Roads and Pavements. 

Cross References and References. — In other sections of this book 
will be found data on concrete costs, for which see the index under 
Concrete. The cost of quarrying and crushing stone for concrete 



CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION. 639 

will be found In the section on Rock Excavation. In estimating the 
cost of forms the data in the section on Timberwork will be of aid. 

The following books on concrete cover different parts of this 
treat subject : 

"Concrete Construction — Methods and Cost," by Gillette and Hill, 
is a 700-page treatise devoted solely to the methods and cost of con- 
crete and reinforced concrete work of every variety. While intended 
primarily as a treatise for contractors and for engineers engaged in 
actual field work, it will aid the designer also if he aims to design 
and specify construction on which low bids will be assured. I can- 
not too often repeat the statement that no designer is thoroughly 
competent unless he has a thorough knowledge of every detail of 
actual cost. 

"Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Construction," by Homer A. 
Reid, M. Am. Soc. C. E., is a 900-page treatise written primarily for 
the designing engineer and the engineering student, but it is full of 
illustrations of forms, arch centers, a^d text matter of value to the 
contractor also. There is, in my opinion, no single book that so well 
covers both theory of concrete design and practice of construction, 
as does this book, when the whole field of concrete is considered. 
The field, however, is so great that in addition to one such treatise 
covering the whole field, most engineers and contractors need special 
treatises on special branches, such as the one by Gillette and Hill, 
above mentioned, and such as the others mentioned below. Reid's 
work contains more than 700 drawings and half-tones. A state- 
ment of this number alone gives some idea of the wide scope of the 
work. 

"Engineers' Pocketbook of Reinforced Concrete," by E. Lee 
Heidenreich, contains 374 pages of tables and data for the engineer 
who is designing reinforced concrete structures. I know of no book 
that is its equal for this purpose. The author is an experienced 
designer, indeed, one of the first American civil engineers to make 
reinforced concrete designing a specialty. 

"Reinforced Concrete, A Manual of Practice," by Ernest McCul- 
lough, is a book whicTi presents the subject of designing reinforced 
concrete in the simplest manner possible ; also the principles of safe 
and good construction are set forth in an equally lucid manner. 
The author has had a very extensive experience in concrete work 
both as an engineer and as a contractor. 

"Theory and Design of Reinforced Concrete Arches," by Arvid 
Reuterdahl, is self-explanatory in its title. The author's aim has 
been to present the theory in a perfectly complete form, leaving no 
gaps to be supplied by reference to other books. 

"Concrete Bridges and Culverts," by H. G. Tyrrell, is a 272-page 
treatise in which the author presents the formulas to be used without 
giving the mathematical derivation, thus making it a very useful 
book for any engineer, other than the student of en>3rineering. The 
author gives many tables of dimensions for standard railway and 
highway bridges and culverts, also tables of quantities and esti- 
mates of cost. 



640 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

"Pradtical Cement Testing," by W. P. Taylor, is the work of a 
practical cement tester, and I think that in that respect it is unique 
among books or parts of books on cement testing. It covers the sub- 
ject in its 330 pages. 

"Concrete Inspection," by Charles S. Hill, is a pocket-size book of 
186 pages, in -which no extraneous matter is contained. It is a 
manual on cement inspection • written by the author of the first 
American treatise on reinforced concrete construction, and an engi- 
neer who has a wider acquaintance with the literature of cement 
and concrete than anyone I have met. My close association with 
Mr. Hill in the production of our joint book, and in our editorial 
work, is the basis for the foregoing statement, in the breadth of 
which I may be unwittingly doing injustice to others who have 
attempted to keep pace with the literature on cement and concrete. 

"Diagrams for Designing Reinforced Concrete Structures," by G. 
F. Dodge. The diagrams are plolted on logarithmic paper, and are 
so devised that results are read direct for any condition that 
occurs in ordinary practice. 

Summary. — In this connection I may say that not since engineer- 
ing began has there ever been a subject that has brought forth, in so 
short a time, so many articles, scientific papers, and books' as have 
appeared on this subject of cement and concrete. This literature has 
had a profound influence upon the growth of the cement and con- 
crete industry. Had it not been for the extensive literature on the 
subject, engineers would have been a generation longer in acquiring 
suflScient knowledge of concrete and its economic merits to leaJ them 
to the extensive use that concrete now enjoys. Authors of books and 
editors of, and contributors to, technical periodicals have been the 
educators who have made the use of concrete well nigh exclusive for 
some classes of construction, and a large factor in nearly every 
class that can be mentioned. In this process of education their work 
has been supplemented by that of intelligent manufacturers of 
cement and of concrete machinery, likewise to a degree never before 
witnessed in the technical advertising world. So, in concluding my 
references, I can do no better than to urge upon every engineer and 
contractor the importance of securing, and keeping up to date, a 
small library of the catalogs of manufacturers of cement and of 
concrete machinery, tools and appliances. 



SECTION VII. 
WATE R- WO RKS. 

Definitions. — Backfill, the excavated earth that is put back into 
a trench. 

Ball Joints. — A cast iron pipe with special ends that permit of 
deflection of the pipe line, after the lead has been poured, is said 
to have "ball joints" or "flexible joints." 

Bell. — The flaring end of a cast iron pipe, as distinguished from 
the smaller end, or spigot, which fits into the bell. 

Bell Holes. — After cast iron pipe are placed in a trench, it is 
customary to enlarge the trench somewhat by digging away the 
bottom and sides around the bells of the pipes, at each joint. The 
excavation thus made is called a bell hole. 

Bend.— A short curved length of pipe. Bends are sold as "spe- 
cials" at a price higher than for ordinary pipe. See Frye's "Civil 
Engineers' Pocketbook" for dimensions and weights of bends and 
other specials. 

Brace. — A horizontal timber across a trench. Also an iron pipe 
with a telescopic end is called an "extensible brace." 

Bracing. — The timber used to support the sides of a trench. 

Branch. — A Y-shaped piece of pipe sold as a "special." 

Calk. — To flU the joints of a pipe to prevent leakage. In cast 
iron pipe, yarn is first inserted ; then lead is poured into the joint. 
The operation of driving the lead home is often called "calking," 
although the entire process of making a joint water tight is also 
termed calking. 

Corporation Cock. — A cock or valve joining the main water pipe 
to the service pipe, so that the water may be shut off from any 
consumer. 

Depreciation. — The loss of value due to lost life. If the straight 
line formula of depreciation is used, the annual depreciation is the 
reciprocal of the life in years ; thus a life of 20 years gives a depre- 
ciation of 5% per annum Depreciation should not be confused 
with current repairs and renewals of parts. 

Duty. — A term applied to pumping engines to express amount 
of work done. The Am. Soc. M. E. definition is number of foot 
pounds of work done by the expenditure of 1,000,000 B. T. U. 
(British thermal units). The duty therefore depends upon the 
character of engine employed. 

Dynamic Heah. — The actual head of water in a pipe plus the 
friction head. 

641 



642 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Electrolysis. — The destruction of a metal due to chemical action 
developed by an electric current. 

Faucet. — The flaring or "bell" end of a cast iron pipe. 

Filter. — A "slow sand filter" consists of a large "filter bed" of 
sand, underlaid with gravel or broken stone, through which water 
passes and enters the drains that lead off the clear water. A 
"mechanical filter" (often called an "American filter"), consists 
of a small tank containing a bed of sand through which the water 
passes, after having been dosed with some coagulent, such as lime. 
The sand is cleaned at short intervals by reversing the current of 
water. 

Flume. — A trough for carrying water ; usually made of lumber. 

Forebay. — The reservoir from which water passes immediately 
to a water wheel. 

Friction Head. — The head of water necessary to overcome the 
friction developed by passing through a pipe. 

Frost Box. — A box surrounding a waterpipe and containing some 
heat insulator, like mineral wool, excelsior or sawdust, to prevent 
the water from freezing. 

Gallon. — The U. S. gallon contains 8 pints, or 4 quarts, or 231 cu. 
Ins., or 0.13368 cu. ft, or 3.7855 litres, or 0.03175 liquid barrels. 
A cu. ft. contains 7.48052 (7% nearly) gallons. A gallon of water, 
at 39.2° F., weighs 8.33888 (SVs nearly) lbs.; or 1 lb. of water 
= 0.12 gals. British Imperial gallon = 1.20032 U. S; gallons. 

Gate. — A stop valve placed in water mains, usuallj' at intervals 
of 300 to 900 ft., to shut off water from any section during repairs, 
etc. 

Infiltration. — The flow of ground water into a well ; or the flow 
of water through the ground, from a nearby lake or river, into a 
gallery. 

Mains. — The system of large water pipes that supply the smaller 
laterals or service pipes. 

Mineral wool, or slag wool, is fibrous slag, often used for pa(?k- 
ing around water pipes to prevent freezing. 

Miners' Inch. — ^Usually the amount of water that will flow, in 
24 hrs., through an opening 1 in. square in a plank 2 ins. thick, 
under a head of 6 ins. measured from the upper edge of the open- 
ing. Such an opening will discharge 11.625 gals, or 1.554 cu. ft. 
per minute, or 0.026 cu. ft. per sec. This is the Colorado miners' 
inch. The California miners' inch is 0.02 cu. ft. per second. 

Oakum. — Material obtained by picking to pieces old hemp rope. 

Packing. — Oakum with long fibres twisted into strands and used 
in filling pipe joints. 

Pouring Clamp. — A device often used instead of the ordinary 
clay "roll" for holding in the molten lead used to form a joint in 
a cast iron pipe. 

Puddle. — A mixture of gravel and clay, wet and compacted, and 
SQ deposited as to prevent leakage through more porous soil. 

Ranger. — A long horizontal timber along the side of a trench, 
against which the "braces" abut. 

Reducer. — A short funnel shaped section of pipe. 



WATER-WORKS. G4a 

Roll. — A roll of clay placed temporarily around a pipe to retain 
the molten lead poured into the joint. 

Runner. — Same as ranger. 

Service Pipe. — A short lateral pipe of small diameter, usually of 
wrought iron or lead, extending from a "main" to a house, store, 
or the like. 

iSheeting, or Sheathing. — Plank used to face the sides of a trench 
to prevent its caving in. When the planks are sharpened and 
driven, they are called sheet piles. 

Shoring. — Braces used temporarily to support any structure while 
excavating near it. Also used to designate the braces and rangers 
in a trench, for which .it is preferable to use the term bracing. 

Skeleton Bracing. — A system of braces and rangers, without any 
sheeting ; or merely a system of braces abutting against short 
lengths of plank. 

Specials. — Bends, branches, tees, crosses, reducers, and all sim- 
ilar castings, other than the regular 12 ft. lengths of pipe, ai-e called 
specials, and are sold (by the pound) at a higher price than the 
regular pipe. 

Spigot End. — The small end of a cast iron pipe as distinguished 
from the bell end. 

Stand Pipe. — A high, vertical pipe of large diameter holding a 
supply of water. 

Ton. — Cast iron pipe is sold by the ton of 2,000 lbs. Pig iron is 
sold by the ton of 2,240 lbs. 

Yarn. — Same as packing. 

Cost of Complete Water Works Systems. — For purposes of rough 
preliminary estimates of cost, and more frequently for purposes of 
comparison and generalization, an engineer often wishes to know 
the appro.ximate first cost of a complete waterworks system for a 
city or town of given size. 

Table I is taken from a report by Mr. Paul Hansen, Assoc. M. 
Am. Soc. C. E., Assistant Engineer Ohio State Board of Health, 
and printed in Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 15, 1909. The author 
has the following to say about the table : 

"The matter that most interests the taxpayer in connection with 
the installation of public water supplies is cost, and to this end I 
have prepared a table giving unit costs for construction and opera- 
tion. These figures are necessarily very general, as they cover a 
wide range of conditions. They, however, are suggestive and give 
an approximate idea of expenditures involved." 

Average Cost of Constructing and Operating Water Works In 
Massachusetts.— Mr. Freeman C. CofF.n gives the following costs 
of constructing and operating 30 water works systems in Mass., for 
the year 1893. Tlie systems were all owned by the municipalities, 
and in every case the water was pumped. Total cost of operation, 
including an allowance of 4% for interest on the first cost of the 
water works system, and 1^^% for depreciation, averaged ?115 per 
million gallons; the minimum cost being |65 in one city; and the 
maximum cost being ?257. The average per capita cost was $2.58 



6U 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






•Sui 
-sn uosjed aed „,„^^„M_ifM 

_ _, ^ iO "^ CO CO C^ rn C^ 

sesuedxa 3un^ 

-xa Suii'Bjado "=> ^ 

X^nuuB iunuiiuij\[ 

■Suisn uosjQd l£?^J?r'S2SS252 

- • J. c, O C5 cot- 0500CO 

jBdsasuadxa Sui j^-^i^qr-iiHi-ir-itH 
-:(T3jado iBnuuB ''av 

'U9d _ _ 

-X9 Sup'BJBdO |I^-i^^^|^ -"^ 

I B n u u T? ' aSBJeAV 



m 
o 

;5 

o 

M 

H 
<! 
03 

o 

o 

u 
t) 

CO 
o 

o 

o 



o 

o 

o 

> 



00 tH t^ 00 to t^ o o 

• sosuadxa oi^c-c-iHiMeDto 
-UT3 i^^o; eS^JSAV '^'^^'^2?5S 



■Suisn uosaed 



OOL-^O^OOOCONCO 



jad ^SOO aSBjaAV -V" e^i i>5 n =^ n eo 



■'B^ld'BO CgrHOoirHOt-in 

aad ^soo uiniuiuijii <x>m-*dt>^do6r-i 



.^-.^^^'N oooooooo 
^+{tlBJ in 'X> Lo l^<l -* lO t- eo 

jad ^soa uinuiix'BiV[ coodNcrJNioNM 



JO 



N<Ml-tTHU5000 

••B^id'BO aad o-hm^oiomo 



■ t— oocqa^coooo 

UtiTji-^OOOOOOOO 

■UOHBII'BISUI JO ioa5-#OM!Ni<Nio 

isoo i'Eioi eS-EjaAv ooV(M'oo"i>Mt-'M 

rH CO to -* •* to «D 
rH*<f COO 



S3 
tf„o 



oo 

coo 

•o2ooo 

•§°§°odo 

^rH O 0„- 

"5 O O 0-t-'*'2 

U° oo 

^ ooooo t-, 
'o OOOOO 0) 

£§°°°o-o> 

I— 'lOrHCOlOi-llMU 
• ++++++-H-H-++++ 



S3 

ss 
ga 

o 
<» o 



4) o 
c3c4 

0) 0) 

• ++ 



WATER-WORKS. (il-'j 

per year; the minimum being $1.25; and the maximum being $3.62. 
The average daily per capita consumption was 62.3 gals. ; the min- 
imum being 23, and the maximum 227 gals. The water was pump- 
ed to an average height of 188 ft. dynamic head, wliicii was about 
10% greater than the static head. The coal consumption per mil- 
lion gallons was : 

Tons. 

Minimum 0.75 

Average 1.67 

Maximum 7.00 

The number of gallons pumped 1 ft. high (dynamic head) per 
pound of coal was : 

Minimum 8,040 

Average 56,344 

Maximum . . . ; 132,550 

These cities may be divided into three groups: Group I, 22 cities 
under 15,000 population, and averaging 5,880 population (or con- 
sumers) on the pipe lines; Group II, 8 cities, 15,000 to 26,000 popu- 
lation, with an average of 21,250 on the pipe lines; and Group III, 
8 cities, 31,500 to 85,000 population, with an average of 56,000 on 
the pipe lines. 

The first cost of the water systems and the cost of operation, etc.. 
for each of these three groups was as follows : 

Group I. — Twenty-two cities, total population 129,300, on the 
pipe lines, consume 2,556,300,000 gals, per year, or 55 gals, per 
capita per day. The pumping plants consumed 6,500 tons of coal 
per year, or 2% tons per million gallons. There were 472 miles of 
pipe line, and the cost of the water systems was $4,720,000, or 
$10,000 per mile of pipe line, including the cost of the pumping 
plants. There were 3,800 hydrants and 22,000 services; or 8 hy- 
drants and 46 services per mile of pipe line. The cost of the water 
systems was $365 per capita, or $1,850 per million gallons annually 
consumed. The annual cost of operation, etc., was as follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total Gals. 

Pump station expense $ 49,200 19.30 

Other expense of maintenance and operation.. 58,400 22.80 

Interest, 4% on $4,720,000 188,800 74.00 

Depreciation, 1%% on $4,720,000 70,800 27.70 

Total .,.$367,200 $143.80 

In this group there were two cities where the cost was $85 per 
million gallons, and there was one where the cost was $252. 

Group II. — Eight cities, total population 170,000, on the pipe 
lines, consumed 4,330,000,000 gals, per year, or 70 gals, per capita 
per day. The pumping plants consumed 5,339 tons of coal per 
year, or 1.23 tons per million gals. There were 425 miles of pipe 
line, and the cost of the water systems was $6,200,000, or $14,600 
per mile of pipe line. There were 3,270 hydrants and 24,944 serv- 
ices, or nearly 8 hydrants and 60 services per mile of pipe line. 
The cost of the water systems was nearly $370 per capita, or $1,430 



646 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

per million gallons annually consumed. The annual cost of opera- 
tion was as follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total. Gals. 

Pump station expense $ 62,400 5 14.35 

Other expenses 90,100 20.72 

Interest 4% on $6,200,000 248,000 57.04 

Depreciation, 11/2% on $6,200,000 93,000 21.39 

Total $433,500 $113.50 

Group III. — Eight cities, total population 448,500, on the pipe 
lines, consumed 10,750,000,000 gals, per year, or 66 gals, per capita 
per day. The pumping plants consumed 10,835 tons of coal, or 1 
ton per million gallons. There were 675 miles of pipe line, and 
the cost of the water systems was $16,300,000, or $24,100 per mile 
of pipe line. There were 5,400 hydrants and 57,848 services, or 
8 hydrant and 86 services per mile of pipe line. The cost of the 
water systems was $363 per capita, or $1,516 per million gallons 
annually consumed. The annual cost of operation was as follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total Grals 

Pump station expense $ 101,700 $ 9.40 

Other expenses 203,300 18.75 

Interest, 4% 651,900 61.12 

Depreciation, 11/2% 244,500 22.57 

Total $1,201,400 $111.84 

In this group there was one city of 44,000 population where the 
cost was only $65 per million gallons, distributed thus: 

Per 
Million 
Total. Gals. 

Pump station expense $ 13,466 $ 7.43 

Other expenses 17,656 9.80 

Interest, 4% 63,605 35.12 

Depreciation, 1%% 23,851 13.14 

Total $118,578 $65.49 

The coal consumption was 0.7 ton per million gallons, the dyna- 
mic head being 130 ft. (static head, 125 ft.). The cost of the 
system was $361 per capita, or $25,000 per mile of pipe line, or 
$880 per million gals, consumed annually. This low first cost of 
plant per million gallons annually consumed is not due to supe- 
rior design of plant, but to the large consumption of water, which 
was 112 gals, per capita per day. The per capita cost of water 
was $2.69 per annum, which is above the average cost of this 
group. 

Prices of Cast Iron Pipe. — Figure 1 shows the prices paid for 
cast iron pipe in cities and towns of the Central West, centering 
about Chicago, according to data collected by J. W. Alvord from 
various pipe contracts. 

The prices of pipe are per ton of 2,000 lbs., and are from $7 to 
$10 above the prices for pig iron per ton of 2,000 lbs. In the same 
localities at the same time. 



WATER-WORKS. 



Wi 



Prices of Cast Iron for Thirteen Years in Chicago. — The average 

cost of cast iron pipe per ton since 1894 to the Water Pipe Ex- 
tension Division of the City of Chicago, 111., has been as follows : 

Per Cent 
Cost Variation 

Per Ton. in Cost. 

1895 ?26.00 100 

1896 23.00 88.4 

1897 19.00 73.0 

1898 25.00 96.1 

1899 25.50 98.0 

1900 25.50 98.0 

1901 23.50 90.4 

1902 28.00 107.7 

1903 33.00 126.9 

1904 30.00 115.4 

1905 27.50 105.8 

1906 30.00 115.4 

1907 37.20 143.1 



40 


- 




- 






- 


- 




m 


n 


- 


I ■ 


-> 




— 


"■ 






-^1 


■" 


~ 


~ 


~ 


~ 




■■ 




~ 






T 


f— 










" 


r 










































































































, 


- 


-' 


., 






















































































' 


\ 


* 


















y 


















































30 










/ 




r 




., 




\ 


'* 










r^- 


^ r 


^ 


N 




. 
























































.' 






r 


> 










0' 


* 








S 














































1" 






<- 




/ 








< 


3 


'^ 


''v 




■■J 


}■■• 




/ '\ 








^ 


\ 



















































/ 


7 




- 






^ 




s 




rxl 






J 


^ 


^ 






A 




."N 




















•• 


" 


' 


"1 


















s 




















^ 


\ 






to 


'i" 








^ 


























/ 


^ 




p- 




*' 




*' 


^EO 






' 




















^> 






f 


\ 












u 


\_ V- 


y 












•'j 




fi, 


/ 








•> 


s 






4 






























c, 


t' 
















\\ 














** 














"s 


y 


S 




f 


c 


" 


























' 




















s» 


' 


•; 


'^ 






f 


. 


^ 








*^ 


»^ 






* 
























































^5* 


"^ 


.- 


— 






,' 


















■■ 


— 


-••■i 


J- 
























































































n ,n 
































































_A 
























3'^ 




9 


Oi 


■t 


1903 


90E 


901 


1900 


1899 


1896 


897 


1896 


1895 


1894-1 



T. q: X ^_ 'zr. ~ZT -— ' 


i\'/ 


T -H*e^^'"^. -4- ^ 


it ^^- ^tlK^ft t it -t^Z^'--^ 


-+- -H-4^^;s. '=i^4,lM^^sl fll^i^L''^-- ■ - 


-^-1- Z>^^^^^ ^^%^^-^ \'^ \'' ^^ .1 


^^IZ^- --'t^ ^^rXi^' Zl\^'-' Z"^^ 


-/' _t5^ ,z^ ^s<^^ m--^^t^m^ 


/v -^^z ■>. ■'■J'l^' "- 


■Hy *"" ~*''~"*^i-' 






~r 






1893 I89E 89 890 889 1888 1887 1886 1885 1884- 1883 



4C 



30, 



-20 



(O 

)5 



Fig. 1. — Prices of Cast Iron Pipe. 



Weight of Cast Iron Pipe. — Pipe from 3 ins. to 60 ins. diameter 
is cast in 12-ft. lengths, that is in lengths that require 440 pipe 
lengths to lay a mile of pipe line; li/4-in. and 2-in. pipes are not 
often used, but when used are cast in shorter lengths. 

Table la gives the approximate weights of cast iron pipes. It ia 
customary to paint the weight of each pipe inside the pipe. As 
variations in single pipes of 5% from the listed weight are com- 
mon, it is well to specify the maximum average variation allow- 
able. 



648 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



•S3HDUI Ut 'SCltJ 

JO •tu'eiQ 'apisiij 


C<3-*lO»000(M-#COOOO'S<OtOONOOO 

rt >-i rt T-( i-H cq (M CO CO -* ■* -* to 


•sqq 
'juiof jad dtuajj 


00,^t^r-<-<*<C0r-(»-^-^O^OCDOt^(Mt~»O 
r-HC<l!MC«3-*lO«000050C^iCOOCOOCOCKl 


T-li— iT-tCSCCCOCO-^CO 


■sqi 


■>i<>oooo>oioo>coo>nooooooo 


■-i,-(rte<iiMiMcocoioc~ooairtio 




1-1 


^ 

M 
C 

^ 


oici'oici'nooooooooooooo 

Cq(MCO-<fO<rs(MiOOiCOt^O-^'^ 000*00 
i-H»-4T-HC^C^CCld:^O3O5(NCP0 




t^,-ico^-*i~ooeotoi>.cot-t-e<>(Me<ioooo 


CDC<l05t^l0CDO0000t-l00O^^'«*<'<*lTj<U^O 

r-(C<IWP0lCt^OC<ll005(MOO(MO(M'<:t<00 

T-lT-HT-Ci-KMCOTfOt-OOOlO 




int^^H-^f-HOOlCIMasOCOCOt^COC^OiOSi-H 
-<J<T*11O*OC0CC)t^0000OO^HC0l0t^t^C>-^ 


rlT-H'r-CT-lrti-HrHN 




oco 

OrH 


p. 

4 




OO00CD-<lieqO0»C0l0rJ(0100C000C0t^O 
OCOCOMC<I»Ot-i05<MO-^0300*^»OCD»0'<J< 

Mc<ico-<j4<otx)»-icot-^o-^c<ir^icooioooo 

l-lr-l.-((Me<lCC-<l<<Ot^00OtD 

T-ll-H 


■M 

o 
o 


t^t^cqu5OO>Ct0t0T-lt-0S«0C000CD00t^ 


tO-HOO>0(M^<MtDeO(MeOTj<OOvra^COrf<0 
rte<l<MCOiOt^03T-i-*l:^Otr~05-*iO^OCO 

i-lr-lrt(MC<lCOlOtDt-aiCO 




»OlC00^HCD(M00C0O>li:i»-<(MCSOCC-rJ<-H10 
■<*«Tt^'fJ*10"5':DCOt^t^00050^-HCO-«J*ir3t>-0 


T-< ,-1 i-H -H >-i ■-< e<> 




MS 


ft 
ui 

1 




U5COiOCOt^ii5i005tOOO-*COr^O"50tDO 
00-*^HOiOOOOCqOSCOOO(MOIMO'<J<0 


O 

o 

Ph 


■<j<eocoooe<5oOT-i-*t-ocoeoooooi^i«o 


l0OO(Mt^C0C<lC<I-^0S»0 CO.O iO CO ^H lO lO 

i-lC<l<MC0i^c000OC-l-*l^C0l0l0-*CT>-*O 

,-lT-lr-lr-l(MCO-*lt3u:it^--l 




cqC<l»flt^T-ICDO»O0i-^00t^*-H-<J*CO00T-l00 

■*-*Tfi-*in>r5ffiicocot~t^ooo--ic-i(M-*co 






01 
•♦-1 

§^ 

-0 3 

PM 


ft 

ui 
bo 


to 

a 

(U 

►J 


t^OlO*«**C*3»OOTt<COC<100t^C^IO»t^t^C<IO 

cocoo2 0»-icor^r:^ocoooooo0i0-*oco 

i-H(MC^COIOCOOOOC<llOt^Tl<-«S<CDOOT-ICTSO 
l-H^H^Hl-HC^CO-^»Ot0^t^l-t 


8 


05e<ltD-<J(OOi-HU31000t-OtOCqiOOCO(Mt^ 


COOJ^O<Mt^lMOSt^t^0500.-HCOMlOO 
i-lr-<(MC0-*>0I-00O<M^O010500T-iC0rt 

.-<.-<,-icq(Mco-a<ioioo5 




oooiMcor-ococoocooior-oocsoioo 

CO-<** -*■<*<•«** 0*0*00 CD C0t-.0005O^HCq-<J< 


r-ir-ir-tT-t 




•saqout ui 'adi£ 
JO "uiBiQ apisiii 


eo-*«otoooo<NT(<cocoo-*otDO«ooo 
,-i.-(rtrtrtirqcqcoco->j<-*-*tD 



ins. 


per joint. 


6 


7.7 


S 


9.1 


16 


21.0 


16 


23.7 



No. 

of ft. 

Pipe laid 


Lbs. lead 
per ft. 
of pipe. 


3,112 

1,997 

550 

10,000 


0.64 
0.76 
1.75 
1.97 



WATER-WORKS. 649 

Lead Required for Joints. — Billings states that the theoretical 
amount of lead required for joints in pipe used in Boston was given 
by the formula, p = 2d, in which p = lbs. of lead per joint, ana 
d = diameter of pipe in inches. Actually, however, the following 
amounts were used : 

Size Actual Theoretical 

of pipe. lbs. lead. lbs. lead, 
per joint. 
12 
16 

32 • 
32 

In the following examples of cost, data will be found as to the 
amount of lead used in different cases. 

Items of Cost of Pipe Laying and IVIaterials. — The expression, 
"cost of laying pipe," is usually used to include all labor costs of 
trenching, distributing and placing pipe, calking and backfilling. 
Sometimes the cost of lead and yarn is included as "cost of lay- 
ing." Every carefully kept record of cost should contain the fol- 
lowing items of cost, expressed in terms of the lin. ft. of pipe ot 
stated size and weight : 
Materials : 

Cast iron pipe. 

Lead for joints. 

Tarn. 

"Wood blocks, if any. 
Labor : 

Labor loading wagons from cars. 

Teams hauling. 

Labor unloading. 

Labor distributing along the trench. 

Teams trenching. 

Labor excavating trench. 

Labor digging bell holes. 

liabor backfilling holes. 

Teams backfilling holes. 

Labor pumping. 

Labor placing pipe in trench. 

Labor placing yarn in joints. 

Labor melting and pouring lead. 

Labor calking joints. 

Foremen, water boy, watchman. 

General superintendence, timekeeping and ofRco expense. 
Supplies and Tools : 

Timber, etc., for bracing. 

Fuel. 

Repairs and depreciation of tools. 

Explosives. 
Miscellaneous : 

Pay roll insurance (accident). 

Insurance of public (accident). 

Premium on contractors' bond. 



650 HANDBOOK OP COST DATA: 

While the lineal foot is the common unit used in expressing the 
cost of a pipe line, it should be remembered that the principle 
item of labor cost is trenching, which is better reduced to the cubic 
yard of excavation as the unit. The cost of loading and hauling 
the pipe should also be reduced to the ton and the ton-mile, as 
the best units for comparing costs. 

The material and labor cost of "specials," valves, hydrants, 
meters, service pipes, etc., should be recorded separately, and not 
lumped in with the cost of the main pipe line. 

The length of the job should be recorded, for usually there is a 
certain amount of time required to organize the gang of men, to 
weed out incompetents, etc. Then, too, there is generally a "fixed 
expense" (independent of the length of the job), involved in get- 
ting the materials, plant and men onto the job, ready for work. 
The effect of these items is well shown in some cost records given 
on page 663. 

The cost of removing an existing pavement and relaying the 
pavement should be recorded as a separate item, expressing it in 
terms of the square yard of pavement. See the section on Roads, 
Pavements and Walks. 

Cost of Loading and Hauling Cast Iron Pipe. — Three men assisted 
by a driver averaged 5 lengths of 12 -in. pipe loaded from a flat car 
onto a wagon in 12 mins. Planks were laid from the car to the 
wagon and the pipe was rolled down the plank runway. This same 
gang would unload a wagon in 6 mins. As each length of pipe 
weighed nearly % short ton, the wagon load was 2% tons. It, 
therefore, cost 5 cts. per ton to load and 2i^ cts. per ton to unload 
the wagons, wages of men being 15 cts. per hr. ; but this does not 
include the lost time of the two horses during loading and unload- 
ing, which is equivalent to about 2 cts. per ton. The total fixed 
cost of loading and unloading was 10 cts. per ton, including team 
time, to which must be added the hauling costs of 12 cts. per ton 
per mile, where 2% tons are the load (wages of team and driver 35 
cts. per hr. ) , and the team returns empty. Good, hard, level roads 
are required for so large a load. If the haul is short and this load- 
ing gang of 3 men walks along with the wagon, the cost of hauling 
becomes 25 cts. per ton mile, instead of 10 cts. 

Pipe should never be shipped in hopper-bottom cars, for the dif- 
ficulty of unloading adds very much to the cost. I have had a gang 
of 6 men who unloaded only 75 lengths of 12-in. pipe in 10 hrs. 
from a hopper gondola, into wagons. Each length weighed 800 lbs., 
making 30 tons the day's work, at 30 cts. per ton. This work was 
by hand, no derrick being available. 

Water Pipe Trenches. — Trenches for water pipes in the northern 
part of America are usually 5 ft. deep from the surface of the 
street to the axis of the pipe. In the South, trenches are only 3 
ft. deep. Water-pipe trenches are usually dug not less than 18 
to 24 ins. wider than the inside diameter of the pipe ; and just be- 
fore the pipes are laid a gang of men enlarges and deepens the 
trench for a short space where each pipe joint is to come ; this is 
called digging the "bell-holes." The bell-holes enable the yarners 



WATER-WORKS. 651 

and calkers to make the joints properly. It Is usually not necessary 
to brace the sides of a trench that is only 5 or 6 ft deep, to pre- 
vent caving in. The shallow depth and tlie absence of bracing 
make waterpipe trenching cheaper than sewer trenching. 

The backfilling is often done entirely by hand, the earth being 
rammed in thin layers. This is far more expensive than backfill- 
ing with a drag scraper pulled by horses, as is shown in the ex- 
amples that follow. 

The reader is referred to the Sewer Section for additional data 
on trench work. 

There are several excellent makes of trench excavating ma- 
chines on the market. Where enough work exists to warrant the 
purchase of one of these machines, and where neither boulders nor 
numerous buried pipe lines occur, trenching with these machines 
is far cheaper than hand work. 

The cost of excavating a water pipe trench with one make of 
trench machine is given in the next paragraph. Costs of similar 
work in sewer trenching and in tile ditching will be found in the 
Sewer Section and in the Miscellaneous Section. See also the sections 
on Earth Excavation and Rock Excavation. All data relating to 
trenching will be found by consulting the index under Trenching. 

Cost of Digging a 36- Mile Trench With a Buckeye Traction 
Ditcher.* — A wooden pipe line is used to bring the water from the 
mountains for the new water system of the city of Gfreeley, Colo. 
This line is 36 miles long. Of this distance 2,000 ft. was in rock. 
This part was excavated by hand and the rest of the trench was 
excavated by a Buckeye traction ditcher, manufactured by the 
Buckeye Traction Ditcher Co. of Findlay, O. 

For eight miles the trench ran through a stratum of gravel, con- 
taining many stones ; some of the gravel was also cemented to- 
gether. The material in the rest of the trench was clay, rather 
hard, but the machine dug it with great ease. In a ten hour day 
the machine in the gravel would dig from 600 to 1,000 ft, while 
in the clay as much as 2,500 ft. of trench was dug in 10 hours. The 
style of machine used is shown in the accompanying cut. It was 
a 28-in. by 7 14 -ft. drainage machine. Such a machine is designed 
for digging ditches for draining land, the type meant for con- 
tractors' use in heavy trench work being more substantially con- 
structed and of greater weight. This machine weighed 17 tons, 
while a contractor's machine of the same size would weigh 24 tons 
and cost $1,300 more than this machine did when new. 

The Buckeye ditcher, Fig. 2, being a traction engine as well as a 
.ditch digger, moves along automatically as it digs the trench. It 
throws the excavated material into the conveyor belt alongside of 
the wheel, and this belt dumps the earth clear of the ditch, so that 
the earth does not interfere with the pipe laying and other work 
that may have to be done in the trench. The bottom of the trench 
is rounded by the buckets on the wheel, so that pipe laid in the 



*Engineerinff-Contracting, Feb. 12, 1908. 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



ST'.- • - 


1 




-4-ii 


*^ 


|M • ' m^:-^.^ ' :-4t 




^ .... 




! 


^" • 








WATER-WORKS. 653 

trench does not roll from side to side. Two men can operate the 
machine under favorable circumstances. In bacltfillihg . the mate- 
rial can be pushed into the trench by the ditcher, used as a trac- 
tion engine, by fastening a plank to an outrigger, which acts in a 
manner similar to a snow plow. A drag scraper can also be used 
in backfilling. The fact that the machine pulverizes the earth to a 
great extent in digging makes the backfilling easier than when the 
earth is in chunks. 

The trench dug at Greeley was throughout its entire length 30 ins. 
wide and 4 ft. deep. This meant that a lineal foot of trench con- 
tained 10 cu. ft. of earth or .37 cu. yd. As the total length of 
trench dug by the machine was 188,080 lin. ft, in all 69,659 cu. 
yds. of earth were excavated. All the work of excavating with the 
machine was done by 4 men. The man running the ditcher was 
paid $5 per day, and the other three ?3 per day of 10 hours. The 
men worked 300 days. The ditcher when new cost $5,200, but 
this machine had been used before, and was bought by the con- 
tractors as a second hand machine. 

In the summary of cost given below we have allowed $6 per day 
for repairs and renewals and interest and depreciation, which is 
30 per cent per annum on the original cost of the machine. We 
are informed by the contractors that this machine used on an aver- 
age of 1 ton of coal per day, the coal costing ?5 per ton. 
The cost of digging the trench was : 

300 days, engineer $1,500.00 

900 days, helpers 2,700.00 

300 tons coal 1,500.00 

300 days, plant charges at $6 1,800.00 

Total 17,500.00 

This cost, as will be seen, does not include any general expenses, 
the cost of getting the machine to and from the job or the cost of 
backfilling. 

The cost of water used for one of these machines is nominal, as 
they use about 1 gallon of water for each pound of coal. 
The cost per lineal foot of trench for each item was : 

Engineer ?0.008 

Helpers 0.014 

Coal 0.008 

Plant 0.010 

Total $0,040 

The average number of lineal feet dug per day was 627, al- 
though, as previously stated, much more than this was done when 
the ditcher was actually working. The average given includes all 
lost time. This machine is speeded to dig 3 lin. ft. of trench 3 ft. 
deep per minute, and 2 lin. ft. of 4 1/2 -ft. trench per minute. In 
good material better speed than this was obtained, but naturally it 
could not be made continuously. The same thing may be said in 
regard to the yardage excavated. On some days more than 900 
cu. yds. of material were excavated, but the average yardage per 
day for the entire job was 232. 



854 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost per cubic yard for the work was as follows: 

Engineer $0,021 

Helpers 0.040 

Coal 0.021 

Plant 0.025 

Total $0,107 

This is low cost for trench excavation, even for a ditch only 4^^ 
ft, deep. 

The contractors for this work are the Jacobsen-Bade Co. of 
Portland, Oregon. 

Trenching in Quicksand, Using a Heim Trench Machine.* — The 
work comprised the placing of a 20-in. main in trench from 5 ft. 
to 13% ft. deep connecting two reservoirs at Madison, Wis. The 
conditions were quite different. The new reservoir was located In a 
low marshy soil with its bottom 5 ft. below the surface, the bottom 
of the old reservoir was 16 ft. below the surface. The main con- 
necting the two reservoirs was 1,068 ft. long. 

Beginning at a depth of 5 ft. at the new reservoir, the trench 
curving to the rise in the ground surface increased to a depth of 
10 ft., at 425 ft. from the starting point. Here an old lake bed 
of 61/^ ft. of quicksand and a stream of running water was encoun- 
tered. This quicksand and water liad to be contended with to the 
end of the pipe line and with an increasing depth of trench to 13% 
ft. Besides the unstable soil there were several interfering pipe 
lines. 

Work was begun with an ordinary derrick, but this was soon 
abandoned for a four-leg saw-horse derrick with a travelei". For 
the more difficult portions of the work still another derrick or 
trench machine, that shown in Fig. 3, was devised. This machine 
was used for handling excavation and pipe. It was 36 ft. long, 
with four buckets and two crank gears to raise and lower them. 
The same apparatus was used to handle the pipe, a 12 -ft. length 
of which weighed a ton. These men did the excavating and low- 
ered the pipe. The trench had to be sheeted to from 2 to 3 ft. 
below the bottom with 3-in. plank braced every 3 ft. The rate 
of progress was one length of pipe laid every 1% days. Toward the 
end of the saw-horse derrick work it took three days to lay a length 
of pipe and by the ordinary methods it is stated that the same work 
would have required seven days. The machine also reduced the 
excavating force by 15 men. Mr. John B. Heim, superintendent, 
under whose direction the Work was done, estimates the saving 
per length of pipe due to the machine $168.50, or for 23 lengths 
of pipe laid at $3,775.50. He writes further regarding the work 
as follows : 

"We had to pump day and night and dare not pump any faster 
than to keep the water down for fear of drawing the quicksand 
back of the sheeting into our trench and undermining the dirt. 

"The buckets were on a swivel and held by a spring, and were 
emptied on the pipe as we moved along. It took us over three 

'Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 20, I'l' 



WATER-WORKS. 



65r, 



months to lay 645 ft. of main with from fourteen to eighteen men 
at times used to trim the street after us. We did not interfere 
with the street or street railway traffic. It was a macadamized 
street, and, in spite of the treacherous soil working in at the back 
of the sheathing, we left the street in a passable condition for the 
winter. There was only slight settling here and there in the spring. 
During the whole siege we had to contend with the water, gas and 
sewer laterals, and towards the end we had to cut diagonally across 
the street. Here we had to go under a 6-in., an 8-in. and a 12-in. 
water main, a 16-in. suction-main from the artesian wells, a gas 
main, two sewer mains and the street railway tracks, at a depth 




Fig. 3. — Trench Machuie. 

of 1314 ft., with 61/^ ft. of quicksand and a continuous stream of 
water to fight. Our trenching machinery did away with building 
platforms to bring the soil to the top, saving us at least fifteen 
men to do this labor, besides requiring only three men to lower 
the pipe, so easy to handle, blocked to grade, as our fall is only 1 
ft. in a distance of 1,068 ft., towards the old storage reservoir by 
gravity. With the saw-horse derrick, towards the end, when our 
depth increased, it required three days to lay a pipe, so that we 
gained, besides the fifteen men, one and a half days for each length, 
not figuring at an increased depth to lay the same. Where we en- 
countered so many pipes going across the street and at times the 
different laterals, we had to lower the pipe at a slant and at times 
perpendicular. The work was accomplished with ease. I do not 



656 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

see how we could have got along without this machine, and without 
the machine we could not have accomplished the work before the 
cold weather set in.ljesides working at a greater expense." 

The trench machine illustrated was designed by Mr. John B. 
Heim, superintendent Department of Water Works, Madison, Wis., 
who gives the cost of the main as follows. 
Pipe, specials, valves, lead, hemp, coke, etc., with freight 

and cartage $ 5,800 

Lumber, machinery, braces, blocks, pumps, etc 1,676 

Labor 4,870 



Total $12,346 

This gives a cost per foot of $12,346 ^ 1,060 = $11,647. 

Cost of Trenching at Corning, N. Y. — A trench for a 10-in. water 
pipe was excavated 21/2 ft. wide X 5 ft. deep X 1,500 ft. long = 600 
cu. yds. in 4% days by 24 men, or at the rate of 6 cu. yds. per 
man per 10-hr. day, equivalent to 11 cts. a running foot or 25 cts. 
a cu. yd. Tlie backfilling was done in 3 days by 2 men and 1 
horse with driver, using a drag scraper and a short length of rope 
so that the horse worked on one side of the trench while the two 
men handled the scraper on the opposite side, pulling the scraper 
directly across the pile of earth. In this way the backfilling was 
made at a cost of 1.1 cts. per lin. ft. or 2% cts. per cu. yd., there 
being no ramming of tlie backfill required. Tliis is a remarkably 
low cost for baclifilling, and one not ordinarily to be counted upon. 
The material was a loamy sand and gravel. 

At Rochester, N. Y., with tlie size of trench and kind of ma- 
terial practically the same as above: 

1 man excavated 8 cu. yds. a day at cost of 19 cts. per cu. yd. 

1 man backfilled 16 cu. yds. a day at cost of 9 cts. per cu. yd. 

Total cost of excavation and backfill, 28 cts. per cu. yd. 

The cost of laying the 10-in. pipe was as follows, 800 ft. being 
laid per 10-hr. day by the gang: 

3 laborers digging bell holes at $1.50 $4.50 

3 laborers laying pipe at $1.50 4.50 

1 man hemping joints at $2.50 2.50 

2 men pouring lead at $2.50 5.00 

3 men calking joints at $2.50 7.50 



Total, 800 ft. at 3 cts $24.00 

This does not include trenching nor hauling and distributing 
pipe. 

Cost of Trenching, Great Falls, Mont. — The Great Falls (Mon- 
tana) Water Co. excavated 25,500 cu. yds. of earth, 1,900 cu. yds. 
of loose rock, and 1,500 cu. yds. of solid rock, in trenching for a 
6-in. water pipe. The work was done by company labor (not by 
contract), wages being $2.25 for laborers, and the cost was 34 cts. 
per cu. yd. for excavation and 3% cts. more per cu. yd. for back- 
filling and tamping. If wages had been $1.50 a day the cost would 
have been 23 cts. per cu. yd. for excavation and 2% cts. per cu. yd. 
for backfilling. 

Cost of Trenching, Astoria, Ore— Mr. A. L. Adams states that 
In trenching for the Astoria (Oregon) Waterworks, in 1806, the 



WATER-WORKS. 657 

first contractor averaged only 7 to 8 cu. yds. per man per day. 
Later on another contractor, even in the rainy season, averaged 
nearly 10 cu. yds. per man per 10-hr. day of trenching (including 
backfilling), at a cost (including foreman) of 17% cts. per cu. yd., 
wages being $1.70 a day. The material was yellow clay dug with 
mattocks and shovels. 

Cost of Trenching, Hilburn, N. Y. — Mr. W. C. Foster gives the 
following data on 17,000 ft. of trenching for water pipe at llil- 
burn, N. Y. The trench was 4 ft. deep, for 4-in. to 8-in. pipe. 
The digging was hard, the banks being full of cobbles and fre- 
quently caved in. The streets were not paved. The cost of trench- 
ing and backfilling was 10.1 cts. per lin. ft., wages being $1.35 for 
laborers and $3 for foremen. 

Cost of Pipe Laying, Providence, R. I.— Mr. E. B. Weston, Engi- 
neer Water Department, Providence, R. I., gives the following 
tables based upon many miles of trench work done prior to 1890: 

Easy Digging Sand. 
Size of pipe, ins... 4. 6. S. 10. 12. 16. 20. 

1. Trenching* 0422 .0518 .0611 .0707 .0798 .1445 .2088 

2. Laying 0129 .0162 .0191 .0219 .0249 .0370 .0497 

3. Foreman 0130 .0158 .0188 .0216 .0244 .0303 .0360 

4. Tools, etc 0041 .0050 .0059 .0069 .0078 .0134 .0191 

5. Calking 0106 .0107 .0108 .0111 .0118 .0159 .0301 

6. Lead, 5 cts. lb.. .0224 .0320 .0431 .0553 .0683 .0950 .1203 

7. Teams 0070 .0090 .0115 .0136 .0160 .0203 .0216 

8. Carting 0078 .0149 .0208 .0275 .0346 .0518 .0746 

9. Total 1200 .1554 .1911 .2286 .2676 .4082 .5602 

Medium Digging, Gravel, Etc. 

Size of pipe, ins... 4. 6. 8. 10. 12. 16. 20. 24. 

1. Trenching* 0597 .0697 .0790 .0883 .0974 .1700 .2400 .3019 

2. Laying 0189 .0220 .0249 .0279 .0307 .0440 .0577 .0639 

3. Foreman 0180 .0206 .0234 .0265 .0294 .0350 .0373 .0396 

4. Tools, etc 0056 .0065 .0075 .0084 .0093 .0154 .0214 .0602 

5. Calking 0106 .0107 .0108 .0111 .0118 .0159 .0301 .0757 

6. Lead, 5 cts. lb... .0224 .0320 .0431 .0553 .0683 .0950 .1203 .1600 

7. Teams 0070 .0090 .0115 .0136 .0160 .0203 .0216 .0228 

8. Carting 0078 .0149 .0208 .0275 .0346 .0518 .0746 .1317 

9. Total 1500 .1854 .2210 .2586 .2975 .4474 .6030 .8638 

♦Including backfilling, and in all cases the depth of the trench 

was such that the center of the pipe was 4 ft. 8 ins. below ground 
surface. 

Hard Digging, Hard or Moist Clat. 

Size of pipe, ins. . . 4. 6. 8. 10. 12. 16. 20. 

1. Trenching* 08G0 .0959 .1053 .1147 .1300 .2261 .3264 

2. Laying 0271 .0303 .0333 .0362 .0411 .0530 .0669 

3. Foreman 0260 .0286 .0314 .0343 .0372 .0428 .0452 

4. Tools, etc 0081 .0090 .0099 .0109 .0118 .0201 .0283 

5. Calking 0106 .0107 .0108 .0111 .0118 .0159 .0301 

6. Lead, 5 cts. lb.. .0224 .0320 .0431 .0553 .0683 .0950 .1203 

7. Teams 0070 .0090 .0115 .0136 .0160 .0203 .0216 

8. Carting 0078 .0149 .0208 .027,^. .0346 .0513 .0746 

9. Total 1950 .2304 .2661 .3036 .3508 .5250 .7134 

♦Including backfilling, and in all cases the depth of the trench 
was such that the center of the pipe was 4 ft. 8 ins. below gi'ound 
surface. 



658 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Wages in all cases above were $1.50 a day for laborers trench- 
ing and laying, $3 a day for foreman, $2.25 for calkers, and $2.25 
for teams which probably refers to team without driver. Carting 
was in all cases $1 a ton. Allowance for tools, item 4, was made 
on a basis of 7.2% of items 1 and 2. 

Lead service pipe per lin. ft. 

Weight Cost of pipe 



Diam. 


-Tap and stop 

Tap, stop, etc. 


Diam. 


in 


including 


in 


ms. 


tapping. 


ms. 


% 


$6.00 


y2 


V« 


6.23 


% 


% 


6.81 


% 


% 


8.67 


1 


1 


10.71 


1% 



in 
lbs. 
3.00 
4.00 
4.75 
6.00 
9.00 
10.00 



trenching 
laying, etc. 
$0.34 
.40 
.45 
.52 
.70 
.76 



In the above, lead pipe was assumed at 6 cts. per lb. ; labor of 
trenching and laying, 16 cts. per ft. 

Short lengths, 15 to 50 ft., of 6-in. pipe cost 34 cts. per ft. in easy 
digging to 45 cts. in hard digging for excavation, laying and back- 
filling, wages being as above stated. 

The trench for a 2 4 -in. pipe, 19,416 ft. long and 6.6 ft. deep cost 
32 cts. per cu. yd. for excavation and backfill, with wages at $1.50 
a day-. 

A 48-in. main was laid for $1.65 per ft. including digging, laying, 
calking and backfilling. 

A 16 -in. pipe, 374 ft. long passed under two railway tracks, 
and the cost of trenching, laying and backfilling was 50 cts. per ft. 

An S-in. pipe was laid across a bridge, and the cost of boxing, 
laying pipe, etc., was $1.32 per ft, while for a 12-in. pipe the cost 
was $1.50 per ft. 

Trenches were ordinarily 2 ft. wider than the pipe and 5 ft. 
plus half the diameter of the pipe deep. Such trenches were dug, 
the pipe laid and backfilling made at the following rate per laborer 
engaged : 

-in pipe, easy earth 21.0 lin. ft. per day 



6-in. 

6-in. 

8-in. 
12-in. 
20-in. 
24-in. 



medium earth 17.2 

hard earth 10.3 

easy earth 19.3 

medium earth 13.4 

easy earth 9.0 

medium earth 4.4 



Earth excavation in trenches where digging is easy costs 20 cts. 
per cu. yd. ; rock excavation averages $2 per cu. yd. and runs as 
high as $3, wages being $1.50 a day for labor. 

Cost of Laying 107,877 Feet of Water Mains at Cleveland, O.* — 

During 1907 the Pipe Laying Department of the Division of Water 
Works of Cleveland, O., laid 107,877 ft. of watermains, the sizes of 
pipe and lengths laid being as follows: 



* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 4, 1908. 



WATER-WORKS. 659 

30-in 5,330 ft. 

24-in 11.164 ft. 

20-in 1.665 ft. 

12-in 17,362 ft. 

10-in 1,181 ft. 

8-in 15,09!) ft. 

e-in 53,415 ft. 

4-in 439 ft. 

3-in 2,222 ft. 

Table II, prepared by M. E. Bemis, superintendent of water 
works, shows the unit cost of laying these watermains. 

Mr. Bemis states that the costs were rather high, owing to the 
unusually high prices of materials prevailing during the year. 
The prices for materials at Cleveland, during 1907 were as 
follows : 

Per ton. 
All sizes of cast iron pipe, delivered on 

streets, for the first half of 1907 $36.25 

For the second half of 1907 36.00 

Miscellaneous castings and special castings, 
from o-in. to 16-in., inclusive, first half 

of 1907 54.00 

Miscellaneous castings over 16-in., first half 

of 1907 60.00 

Miscellaneous castings, second half 1907.. 59.90 
Special castings, from 3-in. to 16-in., in- 
clusive, second half 1907 65.00 

Special castings, over 16-in., second half 

1J07 75.00 

Each. 

3-in. valves .| 6.53 

4-in. valves 7.63 

6-in. valves 12.60 

8-in. valves 18.90 

10-in. valves 26.25 

12-in. valves 34.50 

16-in. valves 66.15 

20-in. valves 134.25 

24-in. valves 217.50 

3-in. hydrants 20.00 

4-in. hydrants 27.75 

6-in. hydrants 46.25 

Pig lead, first half of 1907 

$123.30 per ton f. o. b. point of shipment 

Pig lead, second half of 1907 

$101.00 per ton f. o. b. cars at Cleveland 
Packing 4%c per lb. 

Tlie wages paid for labor were as follows : 

Per hour. 

Foreman $0.42 

Assistant foreman 0.33 

Calkers 0.27 1/2 

Labor 0.22 

Team 0.50 

Cost of Water Pipes Laid at Boston. — Mr. C. M. Saville gives the 
following data relative to 62 miles of pipe work done by contract 
for the city of Boston : The costs are averages of the actual costs 
under 21 contracts, from 1896 to 1903. As a general rule the 



660 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



J OSiHOinN I t-M to 

0) I ' ' 



CO 



o I CJS 1 to 
in I CO I -^t 



•t|_l tOCOtOliSM I 00-* 

5 ;h •^oooo 1 <oo 

' s 1 ■ ■ 

"^ Pi so- I 69- 



1 

M 










00 -* eg ■* Tf 


Ncq 


M 


•4-« 


OijCSOOCOtH 


eq-^ 


D 


c-oooo 


oso 





1 (B 




■ ■ 


Q 


»D, 


6I9- 


1 ««• 


1-4 








«! 








J 










si! 

00 'I' 


00 O t- [- CO 


1 00-* 


M 


inc-oooM 


1 Tt*-** 


0501-IOO 


coo 


< 





T-H 


S 


P. 


e«- 


69- 


M 








El 








1 










eq CO 00 in i-H 


as CO 


c'C 


oo coco tH 


■^Oi 


Tt< e-l C^ rH O 


oo 


e 


I L< 
O 0) 


49- 


c<i 

69- 



rfi I U5 ! ■>«< 



■* I m I 00 



OSCOCOtHC^ I tOiH 

• ^ ■^cgO-'J^CO I 00 CO 

ClM COrHr-jiHiH j i-l ■=> 

"7 u tA ' ' ' I jg 

eg <U yg- ^ ^ 
rH a 



CO 1 00 I 05 






O 

o 

Ph 



o 
O 

H 
CS 



n 



g (j;^ CO 00 o c-i c« 



eg CO 

Irt 00 

us eg o ego i iHO 



o (U CO 
eg p< €«■ 



".jj ■^t-oegco I oi 

CVI COCOOrfO I rH 
■" , C^IiHOcOiH I oo 



'^. jj C0<?j0-.s<0 
CVI OOCOOloOI 
"T* c^ -^j-lOcOO 



OlOO I OS I 00 
CgOO C3S I rH 
tHC- I 05 I oo 



COO I o 
eg"5 in 



O <U in 
CO A E«- 



Ul: 






© 



^ ri t* 






"3 ^ S 



o o 



Is- 

<i)-C_ 
-M CO 

^ to 

^ a 



O t, 

■d-tJ 
C Id 

+j <B 

"s 

<P<H 
!h O 

>•" 

II 

CM 5 

TO 



c 


M 


"3 


a 


S 


I 




a 


c 


i» 


1 


« 


o 


-d 


CO 


!3 



SI 



WATER-WORKS. 6G1 

pipes were laid witli the axis of tlie pipe 5 ft. below tlie surface. 

Tlie pipes were usually placed in the trench by a hand operated 

derrick spanning the trench. In practically all cases tlie streets 

were macadamized. Just how many feet of each kind of pipe were 

laid is not stated ; but there were not less than the following 

amounts : 

12-in. pipe 15,500 ft. 

16-in. pipe 44,600 ft. 

20-in. pipe 21,200 ft. 

24-in. pipe 19,600 ft. 

30-in. pipe 7,200 ft. 

36-in. pipe 36,800 ft. 

4S-in. pipe 97,900 ft. 

The first item in Table III of $30 per ton for pipe was calcu- 
lated by adding 12% to the actual cost of $26.80 per ton, this 12% 
being added to cover incidentals. These incidentals are as fol- 
lows, by percentages : 

Per cent. 
Small pipes for blow-offs and connections.... 1 Mj 

Special castings 4 ^4 

Valves 5 

Miscellaneous materials 1 

Total percentages to be added to the cost 
per short ton of straight pipe 12 

The cost of teaming on 21 contracts previous to 1898 was 26 cts. 
per ton per mile, the average haul being 2.4 miles from the pipe 
yards ; but, in order to be liberal, 30 cts. per ton per mile for a 
21/^ -mile haul is assumed as an average; wages of two-horse team 
and driver being 45 cts. per hr. 

The lead is estimated at 5 cts. per lb., and each joint requires 
about as many pounds of lead as 2 times the diameter of the pipe 
in inches, according to Mr. Saville, but other authorities do not 
agree with him. 

The column headed "misrellaneous expenses" is based upon 
actual experience, and includes cost of tools, insurance of men, 
lumber, yarn, and incidental expenses. The tools depreciate about 
50% on any contract. It was estimated that 4% of tlie cost of 
laying the pipe should be added to cover the cost of tools. The 
cost of accident insurance was 3% of the pay roll. The contract- 
or's bond cost 14% of the bond. Incidental expenses were about 
1% of the pay roll. It was estimated that these three items 
amounted to i.2% of the cost of laying the pipe. The cost of lum- 
ber, yarn, etc., averaged 2.8% of the cost of hauling and laying. 
Hence, the total cost of "miscellaneous expenses" was 4% + 3.2% + 
2.8%, which is 10% of the coct of laying the pipe. The word "lay- 
ing" is here used to include the cost of hauling the pipe, the cost 
of lead, the cost of trenching and backfilling, and the cost of 
placing the pipe in the trench and calking it. 

The column headed "labor" includes the cost of trenching in 
earth (there was very little rock), and the cost of placing the 



662 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



o 


























to«o 


■*iO 


t^t~ 


t^i>. 


^o 


MOO 


OlOO 


00-* 


mm 


00 CO 


00 CO 


rtt- 




cOO> 


05C0 


<M t^ 


U5M 


OS 00 


CD 00 


lot- 


-HCO 


oom 


OSt- 


OS CO 


•*eM 


ai 


^•H 


^(M 


MIM 


C^CO 


(MM 


C3-* 


up CD 


CO 00 


t--H 


osm 


.-100 


.*eo 


O 


•» 
















,>H 


,— t 


.-«rH 


.IN 


H 


























2 


iOtO 


CO t^ 


O-H 


CO 00 


rH-^ 


om 


00 CO 


00 CO 


IMCJ 


t^t- 


coco 


CD CM 


■*TJt 


■*■* 


irao 


io>o 


COCO 


t~t^ 


r-oo 


ooos 


0.-I 


•*m 


cot- 


OSrt 


S 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


.-(tH 


^O 


__, 


^HN 


«» 
























cel- 

OUS 

nses. 


iraio 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


o>o 


om 


mo 


om 


mo 


mo 


coco 


t-t^ 


i>-t- 


oooo 


02 02 


T— < *H 


COCO 


■*-* 


t-^oo 


-*■* 


t-oo 


NCO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


*— ( T— 1 


*-H 1—4 




1—1 1—4 


(MCM 


(M<M 


COCO 


Ul V a 




























oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


«» 
























Lead, 
5c. per 
pound. 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


(M(M 


CO CO 


into 


oooo 


oo 


mm 


oo 


mm 


oo 


ir^iTT' 


oo 




y->^ 


»-. -H 


—"^ 


r-lT^ 


(Mcq 


(MIM 


coco 


CO CO 


•^■rt* 


T).-3< 


mm 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


o» 














































































>om 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 




om 




om 


mo 


mo 


cq n 


CCt1< 


-*>o 


.*co 


lo t^ 


CD OS 


OS CO 


(M 00 


mTt* 


oso 


coos 


t-t- 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


0.-H 


,— t ,— t 


.-lOJ 


r^ CO 


N CO 


<M-* 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


ni I- n 


























(U OJ C3 


























H ^ffi 


























o . 


























Cost 
@ 130.0 
per ton 


























wo> 


coin 


e<5^ 


■*o 


1-1 IM 


lOUJ 


t^co 


"liOO 


mco 


OOrt 


CO 00 


0-* 


0<M 


NCO 


lOO 


t*-^ 


ooo 


iot~ 


IM-* 


t-o 


rMCO 


CO(M 


COTJI 


-HOO 


-H,-l 


Tl^ 


>-.cq 


t-HC^ 


Cq (M 


c<m 


com 


.* t- 


coos 


t-cq 


osm 


.-HOO 


CO 


















" 


" 


" 




























^IJ 


Tt*CO 


(MIO 


1-HI-* 


ooo 


l^-et* 


IC"S 


OSrt 


00 CD 


mcM 


cot~ 


IMCO 


ooo 


CQ.«J1 


Tt<»0 


•OCO 


«ooo 


COOS 


00 Ol 


tHOO 


m-* 


ON 


mo 




t-eq 


^. u So 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


O-H 




^<N 


(MCO 


W-* 


com 


coco 


Weig 

linea 

T 

(2,00 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


























t per 
th. 

ds. 


oo 


OO 


»oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


oo 


OO 


oo 


oo 


oo 


,-H-* 




T— 1 ^^ 


O— I 


i-HCD 


lOO 


CD-* 


oo 


ON 


COtH 


«o 


oo 


Weigh 
leng 

Poun 


coo 


oco 


(>>CO 


■*05 


cocq 


oo 


00 CO 


O0C3S 


c»c~ 


.-It- 


m'S" 


OS-H 


'^ 


i-Ht-H 


t-lt-H 


t-i 1-1 


.-ICM 


M CO 


(M'S* 


CO m 


•*t- 


CD OS 


r-l 


oom 


«3 


























a 




















































"li ^ 


























o o 




















































O) 




























* * 


<iiw 


<5W 


<A 


<t^ 


<iw 


<tA 


<iitd 


<;w 


<:w 


<t:w 


<W 




■* 


CO 


oo 


O 


."J* 


o 


CO 


IM 


00 


.* 


o 




^ 


^ 


^ 




(N 


M 


CO 


CO 


•^ 


.* 


m 


CD 



r-l 1-H ^tn 



WATER-WORKS. 



(>(i:j 



pipe in tlie trench and calking It. Wages paid for labor were as 
follows : 

Foreman ?100.00 per month 

Sub-foreman 3.00 per day 

Calkers and yarners 2..'i0 " 

Laborers, 1st class 1.75 

Laborers, 2d class 1.60 " 

Double team and driver 0.45 per hour 

Single team and driver 0.30 

A considerable amount of extra work was done by force ac- 
count on 38 miles of the pipe lines, averaging 12 cts. per ft. of 
line, due to obstructions encountered causing changes of loca- 
tion, etc. 

Cost of Laying Main Water Pipe in Boston, Mass., 1878-1907.* — 
The gradual increasing average labor cost of laying water pipe 




'0 m 400 m WO 

Fig. 4 



1000 lEOO mo 



mo /SOO ^000 



Effect of Length of Job on Cost. 



in Boston is made the subject of one of the reports prepared by 
Metcalf & Eddy, consulting civil engineers to the Boston Finance 
Commission. Nearly all the pipe laid was 8-in. pipe ; but some 
6-in. and 10-in. pipe is included and a little 12-in. pipe. Since, 
however, this range in sizes involves substantially no change in 
trench dimensions the cost per foot should be directly comparable. 
The average labor costs per lineal foot of laying water pipe, taken 
from the city engineer's records for the years 1878 to 1907, in- 
clusive, are given in Table IV. These are the figures on which the 
engineers' computations which follow are based. 

It will be seen from the table that, during the period covered, 
wages advanced, the hours of labor decreased and the labor per- 
formed per hour also advanced. 

Figure 4 shows the general relation of the cost per foot to the 



*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 



15 



664 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

( "Xl nntj") QOC COTt^^t— • O »-( t^ in 00 O 30 1-1 fX) O t^ 00 00 CO O O Tf* Oi CO iH <?5 Irt N C<! (M 

JO msuet -AB ^^^?^ 
uijojmn oj 
peonpai Jam 
-jnj jsoD "Av 

•JiaaAi. jad 
•sjii 09 '^^P 
jsd g$ JO SIS 
Bq lUJOjiun 
o o:j pao'np 

g -8J 5300 "AV 

O . OLn<M 

+j / isoo 

I5 aj / ^BnjJK AV(Mirqi?OD3c<5COeOC<:iC<3C»3C003-*COritiC>5'*'^T)<lO<0«5«OOOOOCOt-000000 

03 u \ •UITAT t-t-inoJ •^-^(^qr-^r-^1^oieolI:3«>THOT-^od«jr-^cDl^^o6t>^ocolOr^t>^«) 

H a) \ ••"''■ 1-lrHMeq •Cq<M(MC^C<lrHTHiHiHC<l(rqrHi-lTHM«)03C<l-*tOT}<miou5tC 

O , \ ■* CO 

^ g \ r^tooiCD • CO o tH o (^q t- CI o oo Tt* CD CO CD CD LO 00 CO CD ITS CO cr> O <NI T-l "^D 

'"' ^ \ 'X'B ]/\[ Lrsoj-^co toa nairH-:j^oiou^"*c^coLrao6<>ic<iincTicysOLni-Hcoo6a50 

C^ ' COlMt^CO • -^5^ t- t- -* O rH O O Oi -^ CD tH 00 OO iH a» Tj* 0:1 CO 00 C<1 as "* CO CO 

i-tTHi-(T-4'rHC^lC<IC<lr-(i-lrHi-lrHiHrHTH 



hJ 



<! 

h^ 

o 

t< _ 

O "5133 AS. ooooooooooooo-*-*-*-*-*-*oooTf'<j<'*-<i<-<a<Tt<-*Ti< 

O .-JT ^^ CO CO CO CO «D Cfii CD O CC CC CO CO «) 10 ITS 10 ITS U3 U3 10 10 us -^ "<^ Tf -^ -^ ""^ -^ -^ 

g 

lJ •C^aaT^ nor OiooMOi ■ojmojcoc-iocoocooocoirqoooofot-i— cooooor-it-oo 

V'* S,"^ ^ ■ OOC-C-t- •iHC0rH'*COCnO3rHI:^00C0N00lOlO00[--*THNiHT-tt-cnC0 

pj JO l[52U9^ "AV'^t^"*'^ •coM*c<i<rqco(MC<itM<M<Mco*^Tj*co**'^cO'^coco'^'^'^cO'^ 
H 

^1 

O oo^oot* -t— oirtcococoincDoot^eor^coi^cooomc^oooMO'^iiAooos 

O '/TaaT^ arTifT o:)rHious - 00 t-i co 10 ^ o tH o <m cm C5 co i/^ t^ rH ci 00 o l^ 00 CO C> -rt^ t> t- 

(.401s J ; 0^i<-l o^rHC^lin •!— [-OOC2C-aeMCO-*ilOmOCOC5COCOC01/5Tt<C-t-C-C-iH03 

SS JO li;jsU9I 11340 J, ^^^.^•' ;Tl^oO(^5l^^coTH•*"to"o"cD"t-^a^^^c»3 05o"T^coM"cococolnlnln 

PQ tHtHt-H C<1tH rHrHrH tH tH rH 

< 



H 



•SqOC O3T}<05M 

JO asqmh^i 



J9u S9S13^^ r-^^r-^r^r-^M<^<^<^ae^i(^3MC<^c<^N(^q<^qc<i(^iNc-ic<^Mc<^(^qc^^MC<i(^^M 



cioa50THC-ioo-^mcot^ooo^OTHcqcO'«j<Lr5coc^ooa50THc<ico-<j<u:>cot>- 
t^i>'CX)ooGooooooooooooooocjic:>aia5ctso:iasa505o:)00oooooo 

, T*,^ ... OOOOOOOOOOOOOOGOCOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOt30000000000^0^0^OTiOiCi050;i 
aB9 jt T-nHT-HrHTHrHrHrHT-iTHT-lTHrHTHTHrHT-' rWrHrHrHrHrHrHT-(t-(,HTHTHt-i 



WATER-WORKS. 065 

length of the job for five of the years under consideration, viz. : 
1886, 1891, 1896, 1902 and 1906. It will be seen that the form 
of curve is substantially similar in all cases. From these curves 
was computed the increase in labor cost per foot for shorter jobs 
as comparecJ with the cost for 1,000 ft., in percentages, and the 
results shown by the dotted curve on the same diagram. This 
curve shows that the increased cost per foot of a piece of work 
100 ft. long, over what it would have been if 1,000 ft. long, is 90 
per cent. The increased cost for a 200-ft. job is 55 per cent ; for 
300 ft., 34 per cent; for 400 ft, 21 y2 per cent; for 500 ft., 13 
per cent, and for 600 ft., 8 per cent. 

From the same line of reasoning it is readily apparent that in 
years when the average length of job is high, the corresponding 
cost per foot should be less than when the average length is low. 
From their study of the relations of average length to average 
total cost per foot, partly by mathematical work and partly by the 
exercise of judgment, the engineers deduced factors by which the 
costs can be reduced to an average annual length of job of 500 
ft. ; the labor cost so reduced is given in the last column of the 
table. In others words, this column is intended to show costs which 
should be absolutely comparable in all particulars, having been re- 
duced not only to a uniform basis of wages and hours of labor, 
but also to a uniform basis of average length of job. 

The results are indicated somewhat more clearly by Fig. 5, 
showing by the light line the average labor cost as computed by 
the city engineer for uniform conditions of wages and hours of 
labor, and by the heavy line the further reduction for a uniform 
length of job. This latter line shows, under the assumed basis, the 
average labor cost of about 33 cts. per foot to and including 1893, 
and a rapidly increasing cost up to 1906. On this diagram the 
dotted lines show the effect of omitting the work done by contract 
in 1904, 1905, 1906 and 1907, which had been included by the city 
engineer. On this basis it is seen that the cost in 1906 and 1907 
was somewhat less than in 1905, although greater than in any pre- 
ceding year. 

Further comment upon these diagrams is perhaps superfluous. 
Metcalf & Eddy emphasize the statement that the increased labor 
cost can be charged to nothing but inefficiency of labor. 

This inefficiency is due to various causes. The engineers else- 
where reported in some detail showing the effect of age upon effi- 
ciency. Other causes wliich doubtless have greater or less effect 
are lack of discipline, political appointments, and more oi- less 
inefficient organization. 

Comparative Cost of Pipe Laying in New England Cities.* — As a 
part of the report by the special Boston Finance Commission, 
which recently completed its labors, there has been published a 
volume of some 1,200 pages comprising solely the reports (nearly 
60 in number) of Metcalf & Eddy of Boston, consulting ciril engi- 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 28, 1909. 



666 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



In their investigation of the Boston "Water Department the engi- 
neers made a careful study and analysis of the cost of pipe laying 
and for the purpose of comparison also investigated the cost of 
laying pipe by day labor in neighboring cities of Massachusetts. 
The basis of actual cost differs, in some cases considerably, since 
the trenches are not of the same dimensions and since wages and 



7ff 



60 



£0 



^0 



30 



BO 



\\'-'- 



i; 



v. 



Yi\liVi\tli 



W 



'Aw- 



\\Vil\l\i\l 



'i\YiWt 



ItY^ 



?.it>- 



c'i't'- 



lii-i^Jiii- 



>kS?f 



;5??^5: 



-'Hm 



i'n 



;«? = 



i\-h 



ii¥- 



0,h 



ilV: 



JSpf ?■ 



9si 



t^'i',' 






ivtti- 






ii' 



Vhi'r 



z55: 



■-.r^i 



7'«' 



]iiH 



10 



/SSO /S3S 

Yeflff 



/S£>0 



Tamo zees 
Pig. 5. — Increasing Cost of Pipe Laying in Boston. 



/30S 



hours of labor vary more or less. The engineers attempted, how- 
ever, to reduce the cost to a uniform basis, so far as possible. 
Since the data for adjoining cities are based on present costs, or 
at least costs within a period of a year or two previous to the date 
of the report, they took the average labor cost of pipe laying in 
Boston for the 2% years from 1905 to July 1, 1907, inclusive, for 
comparison. 



WATER-WORKS. 667 

In Table V are given, following the name of each city, the 
wages and hours of common labor during the period under dis- 
cussion ; the length of pipe included in making up the average 
cost ; the years in which this pipe was laid ; the actual labor cost 
per foot ; the depth of trench ; the corresponding cost per foot for 
u trench 6 ft. deep, such as is used in the city of Boston ; and, 
finally, the corresponding cost for a 6-ft. trench, if the wages had 
been uniformly $2 per day and the hours 60 per week. 

In making the computations, it was assumed that a trench 6 ft. 
deep would cost 20 per cent more per foot than one 5 ft. deep. As 
a matter of fact the actual increase in cost would probably be 
something less than 20 per cent, since there would be very little 
if any increased cost of placing the pipe, making joints, etc., and 
no increase in the cost of teaming. On the other hand, the cost 
of excavation for the lowest foot might be a little greater than one- 
fifth of the average cost, but in most cases probably not enough 
greater to offset the practically unchanged cost of the items men- 
tioned above. The addition of 20 per cent is, tlierefore, probably 
more than ample to allow for the increased depth of trench. 

In reducing the actual costs to what they would have been had 
the wages been $2 per day and the hours 60 per week, it has been 
assumed that the actual efficiency of labor per hour was unaffected 
by the change in hours and wages. 

The figures in the last column of the table should be absolutely 
comparable. The greater difficulties encountered in Boston on ac- 
count of many obstructions, etc., do not enter, since all jobs involv- 
ing such difficulties have been rigidly excluded from the computa- 
tions and comparisons. 

From them it is evident that the pipe laying cost in the city of 
Boston is 69 per cent greater than that of the average of the other 
seven cities, and nearly 44 per cent greater than the cost in 
Worcester, where it is the highest of any of the seven. 

In the case of Cambridge, besides data showing the cost in 1905, 
average labor cost per foot was furnished of laying 4, 6, 8 and 
12-in. pipe from 1894 to 1903. The fluctuations in these costs are 
not remarkable and tliere was no wide divergence from the average 
during tiiis period of ten years. After adding 20 per cent to make 
the figures comparable with those for 6-ft. trench in Boston, the 
average for the ten years was 40.4 cts. per foot for all sizes, or, 
separating the figures, 31.4 cts. for 4-in. pipe, 35.1 cts. for 6-in., 
43.4 cts. for 8-in. and 51.6 cts. for 12-in. In 1905, however, as 
already noted, the average cost on the comparative basis was 50.3 
cts. per foot, an increase of 49 per cent over the average for the 
ten years 1894-1903. No data were furnished which explained this 
sudden increase. 

Reducing 40.4 cts. per foot to the $2 per day and 60 hours per 
week basis, the comparative labor cost of pipe laying in Cambridge 
prior to 1904 was found to be 31.6 cts. per foot. During this same 
period, 1894-1903, the labor cost in Boston reduced to the same 
basis was rapidly increasing and ranged from 37.3 cts. at the be- 



668 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



•daep -u 9 qouej; — 
X99M asd 09 sanoq m 

eclid JO -^j J8d aoq'Bi » 
JO ' :)soo Suipuodsajjoo ^ 



mO5C0r-IU5Tt<C0i-lt- 



•IlOuaj; -ij-g JOJ M ^^„a.c<io«5co 

8did JO -u JSd Joq c « ^ d od tiJ ci r^i oi 

-•Bl JO ^SOO pajndUIOO ® o>«5ix>ioinio-*co 









•uoueji JO iijdaa <b 



•8dTd JO ij jed -M ^a=Sr-(Not-t- 

JOqui JO JSOO ITJniOV § dddrouriw^d 

U OS lO lO ■>*<•* LO CO C<3 



-4-J C^ 
on-" 

I" 

n <u 
bs 

o u 
ci 






OtH O 

ti >,t- U5 1- to ti t- to 

O'-'OOOOoOO 

I 3 C3 05 05 03 o^ O^ CT) 

Lrth-3rHtHTHTH,_jr-(TH 

So 



•JSOO 8ST3J9 J 

-A'B Sunndmoo uipe a; ^^ ■'^^'^'gt 
-pnpui 9did JO \\-\S\XQ'-i rr. rn "=, . «^.^.m »:^. 



<u 



.5 a 

<D«0 



-tuGO JO sjnoq puT3 § 






s 



IM MC<J(MCqTHCqcqiM 



I'D 



« 



-a 



o>~: cS o S a) i^j3 > 



o bt 
»2 

+-> ^ 

£2 

O n 

C« 

■M 

<1> CI 

,Q O 

u 
•d 

P bfi « 
o ci^ 

• 4) • 

x: ® 



WATER-WORKS. 669 

ginning ot the period to 59.3 cts. at the end, or from 18 per cent 
to 88 per cent more than the cost in Cambridge. 

Metcalf & Eddy show that from the foregoing information it can 
only be concluded that under labor conditions as they exist in 
other neighboring cities, a fair average labor cost for pipe laying 
work, reduced to the uniform basis of $2 per day and 60 hours per 
week, would be about 42 cts. per foot, with 50 cts. as a maximum. 
Of course individual pieces of work would often exceed the aver- 
age and others would frequently fall considerably below it. As 
against these fair costs, this work cost the city of Boston, on the 
same basis of hours and wages, about 70 cts. per foot for the three 
years prior to July, 1907. or from 10 to 70 per cent in excess of its 
reasonable cost. 

Reduced to the basis of hours and wages, at the time of the 
report (i. e., 44 hours per week and $2.25 per day), the fair aver- 
age labor cost as estimated upon the basis of cost in other cities 
would be 63.7 cts. per foot, with 76.6 cts. as a reasonable maximum, 
against which the average cost for the previous 2i^ years (on the 
same basis) was equivalent to $1,081 per foot, an excess of 44.2 
cts. per foot, or 69 per cent, over the fair average cost. 

It is difficult to estimate the total excess cost resulting from this 
inefficiency of labor. The lengths of pipe laid from which the 
average costs were computed — including only those jobs on which 
there were no special difficulties which might render them not 
comparable with other jobs, and including no rock excavation — - 
constitute but a small part of the total pipe of these sizes (6 to 
12 ins.) actually laid. It is probable that on the jobs involving 
special difficulties, where the actual labor costs must have been 
greater, the excess over a reasonable cost was also larger ; and on 
contract jobs, which have usually been done at a less cost than 
the day labor jobs, the excess over a reasonable cost would be less. 
The total length of 6-in. to 12-in. pipe laid in the year 1906-7, as 
stated in the last annual report of the Boston Water Department, 
was 57,949 ft. If the excess labor cost on all of this may properly 
be taken as 44.2 cts. per foot on the $2.25 per day basis, equiva- 
lent to 39.2 cts. on the $2 per day basis, then the city actually paid 
$22,000 more than it should have done for labor alone, in laying 
pipe of 6-in. to 12-in. diameter in 1907. 

The total length of main pipes laid in the year 1906-7 was 71,307 
ft. Since the inefficiency of labor is not confined to work upon 
small sizes of pipe, and is experienced in some degree upon the 
contract work as well as upon that done by day labor, the engi- 
neers estimate that this inefficiency resulted in a total excess of 
cost of pipe laying, for labor alone, amounting to something like 
520,000, and possibly much more, for the year ending January 
31, 1907. 

Cost of Water Pipe Laying and Placing Hydrants at Atlantic 
City. — Mr. Kenneth Allen gives the following data relative to the 
laying of pipe at Atlantic City, N. J., in 1905. The work was 
done by the "Water Department. A 4-in. pipe line, 5,000 ft. long, 



670 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was laid in a trench 40 ins. deep, in sand requiring no shoring or 
pumping. 

The average force employed was as follows: 

Per 8 hr. 
Day. 
Trenching and back filling : 

10 men at $1.50 $15.00 

Ml foreman at $2.00 1.00 

Total, 292 lin. ft. at 5.5 cts $16.00 

Pipe Laying : 

4 pipe handlers at $1.75 $ 7.00 

2 calkers at $2.50 5.00 

1 lead man at $2.00 2.00 

Va foreman at $2.00 1.00 

Total, 292 lin. ft. at 5.1 cts $15.00 

The total cost per lineal foot of 4-in. pipe was: 

Cts. per ft. 

19.66 lbs. cast iron pipe at 1.11 cts 21.59 

Specials, at 21/2 cts. per lb 1.69 

Valves and boxes 6.26 

0.45 lbs. lead at 4.9 cts. per ton 2.22 

0.024 lbs. Jute, 51/2 cts. per ton 0.13 

0.28 lbs. coke 0.08 

Hauling at 75 cts. per ton 0.80 

Trenching, as above detailed 5.50 

Pipe laying, as above detailed 5.10 

Watchman 0.60 

Superintendence 1.25 

Total 45.22 

The average cost of setting 10 hydrants (4 in.) was as follows 
per hydrant : 

Material $3.26 

3 days (24 hrs.) at $1.50 4.50 

Total $7.76 

The following was the cost of 4,300 ft. of 8-in. pipe: 

Per. ft. 

46.5 lbs. pipe at $22 ton $0,511 

1.04 lbs. lead at 4.9 cts 0.054 

Jute at 51/2 cts 0.023 

Specials, valves, hauling, etc 0.217 

Labor 0.290 

Total $1,095 

The following was the cost of 3,200 ft. of 10-in. pipe: 

Per ft. 

68.7 lbs. pipe $0,762 

2.04 lbs. lead 0.098 

Jute 0.046 

Specials, valves, hauling, etc 0.124 

Labor 0.560 

Total $1,590 



WATER-WORKS. 671 



Tlie following was the cost of 3,600 ft. of 12-in. pipe: 

Per ft. 

84.3 lbs. pipe $0,936 

2.77 lbs. lead 0.123 

Jute 0.048 

Specials, valves, hauling, etc 0.273 

Lrfibor 0.790 



Total $2,165 

It will be noted that the labor cost for the 8, 10 and 12-in. pipe 
was abnormally liigli, said to be due to e.\.pensive crossings of other 
pipe lines and to the presence of adjacent gas pipes, etc., which 
liad to be cared for. 

Cost of Laying a 14-in. Pipe Line, Wilkes- Barre, Pa.* — The work 

consisted of laying 750 ft. of 14 in. bell and spigot pipe 
at Wilkes-Barre, Pa., in October, 1905. The work was done by 
company labor and the digging was easy. The pipe was distribut- 
ed with a truck on a narrow gage track along the trench. 
The pipes were placed in the trench by a hand-operated derrick 
spanning the trench. Tlie cost of the pipe line was as follows: 

Materials: , Total. Per ft 

(;2 pieces 14-inch pipe, 77,773 lbs $ 937.16 $1.25 

() pieces 14-inch bends, 2,852 lbs 74.87 10 

Freight on pipe and bends 50.39 .067 

1,421 lbs. lead at $0.05 72.05 .096 

(!8 lbs. hemp at $0.09 6.12 .008 



Total cost of material $1,140.59 $1,521 

Labor : Total. Per ft. 
Excavating and distributing pipe, 64 days at 

$1.74 ? 111.36 .f0.148 

Laying and calking, 213/9 days at $1.74 37.12 .050 

Covering over, 12 2/9 days at $1.74 23.01 

Covering over, 2 days at $1.79 3.58 .035 

Superintendence and engineering 12.20 .016 



$ 187.27 $0,249 



Total cost of material and labor $1,327.86 $1,770 

For the above information we are indebted to Mr. Douglas Bunt- 
ing, Chief Engineer, Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Co. 

Cost of Water Pipe Laid at Alliance, O. — Mr. L. L. Tribus gives 
the following costs of work done in 1894, tlie material being loam 
and clay excavated to such a depth that 4 ft. of earth would be 
left on top of each class of pipe after backfilling: 

Size of pipe In ins 

Wt. of pipe, lbs. per ft. 

Lbs. special per ft 0.4 

Lbs. lead per ft 

Lbs. yarn per ft 

Total length in ft 2,890 



4 


6 


8 


10 


12 


19 


301/2 


44 


62 


79 


0.4 


0.76 


1.1 


1.55 


1.9 


0.4 


0.66 


1.0 


1.25 


1.5 


0.02 


0.025 


0.05 


0.08 


0.1 


890 


9,760 


1,860 


3,320 


2,930 



*Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 7, 1906. 



672 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost Per Lin. Foot. Laid. 

Size of pipe in ins 4 6 8 10 12 

Pipe $0.2360 $0.3780 $0.5350 $0.7470 $0.9400 

Specials . and valves 0120 .0189 ,0268 .0374 .0470 

Hauling 0056 .00V8 .0110 .0145 .0190 

Lead 0020 .0330 .0500 .0630 .0750 

Yarn 0014 .0018 .0035 .0056 .0070 

Trenching 1240 .1210 .1287 .1480 .1902 

Pipe laying 0370 .0346 .0313 .0542 .0463 

Total $0.4360 $0.5951 $0.7863 $1.0697 $1.3245 

This work was done by laborers and men employed by the water 
company and does not include cost of superintendence. The 4-ft. 
cover over the pipe was in some cases exceeded. The digging was 
comparatively easy with little ground water to bother. Mr. Tribus 
informs me that the wages paid were: Laborers, $1.25; pipe han- 
dlers, $1.50; and calkers, $2.25, per 10-hour day. 

Cost of Water Pipe and Service Connections at Porterville, Cal. — 
Mr. P. B. Harroun gives the following data on laying 4, 6, 8 and 
10-in. water pipe and making service connections, at Porterville, 
Cal., in 1904. The work was done by company labor, and the 
workmen were very inefflcient. All trenches were IV^ ft. wide and 
3% ft. deep in a heavy adobe (clay), except for short stretches 
in sand as hereafter noted. The streets were not paved, but cov- 
ered with 4 ins. of hard rolled clay and gravel which required a 
4-horse plow to break through. In backfilling, a "go devil" was 
used to throw the material into the trench wherever practicable, 
and water from street hydrants was used to consolidate the back 
fill. 

Cost of 4-in. water pipe line (2,846 ft. long, of which 900 ft. were 
in sand) : 

Per ft. 

Labor trenching, at 20 cts. per hr $0,070 

Two horses trenching, at 15 cts. per hr 0.001 

Labor digging bell-holes, at 20 cts. per hr 0.015 

Labor laying pipe, at 20 cts. per hr 0.010 

Yarners, at 22 1/2 cts. per hr 0.005 

Labor pouring lead, at 20 cts. per hr 0.004 

Calkers, at 25 cts. per hr 0.008 

Labor backfilling, at 20 cts. per hr 0.011 

Two horses backfilling, at 15 cts. per hr 0.004 

Distribution of materials, at 60 cts. per ton 0.005 

Miscellaneous labor 0.004 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr 0.017 

Timekeeper 0.002 



Total cost of laying per ft $0,156 

The cost of materials for this 4-in. pipe line was as follows: 

Per ft. 

Pipe (2,820 ft., 30 short tons), $44.40 $0,461 

Specials (4,462 lbs.), at 3% cts 0.051 

Valves (9), at $9.40 0.030 

Hydrants (5), at $28.60 0.050 

Lead (2,010 lbs.), at 5.3 cts 0.038 

Yarn (105 lbs.), at 5.4 cts 0.002 

Tools 0.015 

Miscellaneous 0.006 



Total materials per ft $0,653 



WATER-WORKS. 073 

Cost of 6-in. water pipe line (838 ft. long, of which 300 ft. were 
in sand) : 

Per ft. 

Labor trenching, at 20 cts. per hr $0,075 

Two horses trenching, at 15 cts. per hr 0.001 

Labor digging bell-holes, at 20 cts. per hr 0.017 

Labor laying pipe, at 20 cts. per hr 0.013 

Yarners, at 22 i/j cts. per hr 0.005 

Labor pouring, at 20 cts. per hr 0.007 

Calkers, at 25 cts. per hr 0.010 

Labor backfilling, at 20 cts. per hr 0.012 

Two horses backfilling, at 15 cts. per hr 0.004 

Miscellaneous 0.005 

Distribution of materials, at 60 cts. ton 0.012 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr 0.018 

Timekeeper 0.002 



Total cost of laying per ft $0,181 

The cost of materials for this 6-in. pipe line was as follows : 

Per ft. 

Pipe (816 ft., 13.12 tons), at $43.40 per ton $0,679 

Specials (1,420 lbs.), at 3 14 cts 0.055 

Valves (10), at $15.65 0.187 

Hydrants (9), at $29.85 0.320 

Lead (804 lbs.), at 5.3 cts 0.052 

Yarn (42 lbs.), at 5.4 cts 0.003 

Tools 0.016 

General 0.010 

Total materials per ft $1,322 

Cost of 8-in. water pipe line (2,558 ft. long, of which 800 ft. were 
in sand) : 

Per ft. 

Labor trenching, at 20 cts. per hr $0,071 

Labor digging bell-holes, at 20 cts. per hr 0.016 

Labor laying pipe, at 20 cts. per hr 0.016 

Yarners, at 22 1/2 cts. per hr 0.006 

Labor pouring, at 20 cts. per hr 0.006 

Calkers, at 25 cts. per hr 0.013 

Labor backfilling, at 20 cts. per hr 0.012 

Two horses backfilling, at 15 cts. per hr 0.004 

Miscellaneous 0.004 

Distributing materials, at 60 cts. per hr 0.016 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr 0.017 

Timekeeper 0.002 

Total cost of laying per ft $0,183 

The cost of materials for this 8-in. pipe line was as follows: 

Per ft. 

Pipe (2,512 ft, 57.61 tons), at $43.40 .' $0,978 

Specials (4,056 lbs.), at 3^4 cts 0.052 

Valves (5), at $24 0.047 

Lead (3,618 lbs.), at 5.3 cts 0.076 

Yarn (189 lbs.), at 5.4 cts 0.004 

Tools 0.015 

Miscellaneous 0.009 

Total materials per ft $1,181 



674 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of 10-in. water pipe line (124 ft. of pipe, 14 ft. of specials; 
total, 138 ft.) : 

Per ft. 

Labor trenching, at 20 cts. per hr $0,174 

Labor digging bell-holes, at 20 cts. per hr 0.015 

Labor laying pipe, at 20 cts. per hr 0.022 

Labor yarning, at 20 cts. per hr 0.002 

Labor pouring, at 20 cts. per hr 0.002 

Labor calking, at 20 cts. per hr 0.015 

Labor backfilling, at 20 cts. per hr 0.060 

Labor miscellaneous, at 20 cts. per hr 0.015 

Distribution of materials, at 60 cts. ton 0.020 

Foreman, at 40 cts. per hr 0.016 

Timekeeper 0.002 

Total labor per ft ,. $0,343 

The cost of materials for this 10-in. pipe line was as follows: 

Per ft. 

Pipe (124 ft, 3.74 tons), at $43.40 $1.171> 

Specials (603 lbs.), at 3% cts 0.178 

Valves (1), at $34.60 0.251 

Lead (268 lbs.), at 5.3 cts 0.105 

Yarn (14 lbs.), at 5.4 cts 0.005 

Tools 0.015 

Miscellaneous 0.009 

Total materials per ft $1,742 

Cost of service connections (%-in. screw pipe) : 

Each. 

Labor trenching, at 20 cts. per hr $0,613 

Tapping and making, at 40 cts. per hr 1.003 

Tapping and helper, at 20 cts. per \\r 0.289 

Backfilling, at 20 cts. per hr 0.206 

Total labor per connection $2,111 

The cost of materials for each service connection was as follows: 

Bach. 

Goosenecks and cocks $2.48 

Fittings 0.40 

Tools ($68) «.88 

Tapping machine ($81) 1.03 

Total materials and tools per connection. $4.79 

It will be noted that the full cost of the tools and tapping ma- 
chine is charged to these 78 connections, making the cost of each 
unusually high. 

Assuming, as above stated, that the trenches averaged 1% ft. 
wide and 3% ft. deep, the cost per cubic yard of trench work was 
as follows: 

Cents. 

Digging trench 38 

Digging bell-holes 8 % 

Backfilling 8ya 

Total per cu. yd 55 

An Unusually Expensive Piece of Work. — "G. S. W. '88" in The 
Technic of 1896, gives the following, the material in all cases being 
clay: Wages of laborers 15 cts., pipe handlers 16 to 17% cts., fore- 
man 20 cts. per hour ; depth of trench, 4 to 5% ft. : 



WATER-WORKS. <»T5 

Example A B C D 

Size of pipe, ins 24 24 12-16 10 

Length of pipe, ft.: 2,550 2,200§ 6,241 8,9b'J 

Excavation, cu. yds 2,710 1,963 3,441 4,508 

Surplus eartli,* cu. yds.. 1,300 S62 1,033 

Cost of excavation per ft.. $0.2725 $0,333 $0.2061 $0.2410 

Cost of pipe laying, per ft .2480 .182 .2089 .0939 

Cost of bell holes, per ft.. .1500 .128 .0954 .0098 

Cost of backfilling, per ft .1790 .191 .1228 .1360 

Cost of ramming, per ft.. .7927t .107| .2896t •1322t 
Cost of tile, hose work, per 

ft .074 .0200 

Cost of loading excess 

earth, ft 0895 .046 .0358 .0025 

Cost of carting excess 

earth, ft 0636 .055 .0635 .0046 

Total labor cost per 

ft $1.7953 $1,116? $1.0318i; $0.6433 

Cost of excavation, cu. yd. 0.2562 0.373 .3736 .4807 

Cost of backfilling, cu. yd. 0.1684 0.216 .2226 .2706 

Cost of ramming cu. yd.. 0.7461t 0.121 1| .5434t .8618t 
Cost of tile, hose work. 

cu. yd 0.084 

Swelling of material on 

loosening 44% 30. to 441/2%* 20% 

♦This" surplus earth was hauled away in wagons, after filling the 
trenches and leaving a 4-in. crown to provide for settlement. 

§1,400 feet of this trench was backfilled without ramming, using 
water instead ; ramming, however, was much more effective in 
compacting the clay. 

tRammed dry in 4-in. layers. 

JRammed wet; the portion that was rammed dry cost $1.40 per 
ft. total. 

I [This total does not check with the items, so there must be an 
error somewhere. 

With labor at $1.25 for 8 hours and material clay as before, 
streets paved with wood. "G. S. W." also gives the following: 

Example E. F. G. H. 

Size of pipe in ins 12 12 10 8 

Depth of trench, ft 5 5 5 5 

Length of trench, ft 1,048 2,475 2,592 2,049 

Cost of excavation, per ft $0,186 $0,134 $0.1920 $0.1442 

pipe laying, per ft 257 .162 .1218 .0678 

backfilling, per ft 450 .390 .3949 .3632 

hauling surplus, per ft 014 .011 .0101 .0194 

Total labor cost per ft $0,907 $0,697 $0.7188 $0.5746 

The two most striking features in the foregoing data are (1> 
the enormous swelling of the clay upon loosening and casting it out 
of the trenches, and (2) the extraordinary high cost of ramming 
the clay in backfilling. It is difficult to explain either of these items 
except upon the assumption that the loosened clay dried out when 
exposed to the sun and air, forming hard rock-like clods which 
no amount of ramming seems to have consolidated effectually. 
Adding water as in Example B seems to have had no very good 
effect in consolidating the backfill, although it was less expensive 
than ramming. But it is a well-known fact that water makes dry 
clay swell, and it does not cause layers of hard lumpy clay to 



676 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

settle in a trench except as a result of weeks of slow seepage of 
rains. 

It will be noted that all this work was extraordinarily expensive. 
Even the pipe laying cost double the usual amount. We may infer 
that this work was not done by contract but by day labor for a 
municipality or a company, and that the foreman did not secure "a 
day's work" from the men — ^which is so often the case in municipal 
day-labor work. 

Cost of a 6-in. Pipe Line in Ohio. — Mr. E. H. Cowan has given 
me the following data: A 6-in. pipe line, 1% miles long, was laid 
in an Ohio city by contract, the cost per foot of pipe line to the 
contractor being as follows: 

Per ft. 

33.74 lbs. of 6-in. pipe, at ?24 per short ton $0,405 

0.67 lb. of specials, at 2 % cts. per lb 0.018 

Hydrant connections, 4-in 0.008 

Hydrants. ?26 each 0.066 

Gates ($12.60 each) and gate boxes ($3.09 each) 0.054 

0.74 lb. lead, 4% cts. per lb 0.033 

0.07 lb. jute packing, 3 % cts. per lb ... 0.003 

L.abor, 18% to 26 cts. per ft. averaging 0.211 

Teaming, 49 % cts. per short ton 0.009 

Miscellaneous items 0.008 

Total ?0.815 

The working force was as follows: 

1 foreman, at $2.50 per 10-hr. day $ 2.50 

2 sub-foremen, at $2.00 4.00 

9 men in pipe gang (including 2 calkers), at $1.75 15.75 

32 laborers digging trench, at $1.50 48.00 

12 laborers backfilling, at $1.50 18.00 

1 waterboy, at $1.00 1.00 

Total, 423 lin. ft., at $0.211 $89.25 

At times the back filling gang was engaged in trench digging. 
Trenches were 5 ft. 2 ins. deep. The digging ranged from the 
easiest spading to the hardest picking, the average being "average 
earth." Could the contractor have been present all the time, the 
cost might have been less. The backfilling was done by hand, and 
it was not rammed, but the trench was flushed with water. No 
material was hauled away. The work was done in August and 
September, 1903, and there was very little rain. It was not neces- 
sary to brace the trench except at a few spots. 

Cost of Water iVIain and Service Pipe Laid in a Southern City. — 
Mr. C. D. Barstow gives cost of shallow trenching and pipe lay- 
ing in a southern city, where negro laborers were used. From 
the data given by him I have compiled the following tables of cost : 
For the most part the trenches were 15 ins. wide at bottom and 
20 ins. at top, and 3 ft. deep. Some trenching was done using a 
team on a drag scraper, 20 ins. wide; then the trench was made 
3 ft. wide at top. Using teams was more economical, as may be 
seen by comparing C with D in the foregoing table. After a rain, 
however, the scrapers could not be used to advantage. In using a 
plow for loosening the earth, several feet of chain are fastened to 
the end of the plow beam, and one or more men ride the beam : in 



WATER-WORKS. (i'T 

this way plowing may be done in a trench 4 ft. deep, one horse 
walking on one side and one on the other side of the trench. A 
blacksmith was kept busy sharpening about 60 picks a day. There 
was a night watchman. The pipe was distributed by contract at 
34 cts. per ton. 

Table of Cost of Trenching and Pipelaying in the South. 

"Wages per 10-hr. day for negro laborers, ?1.25 ; for calkers, $1.75 ; 
for white foremen, $3.00 ; for teams, $3.25 ; for horse ridden by 
boy, $1.50. 

Job A. B. C. D. E. F. 

Pipe, ins lOi 6 8 10 8^ 

Length, ft 11,000 6,000 6,215 11,352 2,636 21,856 

Width trench, ft 2 

Depth trench, ft 3.5 3 3 3 3 3 

Material 2 ^ " 

No. laborers dig-ging 33 30 40 31 45 46 

No. teams plowing 3 V2 5 2^2 

Team time, cts. per ft 0.80 0.62 0.60 

Labor, digging, cts. ft 6.66 2.74 5.19 2.68 2.12 4.00 

Foreman, digging, cts. ft 0.50 0.23 0.31 0.21 0.12 0.20 

Labor, pipelaying, cts. ft 2.04 .... 0.63 0.77 0.94 1.12 

Foreman, pipelaying, cts. ft. 0.39 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.24 

Bell hole digging, cts. ft 2.70 0.77 0.98 0.93 1.16 

Bell hole digging, foreman, 

cts. per ft 0.27 0.16 0.21 0.18 0.18 

Calking, cts. per ft 1.30 0.52 0.64 0.63 0.75 

Backfill and tamp : 

Labor, cts., per ft 4.32^ 1.00= l.OP 2.09 1.42^ 0.95» 

Foreman, cts. per ft 0.36 0.22 0.22 0.32 0.18 0.18 

Team,* cts. per ft 0.36 0.41 

Horse ridden by boy, cts. ft 0.07 0.09 

Total cost, cts. per ft 18.54 4.19 9.46 8.91 7.41 9.79 

♦Backfill with drag scraper. 

^Trenching in an old street, 1,200 ft. in very muddy ground. Two 
rainy spells in 18 days of work. Then 10-in. pipe was laid for 3,440 
ft.; then 4,038 ft. of 12-in. pipe were laid for 1^4 cts. per ft. less 
than it cost for the 10-in. pipe; then 3,270 ft. of 8-in. pipe were laid 
for 214 cts. per ft. less than it cost for the 10-in. 

^Cemented clay and gravel requiring hard picking. Frequent 
rains. 

^The backfilling and tamping were done most thoroughly, a 
stretch of 2,550 ft. requiring 3 days for 30 men. 

*Sand and loam, bottom land, very easy digging. 

''Very easy shoveling and no tamping; 11 men 7 days backfilled 
9,620 ft. of trench. 

"Dragscrapers used to backfill ; boy riding horses to tamp, gang 
22 men, 3 teams, 1 boy and horse, 2 days on 5,447 ft. 

'Backfilled 1,670 ft. in one day by 19 men, using 1 boy and horse 
on tamping. 

^Half the pipe was 3-in. at cost here given, half was 6-in. costing 
i^-ct. less per ft. for laying. 

•Ground wet and often muddy. Backfilling 11,433 ft. done by 12 
men and 2 teams on scrapers in 7 days ; no tamping. 

The lead and yarn consumed per foot of pipe (pipe in lengths of 
12 ft.) was: 

1.3 lbs. of lead and .04 lb. of hemp for 12-in. pipe. 

.96 lb. of lead and .04 lb. of hemp for 10-in. pipe. 

.95 lb. of lead and .03 lb. of hemp for 8-in. pipe. 

.66 lb. of lead and .02 lb. of hemp for 6-in. pipe. 

Some 6,000 ft. of 2-in. wrought-iron service pipe was laid in 



678 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

trenches 2 ft. deep, at a cost of 1.9 cts. for trenching, 6.24 ct, for 
laying pipe, and 0.71 ct. for backfilling — there was no tamping 
done. 

For a distance of 373 ft. a trench 2 ft. wide and 3 ft. deep passed 
■trough a street paved with brick laid on 7 ^^ ins. of concrete. The 
i)rick was removed for a width of 3 ft. and the cost was as 
follows : 

Men, Cts. per 
days. lin. ft. 

Removing brick and concrete — Foreman 0.5 

Laborers 7.0 2.61 

Excavating trench — Foreman 0.5 

Laborers 18.0 6.30 

Backfilling and tamping well — Foreman 1.0 

Laborers 10.6 4.09 

Labor relaying concrete 7.8 2.61 

Labor relaying bricks 4.5 1 

Professional brick pavers 4.0 ^ 4.59 

Professional brick helpers 2.0 J 

Hauling away 23 loads surplus earth 1.23 

15 cu. yds. sand cushion 4.02 

1,700 new bricks 6.92 

181/^ bbls. cement to relay concrete 6.20 

Total 38.58 

Cost of Hauling, Distributing and Joining Wrought Iron Pipe in 
Maryland.* — Mr. L. B. Abbott, Chief Engineer The Consolidated 
Coal Co., Frostburg, Md., gives the following cost for hauling, 
distributing and joining pipe, in the construction of an S,000-ft. 
long pipe line. The work was done in connection with the in- 
stallation of a water supply for one of the mines of the above- 
mentioned company. 

The pipe, consisting of 4,000 ft. of 6-in. and 4,000 ft. of 8-in. 
double-strength, wrought-iron pipe, was hauled a distance of eight 
miles over roads that had to be practically rebuilt in many places. 
From the main road to the pumping station, a distance of % mile, 
a new road had to be cut and graded for the heavy loads to be 
hauled over it. It took five days to haul the pipe to the two dis- 
tributing point.s, from 12 to 15 teams being used, each team making 
one trip a day. Teams were paid for at the rate of $4.50 per day 
for a 2-horse team. The 4-horse teams, of which there were but 
two or three used per day, were furnished by the company, and 
charged at the rate of $8 per team. The teams started to load at 
7 o'clock, and by time the 12 or 15 teams were loaded it was gen- 
erally 10 o'clock. It took from four to five hours to go to the dis- 
tributing points. It was found that a 2-horse team hauled five 
lengths of pipe, or about 96 ft. per load, while a 4-horse team 
hauled nine lengths, or about 170 ft., nine lengths being all that 
could be loaded into the wagon. The cost of hauling tlie pipe a 
distance of eight miles was 4.7 cts. per lineal foot. 

From the distributing points a team dragged each length of pipe 
to its place in the line, the average cost of distributing being nearly 
1 ct. per foot. 

'Engineering-Contracting^ Oct. 17, 1906. 



WATER-WORKS. till) 

While the pipe was being distributed a force of 12 men started 
to join it up. Thfe men joining and distributing pipe worlted about 
eight hours per day. The greater part of the time they drove to 
their worli. The joining gang was paid as follows: One man at 
$2.25 ; three men at $2.20, and eight men at $1.75 per day. Tiie 
pipe was not buried, but was blocked up about a foot from the 
ground. The entire 8,000 ft. was laid in ten days. In many places 
the ground was very rough, and cribs 6 and 7 ft. high had to be 
built to hold the pipe. The average cost to lay and block up the 
pipe was 2.9 cts. per foot. This included putting in stay rods 
every 300 or 400 ft, to keep the pipe from jumping when the pump 
was running, and the placing of drain cocks in all low places. 

Cost of Taking Up an Old Pipe Line.— Mr. E. E. Fitzpatrick 
furnishes the following data relative to taking up more than 3 
miles of pipe line at Greenburg, Kansas. There were 10,200 ft. of 
4-in. pipe; 4,310 ft. of 6-in. ; 2,050 ft. of S-in., and S90 ft. of 10-in. 
After digging the trenches, the 8-in. and 10-in. pipes were raised a 
little, and fires built under the joints until the pipe expanded ; then 
the pipes were unjointed by working them up and down with a 
three-leg derrick. The 4-in. and 6-in. pipes were raised bodily in 
long sections onto the bank, heated a little, and unjointed by means 
of jack-screws and clamps. The time required to do all the 
trenching, backfilling and unjointing, was equivalent to the work 
of 1 man for 425 days ; and, assuming wages at $1.50 a day, the 
cost was only 3% cts. per foot of pipe. | 

Cost of Constructing and Laying Cement Lined Water Pipe, Ply- 
mouth, IVIass., and Portland, IVle.* — Two general methods of building 
wrought-iron, cement-lined pipe have been used in this country ; 
the first, known as the Goodhue & Birnie pipe, the second, known 
as the Phipps patent. 

The Goodhue & Birnie pipe was generallj'' made by riveting up 
sheets of wrought iron, single riveted with cold rivets, without any 
attempt to make the joints water-tight, and lining this wrought- 
iron shell with from % to 1 in. of neat Rosendale cement, or 
cement mortar mixed 1 part of cement to 1 part of sand. This 
work was generally done in a central plant, or at different points 
along the pipe line, from which the pipe was carried to the trench, 
there imbedded in Rosendale cement mortar laid along the bottom 
of the trench, and then covered over the sides and top with a % to 
1-in. layer or casing of Rosendale cement mortar plastered on with 
rubber gloves or trowel in the hands of the pipe maker. The 
trench was generally backfilled immediately or shortly after laying 
the pipe. 

The pipes were made in lengths of 9 ft., and the joints between 
the pipes were made by means of a sleeve of wrought iron with 
inner and outer casing of cement, or by making the pipe tapering so 
that the end of one pipe was fitted into the end of the next. In the 



* Extract from a paper by Leonard Metcalf, M. Am. Soc. C. E., 
presented to the New England Water Works Association, Dec. 9, 
l'J08, and reprinted in Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 7, 1909. 



680 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

larger mains the joints were often plastered on the inside after 
laying ; in the smaller ones, this was, of course, not attempted. 

The Phipps patent pipe was generally made and coated without 
as well as within with a % to 1-in. layer of cement or cement 
mortar, the outer coating being held in place by a thin sheet of 
wrought iron which subsequently rusted out in the trench. This 
outer sheet was of distinct advantage, however, as a protection to 
the outer cement coating in the handling and laying of the pipe. 

In a few cases cast-iron bells and spigots have been riveted to the 
wrought-iron sheets before making the pipe, and the joints have 
then been made in the ordinary manner with lead tightly calked in 
place or by the use of cement mortar. 

More recently under the Phipps patent, a type of cast-iron ring 
has been developed which is driven home in each end of the pipe, — 
one of the rings being a female ring, the other a male ring — thus 
more rigidly holding the end of the pipe and preventing injury to 
it in transportation and laying, and incidentally making more con- 
venient the placing of the outer cement coating of the pipe, which 
is made of grout poured into the mold between the inner and outer 
sheets, with the pipe standing on end. The joint between pipes is 
made finally by the vise of a sleeve as heretofore. 

So far as the writer is aware no cast-iron has thus far been 
developed which has proven thoroughly satisfactory and advan- 
tageous from the standpoint of economy. 

It is perhaps worthy of note that while blue enameled wrought- 
iron sheets imported from England were used in many of the early 
Installations, in making the later ones steel has been substituted 
at some saving in cost, though not in durability. 

Plymouth, Mass. — Plymouth is a town of about 11,000 inhabitants 
and has had a water supply since 1776. Until 1855 the water was 
supplied to the town by a private company and the pipes used were 
wooden logs with holes bored in them. In 1855 the town pur- 
chased the plant from the company, and the use of cement-lined 
pipe dates from that period. 

At that time about 16,000 ft. of 10-in. pipe was laid and several 
thousand feet of 8-in., 6-in. and 4-in. pipe were laid for the distri- 
bution system. Practically all of the pipe laid at that time is still 
in use. 

The pipe as then manufactured consisted of a sheet-iron shell 
about 9 ft. in length, lined on the inside with about % in. of 
cement mortar, composed of cement and sand in proportions of 
1 to 1. The pipe was then laid in a bed of cement mortar in the 
trench, ends butted together, with a steel sleeve or collar at each 
joint. The top and sides of the pipe were then covered with two 
or more inches of cement mortar, all of the same proportions as 
used for the lining, and a cement-mortar joint was made at each 
joint of the pipe. 

This pipe is still in use and withstands a varying pressure in 
different sections, from a few pounds to about 50 lbs. 

In 1900, somewhat over 40 miles of pipe from 4 to 20 ins. in 



Jl'ATER-iyORKS. 681 

diameter was in use. At this time a change in tlie method of 
maliing tlie pipe was introduced, and for the past seven years all 
extensions have been made with a pipe manufactured in the local 
water-works shop, which is furnished with mechanical devices and 
power machinery necessary for economical manufacture. 

Tlie following description will make the present method of con- 
struction clear. The pipe consists of a shell, a jacket, male and 
female rings, and sleeves. The shells and jackets are of soft steel 
and are received at the shop in flat rectangular sheets of proper 
size and gage. For the shells of 18-in. pipe about 30 tons of steel 
sheets of No. 13 gage were used, at a cost of about $50 per ton 
for the sheets. 

The gage of the sheets used for the shells of pipes of different 
sizes is as follows : 

24-in 12 gage 10-in 17 gage 

18-in 13 gage 8-in 18 gage 

16-in 13 gage 6-in 19 gage 

12-in 15 gage 4-in 20 gage 

The jackets are all No. 26 gage iron. The operation of making 
the pipe is as follows : 

The shells are punched in a punching machine. The spacing of 
the rivet holes is %-in. c. to c, the edge of the rivet hole being 
%-in. from the edge of the sheet. The sheets are then put into 
the rolls and given a semi-circular form, as two sheets are used 
for the manufacture of one shell for the IS-in. pipe. After being 
rolled, the shells are riveted by hand, using 816 rivets with a 
3%-lb. hammer, on a stake, so-called, which is simply a bar of iron 
about 10 ft. long, the upper surface of which is curved to approxi- 
mately the same radius as the shell of the pipe which is to be 
riveted. The jackets are punched, rolled and riveted in precisely 
the same manner as the shells and are ly^ ins. larger in diameter. 

The rings are of cast-iron, a male ring f i- one end of the shell 
and a female ring for the other, the female ring being concave and 
the male ring convex, tlius enabling a very tight joint to be made 
when the pipes are fitted together in the trench. About thirty tons 
of these rings were used in the manufacture of 16 and IS-in. pipe 
during the past year and the cost of the rings was 4 cts. per lb. 

The next operation, after the shells are riveted, is the fitting in 
of the rings, and as they are made just for a driving fit into the 
shell they are driven in by use of the maul. After the rings are in 
place the shells for the IS-in., 16-in. and 14-in. pipes are lined by 
hand, and the smaller sizes of shell from 12-in. to 4-in. are lined 
by means of a revolving cone. Neat Rosendale cement is used in 
lining. About 3,000 bbls. of cement have been used during the past 
year in the manufacture of pipe, and the cost was $1.20 per bbl., 
delivered at our shop. 

When the shells are ready to be lined by hand they are placed 
horizontally on two horses. A man stands at each end of the pipe 
with a long-handled pallet knife, so-called, to spread the cement 
smoothly In the pipe. This knife is simply a flat blade about IVi 
ins. wide and 4 ins. in length, with a handle about 4 ft. long. The 



682 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



M 'H C^ C<1 ^ ^ ^ ■* ^^ ^ 

U I) OOOOOrHi-ir-i 
ft 66- 

^ O CO C<I ■* OO CT) -sf M 

"S t- O 00 T-t [- M I^- M 

rj OOOCOC-00 0-*03 



EH 

o 

s 

J 
Ph 



o 
g 

s 

O 

o 
U 






I:? CO N -*■ o o •* t- o 

O CO I-! lO l^ C- -*< lO t— 

rj ,-H CO CO t^ tr- lO CO ITS 

T LC Oq OO tH i-H Oi ITS ^ 



"t. -:»< O C^ CO C- O O O 
.^ rHlAO«00000 

^ r^ tH o M c<i LO ii5 00 



Ph 



S COrHUJ^CaOOO 

2 5D cq T-i in ^ 00 Tp to 

C lOtDLOCO^lCaOO'M 

<V c.0i-linrHT-<C-CO=O 

O 6«- rH ih" 



W C0<?3C^ cooooo 

■^ ^Cq-^0005CDO 

> if5CvlOOt--THCOa5 
•— Cq tH CO 1-1 CO IM T-H 

ni c-oii— oooqioOO 

yi rHOOrt HrHCOtOOO 
C -r1^ CO ITS o6 Irt CO 00 O 

Ph rH (M COCO^ 

^ rH* rH 

1* m t— cq (Mt'OOO 

> cqco^ooioooo 

Ql C<1 C<J CO TiH LC C- C^ CO 

-H r)" rH so rH Cq CO lO CVi 

CC M- CO ci 



■g^ O^MrHO-MOO 
M Oi C— "^ t- '^ t' '^ "* 
O CO ";J^ t— O C^ fCq O^ to 
^ C<IO O O CO lO ^ ^^ 

l^-COrH-*r^rH00rH00 



rt<000^000-*0 
^ OS C<1 O CO (M 00 -* to 

(U O to to rH m Csl CO rH 

^ Looo^coocviiours 

J/2 tOrHrHNCOt-CTJt- 
^^ CO CO 



ti (M T-H C- t- rH en CO O 

~^j COtOOi OOOOOOOO 
StH cq'a<OOmrH i-^^tO 

aTm tO'^OtOMtO-^OO 
N jj rH THrHrHrH 

c3 1 '. I ! ! I i ! 

i? rH rH rH rH rH C- C- [- 

P OOOOOOOC> 

CTsCDO:>05^0^'3^<^ 



EH 

& 

O 

fcH 

Oh 

EH 



H 

u 

M 

•< 

J 

O 



O 

u 



s 



03 C 

id'" jJ . 



d 






O ON 



(a "H toco 
O (h '^'^ 

O (U rHrH 
ft -fi- 



4-» coco 
O lOi— 



C ooo 

' 3 LOCO 

O LO t- 



<P ; 



-M OO 
(V) ■ • 
C L-O 

a> e«-cq 

o 

(MC- 

to-* 
a3 coco 
ft oqoo 



n 



Sec 


rH rH 


COM 




coo-i 


rHO 




ooo 


f- 


OTM 


o 


rHOO 


to t— 


COTt< 


J 


^N 










be . 


c^o 


c^co 



A W) 
C 
•* S - 



o 

3 in fH 

o cd to 



rH OS Cq Iftl -^ to M 
^ OS O O cq l^ T-J 
r-i O r-i r-H 0^ "-"^ 



O N r-( CMjS t- "5 
rH O O to Tf «<; M 

[-^ OJ -* CO CO i-"" 
CM C- 00 Oi C- o in 
OO OS in t- to '^_ °o 

rH NN r^^M 00 



Cd 051000 toOCO 

■* oi t>^ lo CO to 05 

lO [- CO 00 N OO t- 

com >-< 



oocooooo 
OCMOOO to<^^o 
e<i r-i r-i to o ■* o 

lO C5 to 0> -^ ^ 1^ 

to O OO to lO f^ *** 
t- lO C<1 rH ■* O OO 

CO CO CO to 00 lO -^ 

lO O CO to CM <^ "^i 

rH lO OS OS CCl CM O 



Cq t^ CO 00 O O C-1 

t-tOCOCOOOrH 
od iri CM rH ci r-i rH 
O L-^ rH OS CO -^ rH 
rH CM -^ -* C<I rH ■* 



O tot— COO CM O 
■^ to C7S CM 00 lO O 
OCJ lO -:!<■* 00 CsJ O 

lo CO CO m ■* lo CM 

^OrHOOCMlOOO 
rHrHrH-* •* 



CM l>- CO p> lO rH rH 
OS O -^ lO ■^ CO 05 
CMOIOIOIOOOO 
rHCOeiTii'tOlMOO 






„r . CMO CM CO to to 00 ■* to 
M 02 tHtH rH rHrHrH 



^ rHrH rH Tf Tt< lO t- C- 1- 
P OO OOOOOOO 

csos OS OS CTs OS OS c:s OS 



WATER-iyORKS. 088 

cement for lining is mixed by liand in mixing boxes, and tliere are 
two men to mix for tlie two men wlio line. As the pipe lies on tlie 
horses it is lined for its whole length and half way up each side. 
Then the cement is allowed to set, after which the pipe is rolled 
over and the remaining half lined. After the cement has been 
smoothly spread about Mj-in. thick, on the inside of the pipe, and 
irregularities which appear are corrected by the use of the "nigger- 
head," which is a stiff brush on the enti of a long handle. This 
brush in tlie liunds of a skillful workman can brmg the interior 
uf the cement pipes to a very smooth surface. 

At this point it may be well to describe the operation of lining 
the smaller sizes of pipe. The shells having been punched, rolled 
and riveted, and rings put in in precisely the same manner as pre- 
viously described, are stood upright on an elevator which descends 
into a pit. In this pit is the cone, so-called, which has an external 
diameter equal to the internal diameter of the shell when lined — in 
other words, about an inch smaller in diameter than the shell — 
placed and held directly over it on the elevator. The cone revolves 
on a vertical axis and cement mixed by machinery is put in at the 
top of the shell as it stands on the elevator over the cone. The top 
of the cone, e.xtending for a few inches into the bottom of the 
shell, holds the cement from falling through into the pit. The 
elevator holding the shell is then lowered and the cone revolving at 
the same time spreads the cement smoothly and uniformly on the 
Inside of the shell. 

The next operation is filling and grouting the pipe. The shells 
are stood on end around thi edge of a platform which is about 
6 ft. above the floor. A clamp is placed around the bottom of the 
shell about S ins. from the lower end, and the jacket lowered from 
above fits into the clamp at the bottom. The jacket is kept sym- 
metrical with the shell at the bottom by means of this clamp, and 
at the top by means of four wedges. The grout is merely a mixture 
of neat cement and water, mixed to such a consistency that it will 
pour readily, and is mixed by machinery in a cylindrical mixer 
which has four paddles. After being thoroughly mixed, the grout 
is poured into a metal bucket which is suspended by a chain with a 
wheel and is carried on a track around the platform. The grout 
is poured from the bucket between the shell and jacket of the 
pipe that has been stood around the edge of the platform. After 
the grout has been poured, the pipes are allowed to set twelve hours, 
when the cement is usually hard enough to permit of handling 
them. The pipes are then loaded upon a truck, taken to the yard, 
cleaned, and painted with a coal-tar paint. After staying in the 
yard about two weeks they are sufficiently hard to permit of being 
loaded upon a wagon and carted to the trench. 

Tables VI and VII show respectively the cost of making and 
laying the largest cement-lined pipes which have been ma at 
Plymouth. Town labor, only, is used, and !?2 is the wage pa^ or 
a working day of eight hours, for each laborer. The foreman re- 
ceives $3. 

The pipe-making gang numbers about 16 men, but only 4 are 



084: HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table VIII. — Cost of Building 60,221 Ft. 24-Ix. Wrought Ikon 
Cement-Lined Supply Pipe in 1S7S-9. 

Rights of way, land damages, etc $ 1.579.14 

Cast-iron pipe, special, castings, valves, etc 5,024.08 

Wrought-iron sheets for pipe : 

441,502 lbs. at 2.43 cts $10,728.50 

1,449,562 lbs. at 2.30 cts 33.339.92 

44,068.42 

Making pipes 9 ft. long : 
1,593 pieces at $2.15 and 

5,073 pieces at $2.00 13,570.95 

Making .ioint rings, inside rings and special rings : 

7,061 rings, weighing 646,310 lbs., at 1.95 cts., ap- 
proximately, per lb 12,615.14 

Total labor, 24,775 days, at $1.28, approximate average; 
day labor being paid from $1 to .fl.25 ; foremen, 

$3.50 31,807.11 

Cement, 20,621 bbls. Rosendale 20,180.50 

Freight, cartage, etc 4,148.91 

Engineering, incidentals and miscellaneous e.xpenses, 

amounting to 8.32 per cent, approximately 10,919.67 



$143,913.92 
Deduct land damages 1,579.14 



Net amount $142,334.78 

Cost per foot $2.36 

Equivalent cost per foot for year 1908 (estimate:!) . . . . $3.02 

Table IX.; — Cost of Building 18,450 Ft. 26-In. Wrought-Iron 

Cement-Lined Pipe. 

Equivalent 
Per lb., Actual cost prices 

cts. in 1875-6. as of 1908. 

Wrought-iron sheets, No. 12, Bir- 

minglmm gage, 635,679 lbs., at.. 3.32 $21,230 $18,670 

Trimming, rolling, riveting and fin- 
ishing 2,066 pipe 9 ft. long, at 

$2.50, equivalent to 0.7S 5,020 4,430 

Rings 0.'(0 5,590 4,920 

Total, 1875-6 5.0 

Total, 1908 4.4 

Cement (Rosendale), 74,071 bbls., at 

$1.36 and $1.53 Mi per bbl 

Contract for laying 

Valves ^ 

Specials 

Lumber 

Contract work 

Total 

Cost per foot (including 11.4 per cent 
for engineering and contingencies) .... 

kept on the regular gang and the others are hired as they are 
needed. 

Portland, Me. — In the years 1868-9 the Portland Water Co. laid 
a 20-in. wrought-iron cement-lined supply main, about 15.2 miles 
long, from Sebago Lake to the city of Portland. Data as to the 
cost of this main are unfortunately lacking. 

In the years 1875-9, however, a second wrought-iron cement- 



10.170 

28,310 

237 

85 

608 

141 


7,500 

42,465 

237 

85 

1,074 

150 


$71,391 • 

$3.87 


$79,531 
$4.31 



WATER-WORKS. 



685 



Table X. — Estimate of Cost of Reproducing Cement-Lined Pipe 

IN Portland, 



•;: = 

CIS d 

< 

26-in. 

Cost of sheets, per lb.. $0.0342 
Cost of cement, per bbl 1.40 
Cost of joint castings 

per lb 0.0280 

Cost of making pipe, * 

per lb 0.00756 

Weight per ft., lbs 37.0 

Bbls. cement per foot.. 0.405 
Weight joint rings, lb.. 7 1.0 
Weight joint rings, per 

ft S.3 

Cost per linear foot of : 

Sheets $1.26 

Making pipe 0.28 

Joint castings 0.23 

Cement 0.57 

Gates, valves, etc.... 0.05 
Labor and laying. ... 1.48* 

Sum $3.87 



m 



<u o 

ii c 



PO.0275 
1.00 

0.0275 

0.0125 



Pl.02 
0.46 
0.23 
0.40 
0.04 
2.22 



,$3.86 



Total actual cost. in- 
cluding all special 
obstacles. engineer- 
ing and contingen- 
cies 

Ratio of total cost to 
sum of items above 
given 1.00 

Total" estimated cost, 
including engineering 
and contingencies 

Fair value to use is 
estimate on which 
14'~'r for engineer- 
ing and contingen- 
cies is to be added 



3.85 



13 

C 

a 



0) 

op 

3 D 



OS 

a; 

>- ,.; 



-24-in.- 



<s 



—20.- 



0: 

« 

w C 

<a o 



$0.0233 
0.98 

0.0195 



$0.0275 
1.00 

0.0275 



f0.0275 
1.00 

0.0275 



0.00718 0.0125 0.0125 

31.4 21.0 

0.342 0.310 

91.0 70.0 



10.7 

$0.73 
0.23 
0.21 
0.33 
0.08 
0.53 



fO.86 
0.39 
0.29 
0.34 
0.07 
0.80 



S.2 

$0.58 
0.26 
0.23 
0.31 
0.06 
1.25 



.37 $2.11 $2.75 $2.69 



$2.39 

1.13 ?1.0G 

64.37 S3. 10 2.85 



2.72 2.50 



*The contract price at ordinary depths of cut. and exclusive of 
rock, was 70 cts. per lin. ft. The difference, 78 cts. per ft., repre- 
sents the additional allowances for extra depth and for rock and 
for tunnel, and for all contingencies because of the character of 
the ground. These additional costs would naturally be somewhat 
higher on the 26-in. line than on the 24-in. line, and the route of the 
20-in. line covers substantially the same space as that occupied by 
both the 26-in. and 2 4-in. lines. 



G8Q HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

lined supply main was laid from the lake to the city. The upper 
portion of this, appro>=imatoly Zy^ miles in length, was 2 6 ins. in 
diameter ; the lower portion, approximately 11.4 miles in length, 
24 ins. diameter. The actual cost of this compound main was 
fortunately developed from the books of the company and is given 
in Tables VIII and IX, as some of the unit costs to be derived 
therefrom are interesting and valuable. 

It should be stated that the static pressures upon this supply 
main are approximately as follows : , 

4 miles, under — 40 lbs. per sq. in. 

2.7 miies, under 40 — 60 lbs. per sq. in. 

4.9 miies, under 60 — 80 lbs. per sq. in. 

2.3 miles, under 80 — 100 lbs. per sq. in. 

0.9 miles, under 100 — 120 lbs. per sq. in. 

The main is stated to have been built with a factor of safety of 
approximately 3, out the computation of the factor of safety under 
several assumed heads indicates that the actual factor of safety is 
probably not in excess of 1.5 at the 'points of maximum pressure, 
assuming always static pressures, and ignoring alike the decrease 
in pressure due to friction and the increase in pressure due to 
water liammer or other causes. 

Tiie cost of this 2 6-in. pipe line was excessive, owing to deep 
cut work, a considerable amount of which was in quicksand. 

Mr. Allen Hazen, who was one of the engineers retained by the 
Water District in the valuation of the Portland waterworks, made 
the interesting analysis of these items of cost given in Table X. 

Cost of Lining Iron Service Pipes With Cement. — Mr. Fayette F. 
Forbes gives the following relative to lining wrought iron serv- 
ice pipes with cement. Tlie pipe is bought in short lengths, 16 ft., 
and is 1 to 2 ins. diam. before lining. The lining reduces tlie diam- 
eter a little less than i/4 in. Such pipes have given perfect satis- 
faction for 25 years in Brookline, Mass. In 1900 the cost of lining 
a 1-in. pipe was 1 V2 cts. per ft. ; a 2-in. pipe, 3 cts. per ft. A gang 
of 6 men will line 4,000 to 5,000 ft. of 1-in. pipe per day. The gang 
is as follows : 
1 man mixing cement. 
1 man filling press and overseeing. 

1 man working pipes to the press and from the press to the con- 
ing frames. 

2 men (one at each end of pipe) doing the coning. 

In 1898 the cost of labor and cement for lining 9,000 ft. of 1-in. 
and 3,000 ft. of 2-in. pipe was as follows: 

Labor : 

Preparing pipes $65.79 

Cementing 06.65 

Grouting 22.66 

Reaming 39.98 

Materials : 

23 bbls. natural cement at $1.10 25.30 

Coal for heating shop 6.00 

Grand total $226.38 



WATER-WORKS. 087 

Which gives 1.5 cts. per ft. for lining tlie 1-in. pipe, and 3.03 eta 
per ft. for the 2-in. pipe. 

A barrel of cement will line and ground the following lengths : 

1-in. pipe, 700 ft. 

1^-in. pipe, 500 ft. 

2-in. pipe, 300 ft. 

Extreme care must be used to get uniformly good results. The 
following methods are best: Use wrought iron pipe in 16 ft. lengths. 
Straighten all bent pipes. Remove couplings, turn them around 
and screw on the other end, to avoid trouble in putting lengths to- 
gether. Examine for defective welds. Run a cutting tool through 
pipe to remove scale, dirt, and projections of iron from the welds. 
Use American natural cement for lining (Portland is too heavy), 
and use it neat. Sift all cement to remove pieces of unground rock, 
wood, paper, etc. Use cemenj; quickly after wetting. One man 
mixes cement and water, preparing only enough for 6 pipes at a 
time, and constantly working it. over to keep at rignt thickness. 
If any of the batch is left over, throw it away. The pipes are 
filled full of the cement mortar, using a press made by the Union 
Water Meter Co., of Worcester, Mass., wlio also make the cones and 
other tools. Cones are passed through the pipe twice, and the 
cement that is pushed out is used in the next pipe, except that 
from the last pipe filled by the batch of cement, which is thrown 
away. While the cone is being drawn through, the pipe is slowly 
revolved to keep the cone as nearly in the center of the pipe as 
possible. However, results are satisfactory even if the lining is 
quite uneven in thickness. The cones are washed after each pipe is 
lined. Before the cones are drawn through, a piece of pipe 12 to 
18 ins. long is screwed to each end of the pipe to be lined, to en- 
sure a perfect lining at the ends. After the pipes have been lined 
3 to 5 das^s, until the cement is quite hard, a thin grout of cement 
is run through them, by elevating one end of the pipe and pouring 
the grout in. A rubber cone is then drawn through, leaving a 
smooth, impervious lining. The ends of the pipe are then reamed 
out to fit the composition ferrules, and the threads are cleaned. 
Ferrules are made of best steam metal, %-in. diam. on the inside 
(for a 1-in. pipe). Double ferrules are used where pipes are 
screwed together, and single ferrules for connections at the main. 
These pipes can be bent without damage to the lining, if care is 
used. 

Cost of Setting IVleters and Laying Service Pipes.* — Mr. W. H. 
Shillinglaw gives the cost of setting water meters during 1908 
by the Water Works Department, Brandon, Manitoba, as follows : 

Crown meters % in. % in. 1 in. 1 % in. 

No. of meters set 499 20 5 2 

Cost of labor §295.85 $20.55 |5.97 ?2.60 

Cost per meter 0.593 1.02 1.20 1.30 

Cost of materials 145.73 10.24 1.84 

Cost per meter 0.2S2 0.51 0.37 

Total cost per meter 0.875 1.53 1.57 



"Enffineering-Contracting, Jan. 20, 1909. 



C>88 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



These meters were all set in basements by day labor by city em- 
ployes. The cost for %-in. meters varied from 20 cts. to $2 for 
labor. A large number of these meters were installed on old serv- 
ices and entailed considerable alteration in service pipes and addi- 
tional expense. The cost of setting meters on new services varied 
from 20 cts. to 50 cts. for labor. 

Tlie cost of laying water service pipes during 1908 was as fol- 
lows : 

Vi inch. % inch. 

No. of services 92 7 

No. of feet laid 3,051 290 

Cost of labor $1,030.73 $ 96.69 

Cost per ft 0.34 0.333 

Cost per service 11.38 13 81 

Cost of supplies 857.38 121.90 

Cost per service 9.32 17.41 

Average length of service, feet 33 "41 

These services were laid in 10-ft. trenches in sand, gravel, 
some dry and a considerable number very wet and requiring pump- 



City Engine 


er's Of 


FICE. 

Brandon, June 23, 1908. 
labor and material used in 
for Premises 

Street 

.Ser. No 116£ 


I beg to report thg following 

installing New Service . . 

repairing 

No 16th... 

for Mr Giddings & Wyman 

Installed bv Walker 


1 


Labor 




ISi hrs. at ^5 | 8 


1 
3 .37 






59 


hrs. at 17h \ % 


10 .32 


Length of trench 






Uit.\ 


1 


Materials | | | 


U ft. 




m. 


\ lead pipe | S 


e\.i6 


It. 




m. 


lead pipe | 


1 


1t. 




m. 


iron pipe 


1 


it. 




m. 


iron pipe 


1 


/ 




i in. 


Corp'n Cocks | 


\.99 


/ 




i in 


Kerb Cocks | 


1\.85 


./ 






Service Box | 


1\.87 






m. 


Unions | , 


1 






in. 


Elbows ! 


1 






m 


Check Valve | 


1 








1 


i 


\ in. Lead Pipe — (J lbs. 


per yd. 




1 


J in. Lead Pipe — W !hs. 


per yd. 


1 


1 


1 1 1 








1 8 


24\.66 


Signed . Wm. Smith, Per R. 


M 




.Foreman. 



Fig. 6. Blank for Reporting Cost of Setting Water Meters. 



WATER-WORKS. (i89 

ing. Refilling was well rammed. The cost of labor includes mak- 
ing up service, tapping main, etc. All work was done by day labor 
by city employes. The cost of labor varied from 26 to 50 cls. per 
lin. ft. The ^-in. services were all made up for two Vi-m. 
branches to serve two premises. 

The form employeu for reporting costs is shown in Fig. G ; this 
form was used for botli services and meters, the foreman simply 
tilled in the proper words. 

Cost of Meters and Setting, Cleveland, O. — Mr. Edward W. Bemis 
gives the following relative to the cost of setting %-in. Trident 
meters in Cleveland, Ohio, during 1903. Some 20,000 meters of 
this size had been set during 1902 to 1903 inclusive. A %-in. meter 
costs $6.50, and tlie cost of setting 13,400 meters in 1903 averaged 
$6.87, making a total cost of $13.37. These meters were set as 
follows : 

857 meters in brick vaults. 

3,174 meters in basement settings. 

9.378 meters in sewer pipe settings. 

The cost of these different types of settings was as follows : 

Sewer Pipe Setting. 

4 ft. of 15 in. sewer pipe $1.46 

Frost cover 0.18 

Ring and cover 1.42 

2 ells 0.12 

2 couplings 0.08 

7 ft. of %-in. pipe 0.35 

Labor 4.01 

Total $7.62 

Basement Setting. 

Brick $0.12 

Cement 0.05 

Cover 0.30 

Fittings 0.25 

Labor 3.23 

Total $3.95 

Brick Vault Setting. 
350 brick $2.45 

1 % sacks cement 0.38 

2 couplings 0.08 

2 ells 0.12 

1 nipple 0.06 

1 union 0.24 

1 ring and cover 3.21 

Labor 2.92 

Total $9.46 

One meter reader is employed for every. 1,000 meters, and he is 
accompanied bj' a laborer, when reading meters, to turn off the 
water where there appears to be waste, while the meter reader 
waits at the meter to detect running water. Bach meter is read 
every 6 weeks from Mar. 1 to Dec. 1. The cost of operation per 
meter was as follows in 1903 : 

Interest and depreciation, estimated at SCf of $13.37 $1.07 

Reading meters and clerical work 1.10 

Total $2.27 



690 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. ' 

The prices of meters were : 

%-in. meter $6.50 

%-in. meter 9.45 

1-in. meter 13.50 

The gang for basement setting is composed of 4 meter setters (at 
27% cts. per hr.), and 4 laborers (at 21 cts. per hr. ), and a horse 
and vehicle with driver (at 30 cts.), under a foreman (at 42 cts.). 
These men work in pairs, 2 men at each meter, and set a meter in 
4 hrs. on the average, the range being 1 to 6 hrs., depending on 
the arrangement of the plumbing, etc. The opposition of plumbers 
to the use of laborers and meter setters was overcome by employ- 
ing plumbers to wipe all lead joints. The cost of setting meters 
in 1907 was as follows: 

No. set. Av. cost. 

%-in. meter in basement 2,929 $ 4.22 

%-in. meter on sewer pipe 1 5.00 

%-in. meter in brick vault 4,368 13.47 

%-in. meter in basement 14 6.44 

%-in. meter in brick vault 9 18.01 

1-in. meter in basement 50 7.13 

1-in. meter in brick vault 37 15.71 

lyo-in. meter in basement 10 7.94 

1%-in. meter in brick vault 10 24.42 

2-in. meter in basement 6 9.96 

2-in. meter in brick vault 27 21.97 

3-in. meter in basement 3 30.71 

3-in. meter in brick vault 10 31.36 

4-in. meter in basement 2 23.83 

4-in. meter in brick vault 8 46.78 

6-in. meter in brick vault 1 58.01 

Cost of Setting Meters and Maintenance, Rochester, N. Y — Mr. 

George W. Rafter gives the following relative to the cost of set- 
ting and resetting meters and their maintenance in Rochester, N. 
Y. The cost of setting 11,500 new meters, during 1893 to 1905, 
averaged $3.24 per meter, although there were many years when 
the average was $2.25 or less. The cost includes the proportion- 
ate part of the salary of superintendent and meter clerk, and, as 
the average was only 800 new meters set per year, this element of 
cost would naturally form a large percentage of the total. 

About once in 12 years a meter has co be removed and repairs 
made. The cost of removing, repairing and resetting 11,000 met- 
ers averaged $4.80 per meter, which is equivalent to about 40 cts. 
per year per meter. This does not include the cost of current 
maintenance and inspection of meters in place, which averaged 37 
cts. per meter per year for 12 years, although during the last 6 
years it averaged only 14 cts. per meter per year, the year of 1904 
being only 9 cts. per meter. 

The first cost of each meter appears to have been about $10. 
From this it appears that repairs and resetting have averaged 7.7% 
(77 cts.) of the first cost of each meter per year. 

During the year 1905, there were 36,100 meters in use in Albany, 
Kahsas City, Lowell, and Rochester, and 4,100, or 11%, of these 
were removed, repaired and reset. 



WATER-WORKS. G91 

Cost of Operating and Maintaining Meters, Reading, Pa.* — The 

cost of operating and maintaining tlie meter system of Reading, 
Pa., for the fiscal year ending April, 1908, was $3,568.12, for an 
average of 2,012 meters in service. This is at the rate of $1.77 per 
meter per year; in tlie preceding fiscal year tlie rate was $1.75 per 
meter. The unit costs for tlie several sub-divisions of operation 
and maintenance are given by Mr. Emil L. Nuebling, superintendent 
and engineer, of water works, as follows : 

Repairs $0,878 

Clerical service 553 

Reading 193 

Delivering bills 087 

General test 039 

Sundry work 015 

Stationery, etc 009 

Total $1,774 

The cost of repairs increased 84 per cent over the previous year, 
due principally to extensive repairs to large meters. All otlier costs 
were lowered considerably. 

Cost of Piacing Hydrants, Chicago. f — The standard hydrant 
adopted by the city of Chicago is the Creiger ; it constitutes about 
SO per cent of the total number of hydrants in use in that city. 
These hydrants are made by the city at its own shops. The fol- 
lowing data relate to the placing of several double hydrants of the 
above type, the work being done in 1906 by city forces. The costs 
include excavating for the connection with the main, excavating for 
the h5^drant base, placing hydrant, backfilling, and making the 
connections. The trench as a usual thing averaged about 5 ft. in 
depth. The wages of labor per S-hour day and cost of materials 
were as follows : 

Per day. 

Assistant foreman $3.62 

Timekeeper 3.50 

Calker 3.00 

Laborers 2.50 

Double teams were hired at the rate of $4.50 per day. Single 
teams were usually furnished by the city and charged for at the 
rate of $1 per day. 

The prices paid for materials were as follows : 

Pipe, 6 in 49c per lin. ft. 

Lead 6 1/2 c per lb. 

Gaskets 5c-per lb. 

Coal i/ic per lb. 

Special castings 2 1/^ c per lb. 

The coal was used in the furnace for melting the lead for the 
joints. 



*Englneering-Contracting, Oct. 21, 1908. 
■^:Engmeerino-Contractiiw, Arril 24. 1907. 



692 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Hj''drant at Commercial Ave., N. E., and 83d PL : 

Labor : Total. 

1 Assistant foreman ? 3.62 

% Timekeeper 87 

2 Calkers 6.00 

6 Laborers 15.00 

1 Single team 1.00 

Total labor $26.42 

Material : 

Pipe, 12 ft. of 6 in $ 5.88 

50 lbs. lead 3.25 

Gaskets 10 

Coal. 50 lbs 12 

Specials, 220 lbs 5.50 

Total material $14.85 

Grand total $41.27 

The excavation was in clay, which was hard digging. 
Hydrant at 21st St., between Blue Island and Ashland Aves. 
Labor : Total. 

Assistant foreman $ 3.62 

Calker 3.00' 

11 Laborers 27. .SO 

Total labor $34.12 

Material : 

Pipe, 14 ft. 6 in $ 6.86 

Lead, 90 lbs 5.85 

Gaskets 25 

Coal, 100 lbs 25 

Specials, 237 lbs 5.92 

Total material $19.13 

Grand total $53.25 

The excavation was in clay, and was hard digging. 
Hydrant at Rosemont Ave., 140 ft. south of Clark: 

Labor : Total. 

Assistant foreman ? 3.62 

% Timekeeper 87 

2 Calkers 6.00 

5 Laborers 12.50 

Double team 4.50 

Total labor $27.49 

Material : 

Pipe. 32 ft. 6 in $15.68 

Lead. 70 lbs , 4.55 

Gaskets .15 

Coal, 25 lbs 06 

Total material $20.44 

Grand total $47.93 

The excavation was in sand, which was easy digging. 
Hydrant at northeast corner 24th PI. and Stewart Ave. : 
Labor : Total 

2 Calkers $ 6.00 

6 Laborers 15.00 

% single team 50 

Total labor $21.50 



WATER-WORKS. 093 

Material : 

Pipe, 38 ft. 8 in ?18.62 

Leau. 180 lbs 11.70 

Gaskets 50 

Coal, 150 lbs 37 

Specials, 543 lbs 1 3.57 

Total material $66.26 

Grand total $87.76 

The excavation was in clay, wliich was hard digging. 

Hydrant at Winona and Winchester Ave. : 

Labor : Total. 

% Timekeeper $ 0.87 

Calker 3.00 

3 Laborers 7.50 

Vt Single team 50 

Total labor $11.87 

Material : 

Pipe, 5 ft. 6 in $ 2.45 

Lead, 30 lbs 1.95 

Gaskets 05 

Coal, 25 lbs 06 

Specials, 290 lbs 7.:i5 

Total material $11.76 

Grand total $23.63 

The excavation was in sand, and was easy digging. 

Cost of Concrete Vaults for Valves.* — Mr. Carroll Beale gives the 
following : 

The system of concrete construction for valve casing founda- 
tions described and illustrated here has been in successful opera- 
lion in the District of Columbia for nearly a year. The founda- 
tion, Fig. 7, consists of concrete rings 3 ft. in diameter, S ins. and 
4 ins. high, 3 ins. thick and reinforced witli 16-gage e.xpanded 
metal. These rings have proven to be not only more economical 
than the old brick construction,' but the department is now enabled 
to build a foundation in fiv minutes, whereas with the brick con- 
struction one whole day wa,. required by a bricklayer and his force 
to construct a foundation 4 ft. deep. 

To illustrate the econom5'^ of these rings, take for example a 
masonry foundation 4 ft. deep of brick. This required tlie services 
of a bricklayer and force one day of eight hours. The bricklayer's 
force account and material used were as follows : 

1 bricklayer at $5 per day ? 5.00 

2 laborers at SI. 75 per day 3.50 

Cart and driver $2.25 per day 2.25 

420 red brick at $9 per M 3.78 

% bbls. of Portland cement at $1.79 1.31 

Va cu. yd. .sand at $1.20 0.40 

Total $16.24 



'Engineering-Contracting, Nov. IS, 1908. 



694 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



For a 4-ft. foundation of concrete, six S-in. rings are required. 
These rings in place cost 50 cts. eacli ; therefore the cost would be 
?3, as against $16.24 for the bricli construction. It is therefore 
demonstrated that the cost of the concrete foundation is less than 
20 per cent the cost of the old brick construction, not taking into 
consideration the time lost by the bricklayer in moving about the 
city. 

The ring, 8 ins. high, cares for a height formerly occupied by 




Graeme 



:'■ Cenrenf ■■'■ 



Ccf5f Jron 






m 




CJ. Bptna-^ 


\ 


1 
L 


^ 1 ' 


^J& Gaqe Exfxunciecf Me tail 


1 * V 






Concrek Hin!^5 


'I .0 




& ■', 






■6 \j 






Erti^rConfr 

Fig. 7. — Concrete Vault. 

6 sa. ft. of brickwork 9 ins. thick, or 72 brick, which at $9 per M 
is equal to 65 cts., so it may readily be seen that the cost of these 
rings is less than the cost of the brick alone without mortar and 
without labor, which last item amounted to ?10.75 per day current 
expense. 

An itemized cost of the rings is as follows : 
0.0767 bbl. of cement = 1/13 bbl. 
0.048 cu. yd. gravel = 1/20 yd. 
0.024 cu. yd. sand = 1/40 yd. 



WATER-WORKS. 



69c 



The cost of one ring therefore is : 

CtB. 

Concrete i:5 

Labor 7 

Steel 16 

Total 48 

Placing 2 



Total for ring in place. 



50 









.ILL 



Ellevafion on C-C 




Pin of A 

ZRev,. 

LnqrContr 



Fig. 8. — Cast Iron Forms. 



To sum up the relative merits of the brick and concrete con- 
struction the use of concrete saves the department a current ex- 
pense of $10.75 per day, avoids the delays attending brick construc- 
tion, is as readily removed as the brick, and ts much stronger. 

These rings are made in the cast-iron forms shown by Fig. 8, on 
a smooth platform, and one man is able to make four 8-in. rings 
in one hour. 

As illustrative of the economy in reinforced concrete vault con- 
struction, the accompanying drawings. Figs. 9 to 11, and Table XI, 
give examples of the types of vaults now being constructed in the 



(396 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



District of Columbia. Three of these vaults, 5 ft. 10 ins., by 5 ft. 
6 ins. by 11 ft. 7 ins., 5 ft. 9 ins. by 5 ft. by 9 ft., and 6 ft. 2 ins. by 
8 ft. 10 ins. by 6 ft., have just been completed at New Jersey Ave. 
and B St., just north of the United States Capitol, at a cost of ?50 
each, excluding the cost of the lumber which will be reused. The 
roofs of these vaults have an ultimate strength of about 3,500 lbs. 
per sq. ft., and the flat construction permits of at least 2 ft. more 



•d 


- N PI'.* »..«•.-- > ^■o..'. r- b -.'.M^ l.-l 


< 








■ ^ 

t 


t3C 


_ 


icr\ <• 


_-- 


\ 

i 


fm '> 


f -f 


sCl7 "^ 


Dma/n 

o 


i"3feel FlQcti 






■s 

ri- 

J 


..-' 


.€i^« 


-,";,.•'-;.> ^.-^•, fV. ■.>:.:.■«•. '\4--«4Tx>-| 



t a*^.,i — I 



r4i 



. — f-j" 



■■ g — ■ — k. 










Cr7Cj.-Confr. 
Fig. 9. — Concrete "Vault for Horizontal Valve. 



This last is a very Important item where the mains are shallow 
head room than can possibly be had where a brick arch Is used, 
•and where every inch of head room counts. The vaults may be 
^constructed for approximately one-third the cost of the brick vaults 
►and have a much greater factor of safety than the old brick vaults 
fusing 13-in. walls. The drawings and tables explain fully the 
' method of construction without further description. 

Cost of Dipping Pipes. — In a very interesting article by Thomas 



ir.lTER-irORKS. 



mi 



o 

z 
o 

o 



o> 

si 



o 
g 

c 

a 



> 


J3" J 

6 
2; 


't--0>«-HCCt^05^COlCC»^C*3U3r^ 


■i-<r-(<NC^r-«(M(MCCTrC^COCO-^I25 


Rods 

in 
Roof. 


c S 


co^Dcococcxococoocot^t^t^t^r* 


6 




Horizontal Rods 
in Walls. 


c 

n! 

a 

CO 

*j 

Ih 






!ocO«D?0<:DO«0«OCDt^C*t^t^C* 


6 


,-,,-1 ,_,r-H(M 1— .1— .CMCO 


c 

a 

C 



Co; 


•OSOiOiOStNCKMOlC^^-^-^-^Tf 


6 


■CDOOOJOOOCCOOOOOCCOOO 


UOtJBA 
-■BOXJ[ 70 -SpX •113 




•;u3ui33 JO -siqa 


»-Hi— 1 .— t ,-H ,-( 1— . r-l rH ,— 1 C^ C^ 


■iS-^^-OJOSl'A-nO 


CCTj<O«5t^lOCD00O'MG0OCNJ'rf<C0 


1 


•3J3J0 

-uoQ JO -spA no 




•sui 'spo-jj IBO 
-T:;jaA }° SuioBdg 


•rJ'OCOCMrfOOC^^HOOtroOCC 


Spacing of 
Horizontal 

Roc's 
in Walls. 


nJ 


•CO(M»-H»-iCQ(Mr-iT-i,-H<NCSJi— 'r-< 


a ■ 

J CO 


-•*G0C^OC0CD(MO00-*O00^:0 

■ CM 1— ( T-. ,— 1 .-It— 1 ,— 1 T— 1 l-t,-H 


•SUI 'joo-jj utspo-jj 

JO -J OJ -^HUIOBClg 




■S-It 


-*^ r*^ .-'n 


•sut 
'joo-ajosssujjoiqJL 




■jj'apisui 
^n■ex JO %^yil^H. 




1 

*1I *9PISUT iO»C»0l0lCl0l0'O 10 ROCOCO CDO 

'jin^A JO siioii xxKs^xxxxxxxxxxx 


•;i 'msfi JO 
luoj^og oj qjdaa 


iOOCOO<MtOOOOC^'*000<M'*:r; 


•SU]^ 'aAiB^ 


.JO 


3ZTS 


(MCMC^<M<MCCCOCCCOCC 
III I 1 1 1 1 1 JCOOOOOOOCO 
0000000000-*-S'"^-«*'-^ 



698 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



H. Wiggin, in the Journal of the Association of Engineering So- 
cieties, 1899, Vol. 22, on the Manufacture and Inspection of Cast- 
iron Pipes, the following data are given as to the cost of dipping 
pipes. To coat one 12-ft. length of 48-in. cast-iron pipe costs ap- 
proximately as follows for different coating materials : 

3% gals, crude tar at $3 per bbl. of 52 gals $0.22 

5 gals, pitch at ?5 per bbl. of 52 gals 0.50 

1-Hi gals, tar varnish at 10 cts 0.15 

The first two are applied by dipping, but the tar varnish Is 
applied with a brush. 

Rusty pipes will not hold a coating. 






^S 








1. 



a 



"* EncjConfr 

Fig. 10. — Concrete Vault for Vertical Valve. 



Cost of Cleaning Water Pipe, Pittsburg, Pa. — Mr. J. D. Under- 
wood gives the following: An 8-in. cast-iron water pipe at Pitts- 
burg became coated with 0.32 in. of scale during 14 yrs. of use so 
that the pressure at the end was 34 lbs. below the theoretical static 
head. The contract price for cleaning 3,300 ft. of pipe was 24 cts. 
per ft., at which price the contractor made a very large profit, 
as will be seen from the following data. 

The pipe was cleaned in lengths averaging about 800 ft; the 
range being 400 to 1,200 ft., depending on local conditions. The 
pipe was cut at intervals of 800 ft. (average), and a special Y 



WATER-WORKS. 



699 



connection inserted, into whicli the cleaner could be introduced. 
These special Ys are so made that a cover can be bolted to them, 
should an emergency arise necessitating putting the pipe line into 
service. In order to get a wire cable tlirough tlie pipe, a "go-devil" 
Is first run through. It consists of two cones on an iron rod, eacli 
cone about 12 ins. long, and spaced 8 ins. apart. The cones are 
Inserted blunt end foremost. To the "go-devil" is fastened a No. 




£n^.- Contr 
Fig. 11. — Concrete Vault for Vertical Valve. 



22 flexible wire cable. The water is turned on and forces the 
"go-devil" through the pipe to the next special T. The water is 
tlien shut off and a %-in. wire cable is drawn back through the 
pipe by means of a one-man winch. The cleaner, or scraper, is 
fastened to the cable and is drawn through the pipe by a four-man 
winch, the water washing the broken scale out of the pipe ahead 
of it. 



700 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The time required to clean an SOO-ft. section was as follows: 

Mins. 

Running the "go-devil" through 3 

Pulling cable through 38 

Pulling cleaner through 48 

Total 89 

The following gang was engaged for 6 days, the wages being 
assumed : 

Per day. 

7 laborers at $1.50 $10.50 

1 mechanic 3.50 

1 foreman 5.00 

Total $19.00 

The labor, therefore, cost less than $120 for 3,300 ft. cleaned, 
or less than 3.7 cts. per ft. It is stated that even this cost could 
have been cut almost in two had it been possible to shut off the 
water continuously, but, as the pipe line was the main source of 
water supply for a considerable district, the water had to be turned 
on at intervals, delaying the work 2 or 3 days. 

Cost of Cleaning Water Pipe, Halifax. — Mr. E. H. Keating gives 
the following costs of cleaning water pipes in 1881 at Halifax, 
Canada. 

A 24-in. main, 19 yrs. in use, and 13,400 ft. long, was cleaned 
for 4.4 cts. per ft., the items being: 

Labor $121 

Materials, including scraper 333 

Manholes of brick and stone 139 

Total $593 

A 20-in. main, 13 yrs. in use, and 6,000 ft. long, was cleaned for 
5.4 cts. per ft., the items being: 

Labor $ 85 

Materials, including scraper 193 

Manholes of stone 48 

Total $326 

A 15-in. main, half 13 yrs. and half 25 yrs. old, 29,500 ft. long, 
was cleaned for 1.7 cts. per ft., the items being: 

Labor $248 

Materials, including scraper 162 

Manholes 84 

Total $493 

A 12-in. pipe, 19 yrs. in use, 3,700 ft. long, was cleaned for 4.9 
cts. per ft., the items being : 

Labor $ 34 

Materials (not including scraper, but includ- 
ing 2 batch boxes) 50 

Manholes 99 

TotM $183 

All told, some 62,800 ft. of 24, 20, 15 and 12-in. pipe were cleaned 
at a cost of $1,769, or 2.82 cts. per ft., not including cost of man- 



WATER-WORKS. 701 

holes, which amounted to $430, or 0.7 ct. per ft., additional, making 
a total of 3.52 cts. per ft. 

Manholes and "batch boxes" were built at intervals to insert the 
cleaners, which were scrapers provided with pistons, driven through 
the pipes by water pressure. 

The incrustation on the pipes was % to IV4 ins. thick. 

Cost of Cleaning Water Pipe, St. John, N. B. — Mr. Wni. Murdoch 
gives the following relative to the cost of scraping water pipe at 
St. John, N. B., in 1897: 

Special iron "liatch boxes," were made, consisting of short lengths 
of cast-iron pipe, provided with a flanged opening and a Hanged 
cover, boiled together. Through the "hatch," or opening, the 
scraper was inserted or removed. There were 9 "hatch boxes" in 
4.3 miles of 24-in. pipe. Each box weighs 3,300 lbs. and costs $167. 
Hence the rtrst cost of these ha.tch boxes was $350 per mile of pipe, 
or nearly 7 cts. per ft. 

The scraper weighs 263 lbs., and consists of an iron shaft about 
6 ft. long, made of a 3-in. wrought-iron pipe, at the front end of 
which is the scraper, and at the other end a "piston" ; there is a 
second piston at the middle of the sliaft. The scrapers are 12 steel 
blades, arranged in two sets of six each, one set back of the other 
on the shaft. The blades are bent back and are springy enough 
to pass over such obstructions as cannot be removed. This scraper 
cost $40. It was forced through the pipe by the water pressure. 
To remove an incrustation about % in. thick required 22 trips of 
the scraper, and the labor cost of cleaning the 4.3 miles of 24-in. 
pipe was $64 per mile, or 12 cts. per ft. The working force con- 
sisted of : 

-6 men (at the valves). 

1 mechanic. 

. 2 men (watching scraper). 

2 teams. 

1 foreman. 

The teams were used to transport the men and the scraper back 
to the starting point. The laborers were stationed, 2 each, at the 
valves close by the flushing stations. 

The 2 men who watched the progress of the scraper through the 
pipe could do so by listening to the noise that it made. 

Cost of Cleaning Water Pipe, Boston, Mass — Mr. Dexter Brackett 
gives tlie following relative to the cost of scraping pipes in Boston 
in 1S86. Tubercles % to 1% ins. thick were removed. The pipes 
were not supply mains but distributing pipes, 6 and 12 ins. diam- 
eter. Nearly 4 miles of 12-in. pipe were cleaned for 15.6 cts. per 
lin. ft., and 12 miles of 6-in. pipe for 9 cts. per ft., not including 
5 cts. royalty per ft. paid for the use of the scraper. The scraper 
is a flexible center sliaft, 3 % ft. long, composed of coiled steel 
springs, connecting small castings, to which are hinged two sets 
of steel scrapers arranged radially around the shaft about 12 ins. 
apart. These scrapers are held against the sides of the pipe by 
coiled springs. Back of the scrapers are two rubber pistons, 2 ft. 
apart, so as to insure water pressure on the machine when passing 



702 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



branches. No "hatch boxes" were used, as above described, but a 
section was cut out of the pipe, every 1,000 ft., and the scraper 
inserted. The section was replaced, clamp sleeves being used, and 
lead joints poured. The water, at 30 lbs. pressure, forced the 
scraper through the pipe. In some cases the displaced rust was 
forced into the service pipes, but this was removed by applying a 
force pump to the house plumbing and forcing the rust back 
into the main. In a test of a section of 6-in. pipe that had been 
laid 38 yrs. the discharge was doubled by the removal of the 
tubercules or rust. 

Cost of Water Pipe Maintenance.* — The diagram. Fig. 12, and 
Table XII, give some interesting data on the percentage vari- 
ations in cost of maintenance, labor and cast-iron pipe for the 
water pipe systems of Chicago, 111., for the period from 1895 to 



130% 




: 


1 




1 1 












1 






„t.j 












/ 


-ifiir 






?'-" 


^..^"^ 










s,/ 


^"1 








<? 






m% 






\y~^' 


'■^■"-ctX — 




t=:^ 


,^- — 


--'Za 


^ 


100% 
90% 


Sf> 


' — A 


^^/-rr 


:^:«£=- 


s^ 


P-Si^^v-^ — 






^ 


\s. *. 




' s^^ 




V \ 












«^ 


'^yf ^- 


■<S' 




\ \ 




.^ -^ 








\\ 


X •*'». 






\ * 


L,__n^ __^*^ 






^^**£-!f 








' .'^ > 




\ 


^'~-- ^"^ 


«,AJ!!.£i.- 


^■^.^^j_ 


"*■ 


- 


'"-' 








\ 


_. Im^'NJ^- 






60« 
















"-^/77 










1 


1 








^— '^— -m 


fiOS- 








1 


.1— 











13054 

120% 
110% 
100!!'. 
90% 

%m 

W4 
60% 
50%. 



Fig. 12. — Cost of Pipe Maintenance. 



1906. The data were compiled by the Division of Water Pipe Ex- 
tension, Mr. W. A. Devering, superintendent. 

Table XII. 

o o o) a bc^ a; o o3 o o 

g Bo <^u &^ d ^ 

^ «§ ^oO ^^ rf.S ''^ 

ofl+j .pa) g <- 

Si BjO, ir!S-> o a 01 G ^JQ, ofia A?"^ 

c3 "-f" aJt^Ti uOOci ai.p i-'O-^ 9=3 

tH Eh <!!^ £U U f^ P^ 

1895 1612 $217.09 100.0 $26.00 100.0 $2.25 

.1896 1691 149.28 68.7 23.00 88.4 - 2.25 

1897 1730 183.68 84.6 19.00 73.0 2.25 

189S 1801 240.89 110.6 25.00 96.1 2.25 

1899 1846 226.95 104.5 25.50 98.0 2.25 

1900 1872 144.04 66.3 25.50 98.0 2.25 

1901 1890 132.59 61.1 23.50 90.4 2.25 

1902 1918 144.27 66.5 28.00 107.7 2.25 

1903 1939 151.83 69.9 33.00 126.9 2.25 

1904 1978 141.73 65.3 30.00 115.4 2.25 

1905 2038 123.6G 56.9 27.50 105.8 2.25 

1906 2073 117.37 54.0 30.00 115.4 2.50 

* Engineering-Contracting, July 24, 1907. 



WATER-WORKS. 7U3 

Cost of Hydrant Maintenance in Winter.* — The accompanying 
table, abstracted from tlie report of Metcalf & Kday, engineer&, 
Boston I'inance Commission, siiows tlie cost of hydrant maintenance 
in Boston, Mass., and in neigliboring cities, from tlie uest informa- 
tion available, giving both the estimated total cost and the costs 
per hydrant. The ligure for Boston represents the actual cost as 
charged upon the books of the department. Tlie costs for the 
other cities are estimated on tlie basis of the best information that 
could be obtained as to methods, wages and duration of worlc. 

Cost of hydrant maintenance in winter in Boston and otlier Now 
England cities : 

No. Total Cost per 

City. Hydrants. Cost. Hydrant. 

Boston, Mass 7,772 $19,643 $2.53 

Cambridge, Mass 1,046 2,496 2.39 

Clielsea, Mass 319 468 1.47 

VV^orcester, Mass 2,012 2,574 1.28 

Lowell, Mass 1,272 806 .63 

Newton. Mass 976 234 .24 

Cost of Thawing Water Pipes by Electricity. t — On the basis of 
125 house services thawed by electricity in Rutland, Vt., in Feb- 
ruary, 1904, the cost of the thawing per service was as follows: 

Electricity $1.68 

Labor 1.85 

Teams and drivers 0.58 

Total $4.11 

On the average 17 amperes of alternating current at 2,200 volts 
were required, and at 10 cts. per kw.-hour the current cost was 
$1.68, as shown above. The average time consumed was 27 
minutes. 

Cost of Stop Cock Box Repairs, Etc.J — From May 13 to December 
31, 1907, the Water Department of Cleveland, O., put 9,290 stop 
boxes to grade, besides replacing 1,803 old boxes with new ones. 
In addition 330 new stop cock boxes were put in and 10 new stop 
cock bottoms. The cost of the work was as follows : 

Labor. Materials. 

Boxes put to grade 9,290 $0,409 

New boxes put in 1,803 0.839 $1,786 

NeXv tops put in 330 0.419 0.879 

New Bottoms put in 10 0.842 0.920 

Dug up and cleaned out 639 0.839 

The wages paid for labor in Cleveland in 1907 were about as 
follows : 

Per Hour. 

Foreman $ .42 

Assistant foreman 33 

Labor 22 

Team 50 

Cost of Subaqueous Pipe Laying. — A line of 12-in. water pipe 
was laid in a trench dredged across a river 500 ft. wide, as follows: 



*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 22, 1909. 
^Engineering-Contracting, March 20, 1907. 
ZEngineering-Contracting, Nov. 4. 1908. 



704 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The water in the river averaged 4 ft. deep and tlie trencli was dug 
6 ft. deep, making a depth of 10 ft. from water surface to bottom 
of the trench. The small home-made dredge, described in my book 
on "Earthwork," was used for the dredging. To lower the pipe 
into the trench A-frame bents were built of 4x6-in. timber, the 
legs of the bents straddling the trench, and each pipe was sup- 
ported by an iron rod passing thx-ough a hole bored in the hori- 
zontal member of the A-frame. These rods were about 12 ft. long, 
%-in. diameter, and threaded their full length. Each rod was 
provided with a hook at its lower end to hook into an iron ring 
around the pipe. The pipe was ordinary cast-iron pipe, and was 
leaded and calked while suspended from the A-frames. Then it 
was the intention to lower the 500 ft. of pipe all at one time by 
putting a man with a monkey-wrench at each rod, to give the nut 
on the rod a turn at a given signal from a whistle. There were 
43 bents, 12 ft. apart, and it was decided that a force of 10 men 
could lower the pipe satisfactorily by giving a few turns of the 
nuts on 10 rods, then moving to the next 10 rods, and so on. 
Through carelessness or mischief, some of the men gave more 
turns to the nuts than the signals called for. This threw the 
weight of several pipes upon two or more rods, and broke one of 
them at the hook, which was the weak spot. Immediately all the 
other rods broke in rapid succession, dropping the pipe line into 
the river. The pipe settled to the bottom without breaking in two 
anywhere, and only one joint showed any leakage of air when I 
inspected the line immediately after the accident. This joint was 
calked by a man who dived down repeatedly, and struck a few 
blows each time he was down. However, a diver was sent for to 
examine every joint, and his inspection showed the pipe line to be 
intact from end to end. The cost of building the A-frames, placing 
and calking the pipe line was as follows: 

10 men, 3 days, at $1.75 ? 52.50 

1 foreman, 3 days, at $3.00 y.OO 

10 men, 1 day at work lowering pipe, at $1.75 17.50 

1 foreman, 1 day at work lowering pipe, at $3.00 3.00 

1 diver, 1 day inspecting line 25.00 

Traveling expenses of diver La. 00 

Total for 516 ft. of pipe $122.00 

The above does not include the cost of the iron rods, nor the 
timber used in the bents, nor the building of a small raft from 
which to erect the A-frame bents. 

Prom this experience I believe it would be safe to dispense with 
the threaded iron rods for lowering such a line of pipe. The 
pipe could be held just above the water surface by small manila 
ropes, until calked. Then upon cutting one or two of the ropes, the 
rest would break and allow the pipe to settle into the water. As a 
12-in. pipe line is quite buoyant, when filled with air, it settles down 
gently upon the bottom of the trench. In case a break should 
occur in the line, threaded rods could be made, and the pipe raised 
and repairs made at but slightly greater expense than would have 
been incurred had rods been used in the first place. When pipe 



WATER-WORKS. 



70.J 



is lowered as above described, one flexible pipe joint is usually 
provided at each end of the pipe line. 

Cost of Laying a Submerged Pipe Across Deal Lake, N. J.* — The 
following account of the methods and cost of laying 370 ft. of 6-in. 
cast-iron pipe across Deal Lake, between Interlaken and Loch 
Arbor, N. J., has been furnished us by Mr. James B. McCord, Civil 
Engineer, of New York City. The water in the lake at the point 
of crossing averages 5 ft. deep, and as the bottom is fairly uni- 
form no dredging was necessary. The pipe was laid parallel to a 
line of old bridge piles and these wei-e used as supports for a tem- 
porary platform on which the pipe was laid and connected prepara- 



% Mcrni'/Ia 
Rape -u. 



:e Block 
and Fa// 




nna/ Loccrfjon or P/pe'-J._ 



tNe.-co*''''1- 



Fig. 13. — Laying Subaqueous Fipe Line. 

tory to sinking. The arrangement of the platform i.s shown in 
Fig. 13. 

In connecting up the pipe six ball joints were inserted at inter- 
vals corresponding to changes in profile of the bottom ; all other 
joints were calked. After the pipe was connected, six light A-frame 
derricks were set astride the pipe, as shown by the sketch ; these 
derricks were rigged with 6-in. blocks and %-in. rope. At inter- 
vals between the derricks 2x8-in. braces were nailed to the piles, 
as shown in the sketch. There were nine of these braces used and 
each had an iron thimble fastened to the outer end. Ropes tied 
around the pipe passed through the thimbles and back to the piles 
around which they were given several turns and fastened. Tlie 
ropes at the derricks and braces being made taut, the platform was 



*En(/ineerinff-Contractinff, Veh. 6, 1907. 



roo 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



cut away, leaving the 370 ft. of pipe suspended from the derricks 
and braces. Two men were then placed at each derrick and brace, 
who on signal simultaneously lowered, away until the pipe rested 
on the lake bottom. An examination of the pipe after lowering 
showed that it had suffered no injury. The pipe was standard 
6-in. cast-iron pipe weighing 32i^ lbs. per lin. ft. The itemized 
cost of the work exclusive of the cost of the pipe and the ball 
joints was as follows : 

Platform. 

Per day. Total. 

1 foreman ?4.00 $ 6.00 

6 laborers 1.75 22.24 

Lumber at $30 per M 40.00 

Total $68.24 

Distributing and Connecting Pipe. 

Per day. Total. 

1 foreman $4-00 $ 4.00 

6 laborers 2.0U 14.48 

Rent of raft 25.00 

Total $43.48 

Calking Pipe. 

Per day. Total. 

1 foreman $4.00 $ 4.00 

6 laborers 2.uu 28.96 

Lead at 6 % cts. per lb 27.00 

Yarn 0.75 

Total $60.71 

Derricks, Braces and Slinging Pipe. 

Per day. Total. 

1 foreman $4.00 $13.07 

4 laborers 2.00 13.05 

Rope 9.96 

Clevis, bolts, etc 6.00 

Lumber 22.20 

Total $64.28 

Lowering. 

Per day. Total. 

20 men $2.00 $32.72 

In noting the small cost of the platform it will be observed that 

the piling was already in place, thus cutting out an expensive item 

of the work. Summarizing the several items, we have the fol- 
lowing : 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Platform $68.24 $0.1844 

Distributing and connecting pipe 43.48 0.1175 

Calking 60.71 0.1641 

Derricks, braces and rigging 64.28 0.1737 

Lowering 32.72 0.0884 

Total for 370 ft $269.43 $0.7281 

Cost of Laying Pipe Across the Susquehanna. — Mr. James P. 

Herdic gives the following data relating to laying 10-in. cast-iron 
pipe across the Susquehanna River, at Montoursville, Pa., a distance 
of 600 ft., average depth of water being 13 ft. A %-in. manilla 



WATER-WORKS. 707 

rope was first stretched across the river, to act as a ferry line for 
the scows. The scows were loaded with pipe. The crew ol 8 men 
and foreman were engaged 1 day in tliis preliminary work, and 
then laid the GOO ft. of pipe line in the next 21/2 days. One ball and 
socket joint was used to every six ordinary joints. The pipe line 
was lowered between the two scows, by means of cliain pulleys 
suspended from a heavy sawhorse that spanned the gap between 
the two boats. The pipe was laid in a gentle curve, bowed up 
stream, so as to form an arch to resist the stronger currents. This 
is certainly an excellent record for economic work. 

On another place in the Susquehanna River, wliere the current 
was so swift that it would swamp a scow if held sidewise in the 
current by a cable, as above described, the following method was 
used : A scow was held in the current with its nose up stream, but 
at an angle with the current ; ropes from bow and stern to the 
nearest shore serving to hold it. In this way the current kept the 
ropes taut, and the scow remained steady while the lead joints were 
poured. The pipe line lay across the middle of the scow, which 
was moved out from under each joint as fast as made. Six com- 
mon joints to each ball and socket joint were used. 

Cost of Laying a Submerged 6-in. Pipe, New Jersey to Ellis 
Island. — About 5,100 ft. of 6-in. pipe were laid from the New Jersey 
shore to Ellis Island under 10 to 17 ft. of water. A trench was dug 
5 ft. deep by 10 ft. wide in the mud, using a clam-shell bucket. 
Heavy pipe, weighing 800 lbs. per length, provided with Ward 
flexible joints, was used. Two scows, each 26 x 80 ft., were fastened 
together, 6 ft. apart, and provided with two skids of lOxlO-in. 
timbers 55 ft. long, leading down between the scows to the bottom 
of the trench. The skids could be lowered in rough weather. Two 
lengths of pipe were placed at one time on the skids, a derrick 
being used for the purpose, and then the scows were warped ahead 
24 ft. The whole work occupied just a month, using a force of 10 
laborers, 2 calkers and 1 diver to calk any leaks, etc. The best 
day's work was 516 ft. The line was tested under 80 lbs. pressure, 
and leaked only 5 cu. ft. in % hr. 

Cost of Submerged Pipe Laying In Massachusetts. — in a paper 
entitled "Submerged Pipe Crossings of the Metropolitan Water 
Board," Journal of the Association of Engineering Societies, 1901, 
Vol. 27, Mr. C. M. Saville gives in detail the methods of laying 
submerged pipes and the following cost data, rates of wages and 
details of cost not being given. The work was done in 1897- in 
Massachusetts by contract, iDUt the costs are the actual costs to the 
contractor, plant rental being included. 

Mystic River Crossing. — Two lines of 3 6-in. pipe were laid in a 
dredged trench, 5 ft. 9 ins. c. to c. The trench averaged 8 ft. deep, 
in mud, and 35 ft. wide on top, and was 1,200 ft. long. A clam- 
shell dredge was used for most of the work, and averaged 27 lin. 
ft. of trench, or 250 cu. yds., per day, loading scows, which were 
dumped half a mile away. After the pipes were laid, the material 
was reloaded into the scows by the dredge, at the rate of 500 cu. 



708 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

yds. per day. The cost of excavating the trench was 54 cts. per 
cu. yd. for the 11,000 cu. yds. The cost of backfilling was 23 cts. 
per cu. yd. 

Tlie river is a tidal stream, with tide fluctuations of 10 ft., and 
is 9 ft. deep at low water. 

A pile foundation was built in the bottom of the trench to lay 
the pipe on. The piles were driven in bents of 2 piles per bent, 
bents being 12 ft. apart, and piles 6 ft. apart in each bent. They 
were driven 23 ft. into tlie mud, sav/ed off under water and capped 
witn 10 X 10-in. spruce by a diver. The cost of sawing off and 
capping was ?3 per pile. 

Some of the 36-in. pipes were made with a spherical, or flexible, 
joint, and weighed 8,260 lbs. per 12%-ft. length, costing $24 per 
ton (ordinary pipe cost $18 a ton), and required 248 lbs. of lead 
per joint 8 ins. deep. These flexible joints were only used where 
the pipe line curved vertically. 

Six lengths of pipe were joined together on shore, and lowered 
onto the pile foundation from a scow provided with two derricks. 
The pipes were slung from the lower chord of a light truss 75 ft. 
long, to which the derrick tackle was fastened. The scow was 
23 x 70 ft., and the pipes were lowered over the side. On the op- 
posite side of the scow was a smaller scow, loaded with gravel, 
which was fastened to the pipe-laying scow and thus served to 
counterweight the pipes. There was a 4-in. centrifugal pump on 
the scow for jetting out the trench if it become filled with mud. 

To join the sections of pipe under water (every sixth pipe), a 
special joint was designed. The spigot end was turned smooth in 
a lathe to a taper, and had no head. The bell was grooved and 
designed for a lead joint 5 ins. deep. On shore, a spigot was tem- 
porarily inserted in a bell, and the lead joint cast ; then the spigot 
was pulled out, leaving the lead joint in the bell. To re-make this 
joint under water, a diver guided the spigot to place ; near the end 
of the truss (above referred to) was fastened a hydraulic cylinder, 
to the piston of which was fastened an iron rod with a hook at 
the end. A chain having been fastened back of the bell of the last 
pipe, this hook was fastened into the chain, and, when oil was 
forced into the hydraulic cylinder, the truss was drawn forward 
and the spigot forced home into the bell. Fastened to the bell 
was an iron collar, which guided the spigot into the bell, and also 
prevented the lead from being displaced by any carelessness on 
the part of the diver. The pipe line was tested by compressed air, 
and leaks were calked by divers. 

The total cost to the contractor, including the pipe, which cost 
$6.75 per ft, was $13.25 per lin. ft. of pipe, including the pile 
foundation and the dredging. 

Since the trench averaged 4% cu. yds. per lin. ft. of pipe, at 
77 cts. per cu. yd. for excavation and backfill, the cost of the 
trench was $3.45 per lin. ft. of pipe. This leaves $3.05 per lin. ft. 
for the remaining items : piling, lead, timber and pipe laying. If 
the piles were 45 ft. long, there were 71/2 ft. of pile per lin. ft. of 
pipe, which probably cost the contractor about 10 cts. for ma- 



WATER-WORKS. 709 

terial and 10 cts. for labor (including the $3 for cutting off), or 
?1.50 per lin. ft. of pipe. At 82 lbs. of lead for the ordinary joints, 
the load probably cost about 30 cts. per lin. ft. of pipe. The spruce 
cap on the piles probably cost about $18 per M, or 10 cts. per lin. 
ft. of pipe. Hence tliese three items would total $1.90 per lin. ft., 
leaving about $1.15 per lin. ft. as the cost of laying the pipe. The 
assumptions and conclusions in this paragraph are mine and not 
Mr. Saville's. 

Cost of Laying a Submerged Pipe at Vancouver, B. C* — Mr. J. 
Causley gives the following relative to a 12-in. main across the Nar- 
rows at Vancouver, B. C, in 1906 : 

There have been seven 12-in. mains placed across the Narrows 
at various times during the past 19 years. The last one has just 
been put in position, and of the method of accomplishing this the 
writer purposes giving a short description, trusting that it may 
prove of some interest, for the reason that it differed from the 
method usually followed (with variations to suit particular cases) 
in such work, viz., that of building a staging, or anclioring a string 
of rafts along the line to be followed, slinging the pipes over the 
position they are intended to occupy, jointing them up and lower- 
ing the connected line into place. 

This metliod would not have been suitable in the cases under 
consideration on account of the water varying from 66 ft. deep 
at low tide to 75 ft. deep at ordinary high tide. The tide is very 
strong, running at speeds up to 8 knots per hour ; . also, and per- 
haps the most important of all, nearly the whole of the shipping 
trade of Vancouver, including ocean passenger and freight steamers, 
from 8,000 tons downwards, sailing ships towed in and out by 
tugs, coast steamers, rafts, coal barges, transfers towed by tugs, 
etc., passes through these Narrows. A system of hauling the pipes 
across was first put into practice hy the Water ^Vorks Company, 
this system being greatly improved by the late City Engineer, 
Colonel Tracy, M. Can. Soc. C. B., and the Water Works staff. 

About three years ago it was intended to place another main 
across the Narrows, and in the early part of 1904 a contract was 
made with Messrs. Robertson, Godson & Co., of Toronto and Van- 
couver, for the supply of cast-iron pipes for a submerged main, in 
accordance with the following specifications : 

To be 12 ins. in diameter internally, 1 in. in thickness, lengths to 
laj- 12 ft. each, of the best cast iron, strong, tougla gray metal, cast 
vertically witli the hub end down, the bell end to be bored spher- 
icallj', and the spigot end to be turned where it fits in contact with 
the bored surface. To be tested to a pressure of 500 lbs. per sq. in. 
and hammered under pressure. To be coated witli Dr. Angus 
Smith's preparation, or preferably with Wartz, Dove & Co.'s 
bitulithic solution. 

The pipes were obtained from StavelJ^ near Glasgow, in Scotland, 
and weighed between 1,725 and 1,800 lbs. each. 



*Engineering-Coixtracting, April 22, 1908. 



710 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The half section. Fig. 14, at a flexible joint sliows the latest form 
of the bell and spigot of a pipe. The shape of the bell has been 
altered from that of the earlier forms to cause the pipes to offer 
as little resistance as possible in sliding along the bed of the Inlet. 

The pipes were delivered at Vancouver in August, 1905, but it 
was not convenient to place them in position till the latter part of 
1906, when it was decided that they should be laid directly by the 
city, under the superintendence of Mr. S. Maddison, the manager 




Encj/rConfr 



Fig. 14. — Fle.vible Joint. 

of the water works, who had had much experience in tne work of 
laying previous mains. Captain Westcott, who was contractor for 
laying two of the previous mains, and foreman on laying the steel 
main, was engaged as foreman of the work. This main was to 
take the place of No. 3 pipe line, the pipes of which were taken 
apart by a diver and brought to the bank. 

A chute. Fig. 15, was constructed of 14-in. x 2-in. dressed plank, 
with 4-in. x 1-in. battens on each side — i. e., projecting 2 ins. above 
the plank — supported at every 6 ft. by cross pieces of 3-in. x 4-in. 




Enq-Confr 



Fig. 15.— Chute. 



quartering, each on 2 posts of 3 in. x 4 in., from low water on the 
north side of the Narrows extending back the length of the main. 
Bach length of pipe was tested separately under a pressure of 350 
lbs. to the square inch. The pipes were then placed on the chute 
spigot ends to the south, with a piece of 14-in. x 2-in. plank, about 
2 ft. long, on the bed of the chute running between the side battens 
under each pipe at the bell end. The piece of plank was notched 
out at the top side and upper end, so as to go under, support, and 
steady the bell, and keep the pipe in the center of the chute. The 



WATER-WORKS. 



11 



under skids of these blocks were well greased. The spigot of each 
pipe was pressed home in tlie bell of the next one, lead run in and 
calked to make a tight joint. No gaskets were used, as the bells 
and spigots were bored and turned to make tight and flexible joints. 
Each joint required from 60 to 70 lbs. of lead, making about SVi 
tons of lead used in all. The pipes, after being put together and 
jointed, were tested collectively under a pressure of 150 lbs. per 
square inch. 

A line was pushed through the pipes with a rod made of a 
number of long slats of wood nailed together and a 1%-in. steel 
wire cable hauled through them. 

Over the lower or south end of the string of pipes a cast-iron 
cap 1 in. thick, with strengthening ridges on the outer side, and 
flange overlapping the end of the pipe, was placed, leaded and 
calked. This cap had a 2-in. circular hole in the center with a 
stuffing-box. Through this was passed a 2-in. turned rod 3 ft. 6 ins. 




South Enol of Main Crxf-Co/7h- 



Fig. 16. — Arrangement of Hauling Cables. 



long, and the hemp packing was well tightened up around it. On 
the inner end of the rod was an eye through which the end of the 
1%-in. steel wire cable, which went through the line of pipes, was 
passed, doubled back on the cable, and secured with four clips. The 
outer end of the eye-bar, on which a screw thread was cut, went 
through a stirrup-shaped ring and was made fast to it with two 
nuts. To this stirrup one of the hauling cables was attached and 
secured in the same manner as the cable inside the pipes was 
secured to the other end of the bar. By these means the cable had 
no tension on the front end of the string of pipes. 

The end length of pipe carrying the cap, etc., was covered with 
a wooden lagging, bound at three places with %-in. wire rope. 
Figure 16 readily explains the arrangements made. 

The cable on the west side of the pipes was attached to the 40th 
pipe by taking two turns round the pipe, bringing the end back to 
the cable, and fastening it with 4 clips. The cable on the east side 
of the pipes was secured to the 13th pipe by means of a chain, 
which had a round turn round the pipe, and the ends made fast 



rr2 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



to the cable with clips. Iron bands were put round the pipe and 
cables fastened at intervals to enable a fair pull to be taken. 

On the upper, or north end of the pipe a cap similar to the one 
at the south end was placed, with the exception that the 2-in. 
circular hole in the center was through a plain boss. A 2-in. round 
bar passed through this hole. The inner end of this bar had an eye 
to which the cable through the pipes was attached in the same way 
as the other end of the cable was fastened to the bar through the 
cap at the south end of the pipes. On the outer end of this bar 
a screw thread was cut, and the cable through the pipes was tight- 
ened up with a nut. A second was placed above the first one for 
the sake of security. A length of 12-in. pipe, 4 ft. long, was fitted 
into the bell of the last pipe for the flange of the cap to fit on to. 
The whole was leaded and thoroughly calked. This was completed 
on Aug. 19. 

It had taken about a month to do this work, with a gang of 
about seven men, under the superintendence of Captain Westcott. 
There were 109 pipes, making 1,308 ft. of pipes, whose weight 




Clip 



Fif 



-Arrangement of Gripper. 



varied from 1.725 lbs. to 1,800 lbs. each, giving a total weight of 
about 96.0.5 tons. Including lead caps, internal cable, etc., the total 
weight would be about 102 V^ tons. 

1,800 ft., 1% ins. diameter, and 1,800 ft, I14 ins. diameter, fresh 
steel-wire cables had been bought. These cables were not new, but 
had been used for hoisting in the niines. Also four new 6-in. (cir- 
cumference) 120 fathom manila ropes nad been purchased at 
$160.00 each, for tackle. Six new 3-sheave blocks and two new 
single-sheave blocks had been made in the water works shops. 
The cables, on their reels, had been taken across to the north shore 
of the Narrows. 

The end of a line was taken across, attached to the end of one of 
the cables, and the cable was hauled across, a snatch block and 
four horses being used. No power tackle was used, as the hauling 
had to be done in the space of about 15 minutes at slack water. 

One cable was hauled across at slack water on Aug. 15, one on 
the 18 th, and one on the 19 th. By Aug. 23 everything was ready 
to begin hauling. The cables had been examined by the diver and 
tightened up with their blocks and tackles. 

By means of a gripper. Fig. 17, to each of two of the cables was 
attached a tackle consisting of a pair of 3-sheave blocks with one 



WATER-WORKS. 



ri8 



of the 120-fathom 6-in. manila i-opes rove through them worked 
by a capstan to each tackle driven by one or two horses. The 
other cable had two tackles, with a pair of 3-sheave blocks at- 
tached to each tackle, each tackle worked by a capstan. See Fig. 
IS. The drum of the capstan. Fig. 19, was 18 ins. in diameter, and 
the lever arms 11 ft. each. The cable, however, witii the two 
tackles attached, had been left taut too long ; the flood tide caughi 
it and carried it up channel about 100 ft. at the center, drawing 
two lengths of pipe slightly out of line before it could be loosened. 
It was necessary to draw it back to the north side and haul it 
across afresh. This had been done by Aug. 25, and everything 
found to be in order. Passing vessels had caused some incon- 
venience when getting the lines across. 

Monday, August 2T. — Hauling began at mid-day at low water 
with four horses, i. e., one at each capstan, and was also con- 
tinued on the slack water in the evening, lasting altogether about 




Fig. 18. — Arrangement of Capstans. 



five hours, and moving the main about 178 ft. The work could not 
be carried on longer as the tide when stronger would liave caught 
the cables and carried them out of line. After the first hauling the 
manager went down in diving dress, examined the pipes that had 
moved, found that they had been drawn straight, and that the 
joints were uninjured. 

Tuesday, August 28. — Hauling was carried on from noon to 2 
p. m., and from 5 to 8 p. m. The main was hauled 194 ft. ; in all, 
372 ft. Four horses had been used, i. e., one at each capstan. 

Wednesday, August 29. — Up to 7 p. m., only about 35 ft. had been 
hauled. The horses had been doubled on two capstans and had 
not pulled well together ; the tide also had not served well. 
Hauling was carried on from 7 :10 to 7 :30 p. m., when it was 
stopped by a signal from the other side (the light put out). It 
was found that one side of the chute had sunk where swampy 
ground was crossed, and that the pipes were slipping off. About 
?<! ft. had been hauled ; in all 450 ft. 

Thursday, August 30. — The chute was strengthened early in the 



714 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



day. In the morning the tide was not favorable for hauling, which 
was not begun till about 6 :30 p. m. Only one capstan was doubled 
till about 9 :30 p. m., when a second horse was put on No. 1 cap- 
stan. Hauling was stopped about 1 a. m., as the horses were 
unable to work longer. About 300 ft. had been hauled ; in all 
750 ft. 

Friday, August 31. — In the morning the pipe was examined by 
the diver, V\^ho went right along the part under water from end to 
end, and found everything in good order. There is a soft shingle 
bank extending from the north side to within about five hundred 
feet from the south side of the Narrows, and the pipes had 




Fig. 19. — Plan and Elevation of Capstan. 



ploughed into this for a depth of about two feet and moved boulders 
that were in their way. Further south the bottom is a sandy 
hardpan. 

Hauling began about 5 p. m., and one fleet (the length of travel 
of the moving blocks, about 75 ft.) was hauled by about 7 p. m. 
The tackles were then overhauled. Hauling was continued again 
from about 8 to 8:20 p. m., when the gripper on the eastern cable 
gave way. It was got in order again and operations were con- 
tinued. About 12 :30 a. m., the central cable slipped in the gripper 
and work was suspended for the night. About 150 ft. hauled; in 
all 900 ft. 



WATER-WORKS. 1V^ 

The pull was now becoming heavier. 

Huturday, September 1. — The diver went down in the morning 
and found everything in good shape. 

Hauling began about 4 :30 p. m. The pipe would not start at 
once, and the gripper on the central cable (No. 1 capstan) slipped 
at about 4 :45 p. m. It had to be loosened and a fresh grip taken, 
when the pipe was started. The fleet was finished at 6 :15 p. m. 
It was found from measurement that 162 ft. still required to be 
hauled. The tackles were overhauled ; a sheave in one of the 
blocks, which was found to be cutting (the hole had become en- 
larged about 1/4 in.) was replaced by another, and hauling was 
begun again about 7:45 p. m. About 9 p. m. it was found that the 
head of No. 2 capstan was giving way, and work had to be sus- 
pended till a new drum could be made, 169 ft. were hauled; in 
all 1,069 ft. ; 155 ft. remained to be hauled. 

Monday, September 3. — A new capstan barrel had been made 
and placed in position, and hauling was begun at 8:15 a. m. The 
main was moved about 40 ft., but the tide was found to be running 
out too strongly, and work was stopped. The pull had become very 
heavy, as so much of the main was on the ground and part of it 
was coming up hill. Six horses were used this daJ^ viz., two each 
on Nos. 1 and 2 capstans, and one each on Nos. 3 and 4. 

Hauling was begun again at 11 :10 a. m. A gripper slipped soon 
after starting. A fresh pin was put in and tightened up, and haul- 
ing was continued. Before long the rope of the tackle of No. 2 
capstan got under the barrel of the capstan and had to be cleared. 
The fleet was finished at 12:25 p. m. Seventy feet still required to 
be hauled. 

The tackle was overhauled and work begun again at 1 p. m. 
The rope got under the barrel of No. 2 capstan again and had to 
be cleared. The hauling was heavy, but the pipe moved steadily. 
The work was finished at 2 :45 p. m., the front end of the pipe being 
above low water. Total distance hauled, 1,224 ft. 

The main was tested on September 5, under a pressure of 125 
lbs. per sq. in., and found to be perfectly tight. 

Captain Westcott employed 11 men during hauling, as well as 
the diver and the drivers of the teams. 

The cost of the 1,308 lin. ft. of submerged pipe in place was as 
follows : 

Materials. 

965.05 tons 12-in. pipe at wharf $3,842.00 

Removing to site of work 200.00 

Lead, 7,000 lbs 491.93 

8,040 ft. B. M. lumber for chute, at $18 144.72 

2,436 ft. B. M. lumber for platform, at $17 41.41 

3 kegs nails, at ?4 12.00 

Labor. 
Building chutes and platform, putting up capstans, placing 

and jointing pipe, July 2 to Aug. 11 1,002.69 

Hauling pipe across the narrows (Aug. 25 to Sept. 8) . . . . 1,163.23 



716 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Miscellaneous. 
Materials, provisions, cartage, incidentals, etc 470.00 

Total $7,367.98 

Plant purchased fresh 930.00 

Grand total, 1,308 ft, at $6.35 $8,297:98 

The above $930 worth of plant purchased for this work consisted 
of the following items: 

2,000 ft. %-in. new steel cable, at 7 cts $140.00 

2,800 ft. 11/,-in. and 1%-in. old steel cable 150.00 

2,880 ft. 6-in. (circumference) Manila rope 640.00 

Total $930.00 

This does not include tlie blocks. 

The wages paid were higli, being 25 to 30 cts. per hr. A team 
and driver received $8 per day; diver, $15 per day. Of the $1,163 
item of hauling the pipe across the Narrows, $328 was for team 
and driver time. 

The foregoing costs do not include the cost of taking up and re- 
moving tlie old pipe line, wliich was as follows : 

Labor $1,652.77 

Materials and general expense 403.59 

Total , $2,056.36 

Cost of Laying Pipe Across the Willamette River. — A 32-in. pipe 
across the Willamette River, Oregon, was laid in 1895. Two scows 
and an inclined cradle were used. Tlie gang was 16 men and 1 
diver, and they laid 80 ft. of pipe per day in a trench 23 ft. below 
the water surface. The plant and methods are described in the 
Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 33, p. 257. 

Cost of a Wood Stave Pipe Line at Denver. — Mr. James D. Schuy- 
ler, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 31 (1894), describes and illus- 
trates very fully the building of a wooden pipe line for Denver, 
Colo. The pipe was 30 ins. diameter, made of staves of Texas 
pine 1% ins. thick, witli %-in. round iron bands. A pipe laying 
gang consisted of 8 to 16 men according to the number of bands 
per unit of length, half the gang being employed in back cinching. 
On a 34-in. pipe a gang placed 700 to 1,000 bands per day, laying 
from 150 to 300 lin. ft. of pipe. On a 44-in. pipe the rate was 
500 bands per day. The cost of erection was from 5 cts. per band 
on a 30-in. pipe to 10 cts. per band on a 48-in. pipe. The cost 
of 16.4 miles of 30-in. pipe 'was $1.36 per ft., distributed as follows: 

1,869 M Texas pine, at $27.50 $ 31,399 

271,900 steel bands (y2-in.) and shoes 54,300 

Brection of pipe, 5.1 cts. per band, by contract 13,866 

$119,565 
In addition the trenching and backfilling cost 48 cts. per ft., 

which was unusually expensive. 

Cost of Wood Stave Pipe, Astoria, Oregon. — Mr. John Birkinbine 

gives the following: 

An 18-in. wooden stove pipe at Astoria, Oregon, 7% miles long, 

Cost $0.90 per ft., in place including appurtenances, with lumber 



WATER-WORKS. 717 

at ?35 per M and steel bands at 4.8 cts. per lb. Mr. A. L. Adams 
gave the details as follows: Including all appurtenances the cost 
was 90 cts. per ft., but it was 76 cts. excluding appurtenances. 
The labor cost as follows: 

Building and spacing bands 55% 

Back-cinching :it> 

Repainting iron bands ■ 3 

Backfilling to depth of 6 ins. over pipe. . . . 8.75 

Placing specials 3.50 

Placing air valves 0.75 

Unclassified labor • 3.00 

Total 100.00 

In Colorado, 5Vi miles of 28-in. wooden stove pipe, under a head 
starting at 20 ft. and ending at 150 ft., cost $1.67 per ft, exclu- 
sive of ditching. The cost of 6 14 miles of 36-in. to 44-in. pipe was 
$2.60 per ft. exclusive of ditching. The cost of 6V2 miles of 36-in. 
to 44-in. pipe was $2.60 per ft. exclusive of ditching. In 1903 near- 
ly 2 miles of 42-'n. wooden stove pipe was laid at Absecom, N. J., 
for Atlantic City, at |2.25 per ft. in place. It was laid on tlie 
hydraulic grade line, requiring no heavy banding. 

Estimated Cost of Wood Stave Pipe. — In 1S9S Mr. A. L. Adams 
made the following estimates of cost per foot of wood stave pipe 
in Chicago, exclusive of contractors' profits. The cost includes lay- 
ing the pipe, but does not include hauling. Unfortunately the de- 
tails, upon which the estimate is based, are not given. Apparent- 
Ij' the costs do not include trenching. 

Diam., 25-ft. 50-ft. 100-ft. 200-ft. 

ins. head. head. head. head. 

12 10.42 $0.49 ?0.63 $0.85 

18 0.60 0.80 1.02 1.46 

24 0.79 0.91 1.14 1.61 

30 0.96 1.12 1.44 2.06 

36 1.19 1.40 1.82 2.65 

42 1.40 1.68 2.23 3.33 

48 1.55 1.85 2.46 3.67 

54 2.23 2.62 3.43 5.02 

60 2.85 3.35 4.37 6.40 

66 3.21 3.81 5.00 7.38 

72 3.65 4.38 5.83 8.73 

Cost of Wood Stave Pipe Line at Atlantic City. — Mr. Kenneth 
Allen and Mr. C. J. Myers give the following data relative to a 
wood stave pipe built by contract for Atlantic City, N. J., in It) 04. 

The pipe is 42 ins. diameter, of Washington fir, the staves being 
cut from 2 x 6-in. lumber, and measuring 1 9/16 ins. thick. The 
bands are spaced 12 ins. apart, and are of % in. round steel. The 
bands were bent by winding them around a cylinder 38 ins. in 
diameter. After bending they were wired together in bunches of 
five, and dipped in hot (400° F.) Mineral Rubber Field Paint for 
about 3 mins. About 750 bands were bent and dipped per day by 
a gang of 7 men and a foreman, using 20 gals, of mineral rubber. 

Trenching was begun Feb. 4, and the 9,800 ft. of pipe was com- 
pleted Apr. 16. The material was largely sand. The pipe was 



718 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA.' 

laid in the bed of an old canal, sections of which were dammed off 
and pumped out with two 3-in. gasoline pumps. 
The pipe gang was as follows : 

1 foreman. 

2 men handling material. 
2 men driving staves. 

2 men tightening bands. 

1 man rounding out pipe by hammering inside. 

2 men back-cinching. 

1 boy painting bands. 

2 men tamping. 
There were also : 

2 day men on gasolene pumps. 
2 night men on gasolene pumps. 
2 men on diaphragm pumps. 
S'S men backfilling. 

The first 26% of the work cost considerably more than the last 
74%, due to the colder weather that prevailed in February. 

The labor cost of the first 26% done during Feb. 4 to Mar. 5, 
was as follows, per lin. ft. : 

Excavation and Eackfill : 

4.92 hrs. labor at 15 cts $0.74 

0.28 hrs. foreman at 40 cts 0.11 

Making Pipe : 

1.05 hrs. labor at 20 cts $0.21 

0.13 hrs. labor at 40 cts ' 0.05 

During Mar. 5 to Apr. 16, the labor cost was as follows per lin. 
ft.: 

Excavation and Backfill ; 

4.91 hrs. labor at 15 cts $0.74 

0.18 hrs. foreman at 40 cts 0.07 

Making Pipe : 

0.73 hrs. labor at 20 cts .?0.15 

0.07 hrs. foreman at 40 cts 0.03 

During tne first period there was less excavation per lin. .ft. 
and less water to handle. 

The freight on the staves from Washington was $300 per car. 
The contract price for the 42-in. pipe was $2.25 per lin. ft. exclu- 
sive of earthwork. 

Labor on a Wooden Stave Pipe at Ogden. — Mr. Henry Goldmark 
gives the following relative to 6 ft. wood stave pipe line, 27,000 ft. 
long, built in 1896 near Ogden, Utah. The pipe is laid in a trench 
8% ft. wide and 9% ft. deep. The maximum hydrostatic pressure 
is 50 lbs. per sq. in. The lumber was Douglas fir, the staves meas- 
uring 2 % X 8 ins. before final dressing, and 2x7% ins. dressed. 
Sills, 6x8 in. X 8 ft, were laid 8 ft. apart, with 6 x 6-in. chocks 
or cradles on top. The bands were % to % in., and there were 
two shoes to each band. A gang of 20 men built about 70 lin. ft. 
per day; 10 of these men assembled the pipe and put on enough 
bands to hold the staves together ; the other 10 men put on the re- 
maining bands and did the back-cinching. There were 1,500,000 ft. 



WATER-iyORKS. 719 

B. M. of lumber and 2,500,000 lbs. of steel in bands and shoes of 
this 27,000 lin. ft. pipe line. 

Labor on a Wooden Stave Pipe at Lynchburg. — A wood stave 
pipe line was laid in 1906 at Lynchburg, Va. Tlie pipe is 30 ins. 
diam., made of 2 x 6-in. redwood stavtjs, banded with Mi -in. steel 
rods. The cast shoes weigli 1 lb. each ;. 320,000 bands were used 
for 2,000,000 ft. B. M. of staves. A gang of 18 men averaged 150 
ft. of pipe built per day ; 12 of these men fit up and assemble the 
pipe, and 6 men back cinch. The trench was 6 ft. wide, the upper 
part being excavated with drag scrapers. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Conduit. — To Mr. G. C. Woollard, 
engineer for James Stewart & Co., contractors, I am indebted for 
the following data relating to the construction of a 5-ft. concrete- 
steel conduit in the Cedar Grove Reservoir, near Newark, N. J. 
Two conduits, side by side, were built across the bottom of the 
reservoir from the gate house to a tunnel outlet. Since the con- 
duits are to be submerged, a small amount of leakage at end joints 
is not objectionable. 

Trial sections of the conduits were tested under hydrostatic pres- 
sure ; one of tlie conduits broke under an internal pressure of 15 
lbs. per sq. in., rupture taking place at ,a joint near the springing 
line of the arch where work had been stopped over night during 
construction. Another ■ section, in which no -stopping had occurred, 
resisted a pressure of 34 lbs. per sq. in. ; but the leakage of the 
•v*)oden bulkhead used in the test prevented applying a greater 
pressure. 

The concrete was 1 : 2 : 5, no stone exceeding 1% ins. being used. 
Expanded metal, No. 10 steel with a 3-in. mesh, weighing 0.56 lbs. 
per sq. ft., made by the Associated Expanded Metal Companies, was 
used. When construction was begun the sheets of expanded metal 
were bent up into the middle wall, but it was found that the in- 
clined part of the metal acted as a screen to separate the mortar 
from the stone. Hence the form of the metal was made as in Fig. 
20. 

"The particular thing that was insisted upon by both Mr. M. R. 
Sherrerd, the chief engineer of the Newark "Water Department, 
and Mr. Carlton B. Davis, the resident engineer at Cedar Grove 
Reservoir, in connection with these conduits, was that they be 
built without sections in their circumference, that the whole of the 
circumference of any one section of the length should be construct- 
ed at one time. They were perfectly willing to allow us to build 
the conduit in any length section we desired, so long as we left an 
expansion joint occasionally which did not leak. 

"The good construction of these conduits was demonstrated later, 
when the section stood 40 lbs. pressure to the square inch, and, in 
addition, I may say that these conduits have not leaked at all since 
their construction. This shows the wisdom of building the conduit 
all around in one piece, that is, in placing the concrete over the 
centers all at one time, instead of building a portion of it, and then 



720 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



completing that portion later, after tliie lower portion had had an 
opportunity to set. 

"The centers which I designed on this work were very simple 
and inexpensive, as will be gathered from the cost of the work, 
when I state that this conduit, which measured only 0.8 cu. yd. of 
concrete to the lineal foot 'of single conduit, cost only $6.14 per cu. 
yd., built with Atlas cement, including all labor and forms and 
material, and expanded metal. The forms were built in 16 ft. 
lerigths, each 16 ft. length having five of the segmental ribbed cen- 
ters such as are shown in Fie:. 20. viz., one center at each end and 
three intermediate centers in the length of 16 ft. These segments 
were made by a mill in Newark and cost 90 cts. apiece, not includ- 




"J ^Outs!eie Form Boarcis lO'xZ'xS'o'long 
6'x6''x8"Posts, eyery B'o" 

Fig. 20. — Centers for Concrete Conduit. 



Ing the bolts. We placed the lagging on these forms at the reser- 
voir, and it was made of ordinary 2x4 material, surfaced on both 
sides, with the edges bevelled to the radius of the circle. These 
pieces of 2 x 4 were nailed with two lOd. nails to each segment. 
The segments were held together by four %-in. bolts, which passed 
through the center, and l^^-in. wooden tie block. There was no 
bottom segment to the circle. This was left open, and the whole 
form held apart by a piece, B, of 3x2 spruce, with a bolt at each 
end bolted to the lower segment on each side. 

"The outside forms consisted of four steel angles to each 16 ft. 
of the conduit, one on each end, and two, back to back, in the mid- 
dle of each 16 ft. length. These angles were 2x3, with the 2-in. 



WATER-WORKS. 721 

side on the conduit, and the 3-in. side of the angle had small lugs 
bolted on it at intervals, to receive the 2x12 plank, which was 
slipped down on the outside of the conduit, as it was raised in 
lieight. Tlie angles were held from kicking out at the bottom by 
stakes driven into the ground, and held together at the top by a 
%-in. tie-rod. 

"The conduit was 10 ins. thick, save at the bottom, where it was 
12 ins. The reason for the 12 ins. at the bottom was that the 
forms had to have a firm foundation to rest on, in order to put all 
the weight required by the conduit on them in one day or at one 
time, without settling. We therefore excavated the conduit to 
grade the entire length, and deposited a -l-in. layer of concrete to 
level and grade over the entire length of the conduit line. This 
gave us a good, firm foundation, true and accurate to work from, 
and this is the secret of the good work which was done on these 
conduits. If you examine them, you will say that they are one of 
the neatest jobs of concrete in tliis line that has been built, especi- 
ally with regard to the inside, which is true, level and absolutely 
smooth. [The author can confirm this statement.] When the con- 
duit is filled with water, it falls off with absolutely no point where 
water stands in the conduit owing to its being out or the proper 
amount of concrete not being deposited. 

"The centers were placed in their entirety on a new length of 
conduit to be built, resting upon four piles of brick, two at «ach end 
as shown. The first concrete was placed in the forms at the point 
marked X and the next concrete was dropped in through a trap 
door cut in the roof of the conduit form at the point marked T. 
This material was dropped in to form the invert, and this portion 
was shaped by hand with trowels and screened to the exact radius 
of the conduit. The concrete was then placed continuously up the 
sides, and boards were dropped in the angles which I have men- 
tioned, and which served as outside form holders till the limit was 
reached at the top, where it was impossible to get the concrete in 
under the planking and thoroughly tamped. At this point the top 
was formed by hand and with, screeds. 

"Each 16-ft. length of this concrete was made with opposite 
ends male and female respectively, that is, we had a small form 
which allowed the concrete to step down at one end to 3 ins. in 
thickness for 8 ins. back from the end of the section, and on the 
other end of the section it allowed it to step down to 3 ins. in thick- 
ness in exactly the opposite way, making a scarf joint. This was 
not done at every 16 ft. length, unless only 16 ft. were placed in 
one day. We usually placed 4S ft. a day at one end of the conduit 
with one gang of men. This was allowed to set 24 hours, and, 
whatever length of conduit was undertaken in a day, was absolute- 
ly completed, rain or shine, and the gang next day resumed opera- 
tions at the other end of the conduit on another 48 ft. length. This 
■was completed, no matter what the weather conditions were, and, 
towards the close of this day the forms placed on the preceding 
day were being drawn and moved ahead. 



722 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

"The method used in moving these forms ahead for another day's 
work is probably one of the secrets of tlie low cost of this work, 
and it is one which we liave never seen employed before. The 
bolt at A, Fig. 20, was taken out, and the tie brace B thrown up. 
We had hooks at the points C. A turnbuckle was thrown in, catch- 
ing these hooks, and given several sharp turns, causing the entire 
form to spring downward and inwards, wliich gave it just enough 
clearance to be carried forward, without doing any more striking 
of forms than pulling the bolt at A. This method of pulling the 
forms worked absolutely satisfactorily, and never gave any trouble, 
and we were able to move the forms very late in the day and get 
them all set for next day's work, giving all the concrete practical- 
ly 24 hours' set, as we always started concreting in the morning at 
the furthest end of the form set up and at the greatest distance 
from the old concrete possible in the 48 ft. length, as the furthest 
form had, of course, to be moved first, it being impossible to pass 
one form through the other. 

"Six 16-ft. sections of these forms were built, and three were 
used each day on each end, as shown by the diagram MN, Pig. 
20, which gives the day of the month for the completion of each 
of seven 48-ft. sections. 

"A gang of men simply shifted on alternate days from end to end 
of the conduit, although several sections were in progress at on© 
time ; aud of course, finally, when a junction was made between 
any division, say of 1,000 ft., to another 1,000 ft., one small form 
was left in at this junction inside of the conduit, and had to be 
taken down and taken out the entire length of the conduit. 

"The centers for a 16-ft. length of this conduit cost complete 
for labor and material, $18.30, but they were used over and over 
again ; and, after this conduit was completed, they were taken 
away for use at other points, so that the cost is hardly appreci- 
able, and the only charge to centers that we made after the first 
cost of building the centers, was on account of moving them daily. 
Part of this conduit was built double (two 6-ft. conduits) and part 
single, the only difference being that, where the double conduit 
was built, two forms were placed side by side, and not so much was 
undertaken in one day. 

"These conduits, when completed and dried out, rung exactly 
like a 60-in. cast-iron pipe, when any one walked through them or 
stamped on the bottom." 

Mr. "Woollard gives the following analysis of the cost per cubic 
yard of the concrete-steel conduit above described; 

Per cu. yd. 

1.3 bbl. cement $1.43 

10 cu. ft. sand 0.35 

25 cu. ft. stone 1.10 

26 sq. ft. expanded metal, nt 3 ots 0.78 

Loading and hauling materials 2,000 ft. to the mixing board 

(team at $4.50) 0.50 

Labor mixing, placing, and ramming 1.38 

Labor moving forms 0.60 

Total §6.14 



WATER-WORKS. 723 

Wages were 17 Ms cts. per hr. for laborers and 50 cts. per hr. for 
foremen. The concrete was 1 : 2 : 5, a barrel being assumed to be 
3.8 cu. ft. The concrete was mi.xed by hand on platforms along- 
side the conduit. The cost of placing and ramming wa.s higli, on 
account of the expanded metal, the small space in which to tamp, 
and to the screeding cost. When forms were moved they were 
scraped and brushed with soft soap before being used again. 

Prom Mr. Morris R. Sherrard, Engr. and Supt. Dept. of Water, 
Newark, N. J., I have received the following data which differ slight- 
ly from those given by Mr. Woollard. The differences may be e.\- 
plained by the fact that the cost records were made at different 
times. Mr. Sherrerd states (Sept. 26, 1904) that each batch con- 
tains 4 cu. ft. of cement, 8 cu. ft. of sand, and 20 cu. ft. of stone, 
making 22 cu. ft. of concrete in place. One bag of cement is as- 
sumed to hold 1 cu, ft. He adds that a 10-hr. day's work for a 
gang is 63 lin. ft. of single 5-ft. conduit containing 47.4 cu. yds. of 
concrete and 1,260 sq. ft. of expanded metal. This is equivalent 
to % cu. yd. of concrete per lin. ft. The total cost of material for 
one complete set of forms 64 ft. long was $160 ; and there were 
7 of these sets required to keep two gangs of men busy, each gang 
building 63 lin. ft. of conduit a day. Since the total length of the 
conduit was 3,850 ft., the first cost of the material in the forms was 
18 cts. per lin. ft. 

Cost of Labor on 5-ft. Conduit : 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 
1 foreman on concrete $ 3.35 $0.07 

1 water boy , 0.75 0.01 

11 men mixing at $1.75 19.25 0.39 

5 men mixing at $1.50 7.50 0.16 

4 men loading stone at $1.40 5.60 0.12 

4 men wheeling stone at $1.40 5.60 0.12 

2 men loading sand at $1.40 2.80 0.06 

2 men wheeling sand at $1.40 2.80 0.06 

1 man placing concrete at $1.75 1.75 0.04 

6 men placing concrete at $1.50 9.00 0.19 

2 men supplying water at $1.50 3.00 0.06 

1 man placing e.ypanded metal at $2 2.00 0.04 

1 man placing expanded metal at $1.50 1.50 0.03 

Total labor on concrete $64.90 $1.35 

Cost of Labor Moving Forms : 

Per day. Per cu. yd. 

4 carpenters placing fonns $13.00 $0.27 

2 helpers placing forms 4.00 0.08 

1 carpenter putting up boards for outside forms 2.75 0.06 

1 helper pvitting up boards for outside forms. . . . 2.25 0.05 

2 helpers putting up boards for outside forms. 3.50 0.07 

1 team hauling lumber 4.50 '0.09 

1 helper hauling lumber 1.75 0.04 

Total labor moving forms $31.75 $0.66 

It will be noted that it required two men to bend and place the 

700 lbs., or 1,260 sq. ft, of expanded metal required for 63 lin. ft. 

of conduit per day, which is equivalent to 0.5 ct. per lb., or 0.3 ct. 

per sq. ft., for the labor of shaping, placing and fastening the 

metal. 

Reference to Other Concrete Conduits. — In the section on Sewers 



724 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

will be found more data on reinforced concrete conduits. See also 
Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction — Metliods and Cost." 

Cost of Brick Conduit. — A conduit of liorseshoe sliape, 7i^ ft. 
in diameter, was built with a briclc arch 8 ins. tliiclc and a con- 
crete invert lined with brick 4 ins. thick. Tlie following relates to 
the brickwork. Work was done by contract, in 18S4, in Massachu- 
setts. Mr. Henry A. Carter gives the cost of 960 M of brickwork 
was as follows : 

Labor: 

Foreman, 39 days, at $5.00 ^ 195.00 

Laborers, 320 days, at $1.25 400.00 

Laborers, 1,752 days, at $1.50 2,628.00 

Masons, 753 days, at $4.90 3,601.50 

Carpenters, 4 days, at $2.50 10.00 

Horse and car, 90 days, at $3.15 283.50 

Miscellaneous labor 23.75 

Materials: 

Brick, 960,000, at $8.40 per M 9,024.00 

Cement, 315 bbls. Portland, at $3.20 1,008 00 

Cement, 1,681 bbls. natural, at $1.26 2,118.06 

Sand, 571 cu. yds., at $1.20 685..20 

Plant: 

Boiler, 15 days, at $1.00 15.00 

Pumps, 101 days, at $0.25 25.25 

Cars and tools 79.00 

J'-Qims and centers 304.00 

Coal, 12 tons, at $6.00 72.00 

Office building 57.00 

Total $20,529.26 

General expense, timekeeper, watcliman", etc. 1,038.36 

Grand total $21,667.62 

These 960 M of brick made 1,600 cu. yds. of masonry, or 570 
bricks per cu. yd. About 5% were culled and rejected. It took 
1.23 bbls. of cement per cu. yd. Masons each averaged 1,250 bricks 
per day, which was a poor average for men paid such high wages. 
The cost per cubic yard of this brick masonry was ; 

Per cu. yd. 

Masons laying, at 49 cts. per hr $ 2.38 

Laborers tending, including unloading, etc., 15 

cts. per hr 2.07 

Brick, 570 at $8.40 per M 5.59 

Sand, 0.35 cu. yd., at $1.20 0.42 

Cement, 1.23 bbls ■. 1.55 

Forms 0.19 

General expense and miscellaneous 1.05 

. Total per cu. yd $13.25 

The cost of 2,500 cu. yds. of concrete in the foundation and in- 
vert was as follows : 

Labor: Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, at $2.75 $0.16 

Laborers, 20 at $1.65 1.22 

Carpenters, 2 at $2.25 0.15 

Horse and car. at $3.15 0.15 

Miscellaneous labor 0.01 

Total labor $1.6'9 



WATER-WORKS. 725 

Materials for concrete J3.34 

Lumber for forms 0.05 

Cement slied o.04 

Tools, pumping, etc O.oy 

Grand total $5.21 

Weight of Iron or Steel Stand Pipes. — With iron or steel assumed 
to have a safe tensile stress of 12,500 lbs. per sq. in., assuming that 
single riveted joints have 66% of the strength of the solid sheet and 
that double riveted joints have 75%, each sheet to build 5 ft. 
Table XIII was calculated by Mr. A. H. Howland in 1886. 



a 
c 







§- 


a 
— a; 


CQ<w 


■3^ 


Q 


o 


5 


147.0 


6 


211.5 


7 


287.9 


8 


376.0 


9 


475.9 


10 


587.5 


12 


846.1 


14 


1,151.5 


15 


1,325.9 


16 


1,504.0 


18 


1,903.6 


20 


2,350.0 


22 


2,843.5 


25 


3,672.0 


27% 


4,442.7 


30 


5,304.0 


33 


6,398.2 


35 


7,197.0 


40 


9,400.0 


45 


11,897.0 


50 


14,688.0 



Table 


XIII. 








a 
o 






Id to 
hick- 
ch 5 

di.st. 

col.. 




£ 

o 
u 


o 


o 


5"S £ 


c o 

C to 




2 id 


istance f 
to carr 
rivets, f 


on.stant t 
minimun' 
ne.ss for 
ft. belo 
given in 


i 


5 




a 


O 


0.1455 




105 


65 


0.0069 


0.1494 




90 


55 


0.0083 


0.1455 




75 


50 


0.0097 


0.1554 




70 


45 


0.0111 


0.1500 




60 


40 


0.0125 


0.1525 




55 


35 


0.0139 


0.1670 




50 


30 


0.0167 


0.1940 




50 


30 


0.0194 


0.2080 




50 


30 


0.0208 


0.1989 




45 


25 


0.0221 


0.2192 




40 


25 


0.0249 


0.2218 




40 


25 


0.0277 


0.2440 




40 


25 


0.0305 


0.2425 




35 


20 


0.0347 


0.2681 




35 


20 


0.0383 


0.2496 




30 


20 


0.0418 


0.2754 




30 


20 


0.0459 


0.2917 




30 


15 


0.0486 


0.3332 




30 


15 


0.0555 


0.3127 




25 


10 


0.0625 


0.3465 




25 


10 


0.0693 



P'rom this table the details of any iron stand pipe can be deter- 
mined and tabulated. Then from such a tabulation calculate the 
weight of the metal as follows : Figure the superficial area of the 
stand pipe of given diameter for a ring 5 ft. in height, multiply this 
by the weight of a square foot of metal of the thickness of each 
ring, add them all together and add the weight of the bottom, and 
then add 10% for laps and rivets. 

Cost of a Standpipe, Quincy, Mass. — Mr. C. M. Saville gives the 
following relative to a 300,000 gal. steel standpipe built in 1900, at 
Quincy, Mass. The pipe is 30 ft. diam. and 64 ft. high. The lowest 
plates are 9/16 in. thick, and the top plates are 14 in. thick. The 
bottom is of % in. plates. The bottom or floor plates and the first 
course were assembled and riveted, resting on rivet kegs directly 



"i-IG HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

over their final location in the concrete foundation, and then low- 
ered to place witli hydraulic jacks. 

In erecting, the contractor used inside and outside platforms 
swung from the top of the last plates set up, and for hoisting the 
plates he used a gin pole bolted to seams in this course. This pole 
was of such a length tliat a block at its top was 9 ft. above the 
top of the plate to which the pole was bolted. The hand wincli 
was located on the ground. Riveting and calking were done with 
pneumatic machines, a 12 HP. Clayton air compressor (a larger 
compressor sliould have been used) and 25 HP. boiler being used. 
For calking a thick edged tool was required, as it made a better 
joint than a thin edged tool. 

The side plates were first set up with bolts, and, when all were in 
place, tlie riveting was begun at the top and worked down, except 
in the case of the lowest two or three courses, when riveting kept 
pace with erection. The space between tlie bottom of the pipe and 
tlie concrete foundation was filled with neat cement grout, by 
means of a force pump, througli grooves left for the purpose in the 
concrete foundation. During this process, 6 ft. of water were put 
into the standpipe to prevent its being lifted. 

Tlie actual cost (to the contractor) of the labor on the stand- 
pipe was nearly 0.9 ct. per lb., as follows: 

Per lb. 

Assembling plates $0.33 

Riveting 0.42 

Calking 0.10 

Painting 0.40 

Total .5>0.89 

The contractor's plant cost about $1,600. The gang employed 
was : 

1 foreman at ?3.50. 
1 calker at $3.00. 
1 riveter at $2.50. 

1 engineman at $2.50. 

2 heaters at $2.00. 

3 helpers at $1.80. 

The contract price for the standpipe was 3.8 cts. per lb The ac- 
tual cost to tlie contractor was 3.88 cts. per lb., as follows: 
Materials : 

55 tons steel plates at $50 $2,750.00 

1 ton L, iron at $107 107.00 

70 kegs rivets at $2.75 192.50 

Bolts used in erection 10.00 

Moving materials to and from shope and 

cars 250.00 

Freight and materials 180.00 

Total $3,489.50 

Labor : 

Assembling plates $ 383.33 

Riveting 488.38 

Calking 111.95 

Painting 47.36 

Total $1,031.02 



WATER-WORKS. 7_'7 

Since the total weight of tlie standpipe was 116,430 lbs., tlie cost 
pex- pound was : 

Materials 2.99 cts. 

Labor 0.89 cts. 

Total 3.88 cts. 

The steel standpipe rests on a concrete foundation and is sur- 
rounded by a masonry tower. At contract prices the total cost was 
as follows : 

Foundation : 

1,355 cu. yds. excavation if 514.90 

2S4 cu. yds. concrete (48 ft. diam. X 5 ft. 

thick) 1,704.00 

Grouting under standpipe 133.26 

Total, foundation $2,352.10 

Standpipe 4,529.72 

Masonry tower 24,790.00 

Pipe connections 339.37 

Grand total $32,011.25 

The masonry tower is 77 ft. high, 4% ft. thick at the base, 3Vj ft. 
thick at a point 10 tt. above the base, 2 ft. tliick at tlie lop. The 
following- are principal items in the tower : 

925 cu. yds. rubble masonry (granite). 

275 cu. yds. dimension stone (granite). 
. 14 tons iron and steel work. 

90 sq. yds. granolithic observation roof. 

The so-called rubble was laid in courses with %-in. joints at the 
face. Between the tower and the standpipe the contractor erected a 
staging. Across iiie top of the standpipe were placed two pairs 
of 4 X 12-in. timbers, 30 ft. long and trussed with 114-in. rods. 
These timbers rested partly on the standpipe and partly on tliD 
staging. A platform was laid on these timbers and a guy derrick 
with a 20 ft. mast and a 30-ft. boom was mounted on the platform. 

Cost of Steel Stand Pi.oe Encased in Brick. — Mr. Edward Flad 
gives the following data relative to a standpipe built in 1895 at St. 
Charles, Mo. 

The tank is 25 ft. diam., 70 ft. high, and holds 250,000 gals. It 
is of steel plates ( i/4 to % in. thick) encased in brick, a space of 
2 ft. being left between the brick and the steel. It rests on a 
foundation of natural cement concrete 5 ft. thick. The roof is of 
steel covered with slate. There are six horizontal circular girders 
riveted to the steel casing, to provide for wind pressure, acting like 
the stiffeners of a plate girder. The brick work is 9 ins. thick for 
the upper 30 ft. and 13 ins. thick for the lower 40 ft., and bears 
upon the circular girders just referred to. Eight brick pilasters 
(30 ft. high) were built for architectural effect, brick arches join- 
ing the tops of the pilasters. There is a steel cornice with a hand 
rail around the top. A light scaffold was built inside the tank, and 
a cage swung on the outside, the plates being raised by a gin pole. 
A forge was placed on the cage and rivets were driven from the 
inside. After the iron work was in place, the brick casing was built 
from a scaffold. 



728 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The work was done by contract at the following prices: 

Steel $4,450 

Brick casing 2,807 

Foundation 678 

Total $7,935 

Brick Casing Around Stand Pipe. — Mr. W. J. Laing gives the 
following data relative to a brick casing built in 1898 around an 
iron standpipe to prevent ice formation. The iron standpipe is 25 
ft. diam. and 90 ft. high. It rests on a concrete pedestal 62 ft. 
high, 7 ft. of which is below ground level. This pedestal contains 
1,200 cu. yds. concrete. The top of the standpipe is 145 ft. above 
ground level. The masonry casing around the standpipe is 162 ft. 
high, and contains 1,275 tons of broken stone, 13 cars of cement, 
500,000 brick, and 5,000 lbs. of iron. It required 45,000 ft. B. M. 
of staging, and 16 men were three months building the casing. 

Cost of a Steel Tank and Tower, Ames, la. — Mr. A. Marston 
gives the following relative to 162,000 gallon water tank mounted 
on a steel tower 110 ft. high, built at Ames, la., in 1897. The steel 
work is 24 ft. diam. x 40 ft. high (excluding the height of a hemi- 
spherical bottom). The curved roof is of galvanized iron on a steel 
frame work. Tlie tank is supported by a tower composed of 8 
Z-bar columns (12 in.) resting on 8 concrete pedestals. Each ped- 
estal is 10 ft. square at the base, and 4 ft. square on top, capped, 
with stone 18 ins. thick. The height of each pedestal is 7 ft. be- 
low the stone cap, and eacli contains nearly 19 cu. yds. of con- 
crete. The contract price for the foundations was $1,150. The 
contract price for the steel tank and tower was $8,966, making a 
total of $10,116. 

Cost of Steel Tank and Tower, Porterville, Calif. — Mr. Philip E. 
Harroun gives the following data relative to a 75,000 gal. tank on 
a tower, built in 1904 for the waterworks at Porterville, Calif. 

The tank is of steel, 20 ft. diam. x 25 ft. high, plates being % 
to 5/16 in., and has a hemi-spherical bottom. The tower has four 
legs 108 ft. long, resting on concrete pedestals. The foundation 
work was done by day labor at 20 cts. per hr. The tower and 
tank were erected by contract. The cost was : 

157 cu. yds. excav. at 64% cts $ 101.74 

52 cu. yds. backfill at 12 ^ cts 6.40 

105 cu. yds. loaded and hauled % miles at 201/2 21.35 

104.7 cu. yds. concrete (materials at $5.86, and labor at 

$1.88), at $7.74 ■ • 810.53 

65 cu. ft. granite capstones 231.55 

78,532 lbs. steel, tower and tank, in place at 0.066 5,191.00 

102 ft. screw pipe, 10 in. riser 269.23 

Miscellaneous 19.51 

Total * $6,650.81 

Cost of Steel Tank and Tower, Fairhaven, IVlass. — An elevated 
water tank was built at Fairhaven, Mass., in 1S93. Its capacity is 
383,000 gals, and its cost was $19,000. The steel tank is 35 ft. 
diam. x 50 ft. high, with a conical bottom, and is supported by 12 
steel posts, 97 ft. high, surmounted by a girder 3 ft. high, tota) 



IVATER-irORKS. 729 

100 ft. Each post rests on a masonry pedestal 9 X 9 ft. at the base 
6X6 ft. at the top, 5 '/a ft. high, capped witli a 4 X 4 ft. stone 1 V\ 
ft. thiLk. 

- Cost of Steel Tank and Tower, Providence, R. I. — Mr. F. M. Bow- 
man gives the following relative to a steel water tank and tower 
built in 1904 for East Providence, R. I. The cost was a little less 
than $100,000. The tower is 135 ft. high from base of column to 
base of tank ; the steel tank is 50 ft. diam. X 70 ft. high, and holds 
1,000,000 gals. The foundations are of concrete resting on solid 
rock. 

Cost of Scraping and Painting a Stand Pipe. — Mr. Byron I. 
Cook says that it is practice to scrape and paint the interior of a 
stand pipe every two years. An old flat file, ground to a chisel 
edge, is used for scraping, and it costs less than 0.1 ct. (1 mill) 
per square yard for scraping. Ho prefers novices to regular paint- 
ers. The cost of painting with two coats of Durable Metal Coating 
was : 

Paint ?0.049 per sq. yd. 

Liabor U.042 per sq. yd. 

Total ?0.091 per sq. yd. 

The outside of the pipe is not painted oftener than once in five 
j"ears, with Dixon graphite paint. 

Weight of Wooden Tank and Steel Tower. — A steel tower SO ft. 
higli and supporting a wooden water tank 2S ft. diam. X 22 ft. high 
(.100,000 gals) weighed 100,000 lbs. This weiglit of steel includ- 
ed 25,000 lbs. of steel I beams (24 ins.) forming part of the plat- 
form on whicli the tank rested. Brick arches between these I 
beams formed the platform. The dead load was as follows : 

L,bs. 

Tank 25,000 

Water 830,000 

Platform ( brick ) 70,000 

Platform steel 1 beams 25,000 

Tower : 75,000 

Total 1,025,000 

Cost of a Wooden Water Tank, La Salle, 111.*— The following 
figures of cost of constructing a wooden water tank are given by 
Mr. C. H. Nicolet, of La Salle, 111. The tank was built to replace 
a tank which failed on March 29, 1905, because of tlie rusting and 
bursting of the iron bands or hoops. This old tank was 30 ft. in 
diameter and 24 ft. high, and was mounted on a circular stone 
tower 77 ft. higii. It was built of Louisiana red gulf cypress, tlie 
stairs and bottom being 3 ins. thick and the hoops 3/16 X 6 ins. and 
^ X 6 ins., with the usual spacing. The new tank was of the 
same dimensions and type, but with changes in details. . The grade 
of the lumber was raised by limiting the amount of bright sap on 
any one edge to 1% ins. This change increased the cost of the 
wood work about 11%. The most important change, however, was 



'Enciincering-Contracting, Sept. 26, 1906. 



730 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in the style of band used. Round rods were used. There wei-e 29 
hoops of 1% in. diameter and six at tlie top 1 in. in diameter, all 
of mild steel. They were spaced 5 ins. apart on centers at the bot- 
tom and varying up to 21 ins. at the top. The hoops were made 
of three 30-ft. rods with a short filling piece, this being the limit- 
ing length obtainable from stock. The rods were bent to the 
proper curve before being placed. The joints were made by means 
of malleable iron lugs of the type commonly used in built-up stave 
pipe in the West. The cost of the tank as described was as fol- 
lows: 

Materials : 

Tank complete at mill (wood work only) "Tank grade"...? 698.00 

Added for raising grade of lumber /li.OO 

Freight 39.00 

$ S13.00 

Rods, 1 Vs in. round 10,046 lbs. 

Rods, 1 in. round 1,734 lbs. 

11,780 lbs. 

11,780 lbs., at $1.85 Chicago 217.95 

Lugs, 116 — li/s-in. at 43yoc $41.76 

Lugs, 24 — 1-in. at 36c 8.64 

50.40 

Total materials $1,081.35 

Labor : 

Machinists and helpers — threading and bending rods, grind- 
ing lugs, etc., 214 hours $ 45.00 

Carpenters and helpers, removing debris of old tank and 

erecting new tank and roof; also painting, 907 hours. . . . 200.00 

Laborers — mainly removing debris of old tank 10.00 

Total labor $ 255.00 

Grand total $1,336.35 

It will be noticed that the labor of putting on the roof is in- 
cluded above, but not the material. This consisted of a flat cover 
made of 1% in. tongued and grooved plank resting on 2 X 12 in. 
joists tops flush with top of tank, supported on two trucks with 
cups, and two 6X6 in. posts, each set on tank bottom. 

Cost of Concrete Standpipes.*— Mr. George H. Snell, Mr. Frank A. 
Barbour, and Mr. Leonard C. Wason give the following data relative 
to a reinforced concrete standpipe built in 1904 at Attleborough, 
Mass. The standpipe is 50 ft. diam. x 100 ft. high, and holds 1,500,- 
000 gals. The experience, gained with a foi-mer standpipe of iron 
indicated that a steel pipe would have a life of only 20 years, because 
the water contained carbon dioxide (CO-). Two tons of rust 
had been removed annually from a wrought-iron standpipe 30 
ft. in diam. x 125 ft. high. The bid on a steel standpipe, 50 
ft. X 100 ft, was $37,135. The bid of the Aberthaw Construction 
Co. on the reinforced concrete standpipe and gate house was $34,000, 
which was accepted. 

The concrete wall is 18 ins. thick at the bottom and 8 ins. thick 
at the top. The bottom is of concrete 1 ft. thick, and the concrete 
foundation, 18 ins. thick, rests on hardpan 7 ft. below the ground 

*Engineering-Contr acting, Dec. 26. 1906. 



WATER-IVORKS. 



731 



level. The concrete foundation is of 1 : 3 : 6 concrete. The walls are 
of 1:2:4 concrete, reinforced witli round steel rods (0.40 carbon). 
Kods of milder steel would have been better, for it was difficult to 
bend them so tliat they would hold their shape, on account of their 
springiness. Twisted steel rods could not be bent in true planes 
and had to be abandoned. The rods were pulled through a tire 
bender around a curved form by a steam engine. The rods were in 
56y2-ft. lengths, and were spliced by overlapping 30 ins., using three 
Crosby guy-rope clips without which it would have been very 
difficult to secure a satisfactory splice. It was at first attempted 
to support these hoops, or rings, with vertical rods of twisted steel, 
but, due to lack of rigiditj' of these rods, 4-in. channels were sub- 
stituted, spaced 11 ft. apart. It would have been better had the 
channels been closer. Holes were punched through the flanges of 
the channels at proper intervals, and i^-in. pins inserted to sup- 
poi't the hoops or rings as in Fig. 21. Up to a height of 60 ft. 
there were two rings of IVi-in. bars spaced 3% to 8 ins. vertically. 
There were 2% ins. of concrete outside of the outer ring, and 4 ins. 
between the two rings. From 60 to 81 ft. there was but one ring. 







Fig. 21. 



spaced as shown In Fig. 22. Above 81 ft. the diameter was re- 
duced to 1 Vs ins. 

The labor of bending and placing the steel actually cost $9 per 
ton, or 0.45 ct. per lb. The Crosby clips cost 37 cts. each. 

The cost of the 1:2:4 concrete in the walls was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Cement ? 4.80 

Sand and stone 3.90 

Mixing concrete 0.40 

Placing concrete 2.20 

Forms, labor and lumber 2.65 

480 lbs. steel, assumed at 2 cts 9.60 

Bending and placing 480 lbs., at 0.45 2.16 

4 Crosby clips, at 0.37 1.4 8 

Total $27.19 

There are 770 cu. yds. in the walls, which, at ?27.19, gives an 
actual cost of ? 2 0,9 3 6. This does not include the cost of plastering 
and waterproofing. 



732 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




Fig. 22. — Reinforced Concrete Standpipe. 



WATER-WORKS. 733 

There are nearly 90 cu. yds. in the floor, which are included in 
tlie 770 cu. yds. above given. There are about 230 cu. yds. of 
1:3:6 concrete in the foundation. 

The standpipe has an ornamental concrete cornice and a d»me- 
shaped roof of Guastavino tile. 

A timber tower 60 ft. high was erected inside the standpipe and 
a derrick with a 40-ft. boom was mounted on the tower, the derrick 
being operated by an engine on the ground. When the standpipe 
had reached a height of 60 ft., the height of the tower was in- 
creased to 110 ft. and the derrick raised. The cost of tlais tower 
and of raising the derrick was $1,700, which is equivalent to $2.20 
per cu. yd. This is charged against the item of forms and of 
placing concrete. 

The plant included a Sturtevant roll jaw crusher, bucket elevator 
and rotary screen, and a Smith mixer. 

The floor and a section of wall 21^ ft. high were molded in one 
operation, after which the wall was built up in sections 714 ft. 
high. The reinforcing was first built up to a height of 71.^ ft. and 
then the forms were placed. The forms wei'e made in sections 11 ft. 
long. The lagging of the outside forms was boards nailed vertically 
to wooden ribs. The lagging of the inside forms was boards placed, 
one at a time, horizontally, as the wall was built up, so that the 
concrete was always easily accessible. The sections of forms were 
locked together by iron clamps. Two sets of Jorms were used, so 
that one set was left in place while the other was being raised and 
made ready to receive the concrete. The batter of the outside of 
the tank increased the difficulty of the work, for they had to be 
adjusted from time to time to provide for the decreasing circum- 
ference. It is questionable whether the cost of this adjusting 
did not exceed the saving of concrete effected by the use of a 
batter. ^ 

Fig. 23 shows the timber tower and the standpipe partly built. 

Fig. 22 shows the design of the standpipe. 

Since the wall was built in sections 71/. ft. high, great care was 
taken to secure a perfect joint between the sections. At the top 
of each concrete section a groove was formed by a 2 x 3-in. strip of 
beveled wood. AVhen this was removed, the top surface was well 
scrubbed with water and coated with neat cement. This joint 
proved very effective. The operation of placing steel and raising 
forms for a new section took three days, so that the concrete sur- 
face was quite hard when concreting was resumed. 

The concrete was dumped on platforms on the tower and shoveled 
into the forms. Care was taken not to make the concrete so wet 
that spading and ramming would drive the stone to the bottom and 
leave porous spots. The mixture must not be more wet than will 
enable the mortar to support the broken stone. Atlas Portland 
cement was used throughout. 

After the wall had reached a height of 20 ft., the tank was filled 



734 



HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



with water, and it was kept filled, as the work progressed, to the 
elevation of tlie bottom of the lowest set of forms. Considerable 
leakage developed at first, but this gradually grew insignificant, 
although the waterproof coat had not yet been placed. At no time 
was*more than 1 to 2 per cent of the exterior surface wet by leak- 
age. During the winter some of the concrete scaled off near the 
bottom on the outside, apparently due to cavities outside the steel 
reinforcement, probably caused by a slight moving of the forms 




Fig. 23. — Erecting Concrete Standpipe. 



when the concrete was being placed. Repairs were made by digging 
around the outside rows of steel reinforcement, putting on iron 
clips (% X % in.) of iron bolted through, and then forcing cement 
into the cavities around the clips by throwing it a distance of 4 ft. 
against the wall. Expanded metal was then fastened to the clips, 
and covered with cement plaster, and then more expanded metal 
was put on over this and plastered. 

The inside of the tank was plastered after roughening the sur- 
face of the concrete with a pick. The plastering seemed to have 



WATER-WORKS. 735 

little effect in absolutely stopping the leakage. The lower 25 ft. 
were subsequently given 5 more coats of plaster without entirely 
stopping leakage. Finally the surface was treated by the Sylvester 
process, as follov/s: 

Thoroughly dissolve % lb. pure Castile olive oil soap to each gal- 
lon of water. Thoroughly dissolve 1 lb. of pure alum in 8 gals, of 
water. Thoroughly clean the wall and dry it. ' Apply the soap solu- 
tion boiling hot, with a flat brush, taking care not to form a froth. 
Wait 24 hours so that the solution will become dry and hard upon 
the walls, then apply the alum solution in the same way, at a tem- 
perature of 60 to 70° P. Wait 24 hours, and repeat with alternate 
coats of soap and alum. 

In 1870 this process was used successfully to waterproof brick 
walls on the Croton reservoir, 4 coats of each solution being suffi- 
cient ; 1 lb. of soap covered 37 sq. ft., and 1 lb. of alum cov- 
ered 95 sq. ft. 

After applying four coats of each solution to the concrete stand- 
pipe, up to a height of 35 ft., water was admitted to a height of 
100 ft., and only four leaks developed. Then four more coats were 
applied to this 35-ft. section, and above that only four coats were 
used. 

It was found, by tests at the Watertown Arsenal, that three 
Crosby clips developed the full tensile strength of the l^^-in. re- 
inforcing rods. 

The design of this tank and further details are given in "Concrete 
Construction" by Gillette and Hill. 

Materials In a Reinforced Concrete Stand Pipe.— Mr. J. L. H. 
Barr gives the following relative to an 81-ft. standpipe of reinforced 
concrete built in 1903 at Milford, Ohio. 

The outside diameter is 15 lA ft. The shell is 9 ins. thick for the 
lower 30 ft., 7 ins. thick for the next 25 ft., and 5 ins. thick for the 
remaining 26 ft. The concrete foundation is octagonal, 20 ft. diam- 
eter of inscribed circle, and 6 ft. thick. The shell is made of 1 : 3 
mortar (no stone) reinforced with 1 x 1 x '/s-in. T bars. The ver- 
tical bars are 18 ins. c. to c. ;' the horizontal bars are spaced 6 to 
the foot for the lower 30 ft., 5 to the foot for the next 25 ft., and 
4 to the foot for the remaining 26 ft. 

The forms were 3-ft. staves (1% x 3 ins.) nailed to circular ribs 
(4x4 in.), the topmast rib extending 1 in. above the tops of the 
staves so as to form a rabbit to receive the next form. Three sets 
of forms were used, each 3 ft. high. Each set consisted of an inner 
and an outer form, each divided into 8 segments for ease of 
handling. This standpipe required : 

68 cu. yds. gravel containing 40% sand (for base). 
90 cu. yds. sand (for shell). 
270 bbls. cement. 
25,000 lbs. steel. 



736 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

There would appear to be insufficient steel in the horizontal rings, 
since the tensile stress at the bottom is nearly 22,000 lbs. per 
sa- in. 

The amount of gravel for the base or foundation appears to be 
approximately correct, since it would be about 70 cu. yds. of Con- 
crete ; but the amount of sand appears to be overestimated, as the 
shell would contain but 60 cu. yds. The base inside the shell was 
covered with 1 : 3 mortar 6 ins. deep, which would require about 3 
cu. yds. 

It is stated that the contract price for this standpipe was $200 
less than the lowest bid for a steel standpipe. 

Cost of 12- in. Well, Portersville, Calif. — Mr. Philip E. Harroun 
gives the following cost of 12-in. well, 216 ft. deep, ariven in 1904 
at Portersville, Cal. The material penetrated was clay. The con- 
tract price for drilling the well and driving the casing was $2 per 
lin. ft. The well had a double casing, the inner casing being No. 14 
gage, and the outer being No. 16 gage, in 2 -ft. lengths. The casing 
cost $1 per ft. thus making the total cost $3 per ft. Various inci- 
dentals added $50 to the cost of the well. 

Relative Cost of Waterworks and of Filters.— When it is gener- 
ally known that it costs about $100 to produce a million gallons of 
water in the average city, and less than $10 to purify it by filtra- 
tion — including plant interest and depreciation in both cases — there 
is certain to be far less hesitancy about incurring the expense of 
providing filter plants. Somehow the impression prevails that pump- 
ing water and delivering it through pipes is very cheap, and that 
filtering is exceedingly expensive, whereas it costs ten times as 
much to supply water as it does to filter it under ordinary condi- 
tions. The expensive system of piping that underlies the streets 
of a city costs about $350 per capita of population, whereas a slow 
sand filter plant capable of supplying 100 gals, per capita per day 
costs only $3.50 per capita, and a mechanical filter plant costs less 
than $2.70 per capita. In other words, by an expenditure of about 
1% more than the first cost of a piping and pumping system for a 
city of less than 100,000 population a filter plant can be added to 
the existing water supply system. 

It is true that the cost of operating a filter plant is not corre- 
spondingly small, but it is a relatively small item nevertheless. As 
will be seen from the data subsequently given, the principal cost 
of operating a sand filter is the scraping and cleaning the sand, 
and replacing it on the filter bed. Year by year, improved methods 
have been develop^ tor washing and handling the sand, and the 
end of this development is by no means reached yet. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Ashland, Wis. — Mr. William Wheeler 
gives the following relative to a slow sand filter built in 1895 at 
Ashland, "Wis. This was the first sand filter plant in America to be 
covered with masonry. The 3 filter beds have an area of V-i acre. 
They are so located on the lake shore that it was necessary to 



WATER-WORKS. 737 

build a pile bulkhead around three sides of the filter beds. The 
walls are of concrete and brick, 3 ft. tliick at tlie bottom and 2 ft. 
at the top. The beds are roofed with groined elliptical brick 
'arches (15% ft. span), resting on brick pillars, and backed willi 
concrete. Two courses of brick laid Hat form the arch rings (5 
ins. thick). The floor is of concrete only 3 ins. thick. It is below 
tlie lake level, wliich necessitated building a cofferdam during con- 
struction. Tlie sand beds are 4 ft. tliick resting on 9 ins. of 
gravel. The work of construction was entirely by day labor. The 
cost was as follows : 

470 lin. ft. cofferdam (not with earth filling) ? 1,720 

Handling water 493 

6.943 cu. yds. earth excavation 3,233 

340,400 bricks, laid in walls 6,237 

45,000 bricks, laid in piers 827 

349,550 bricks, laid in roof arches 6,755 

Centers for roof arclies t labor and materials) 1,157 

37 manholes 724 

House over etfiuent chamber and sump well 627 

1,000 cu. yds. concrete 5,977 

Vitrified collecting pipes, laid 116 

Cast-iron collecting pipes, laid 639 

(Jast-iron supplying pipes, laid 725 

Pipe, pipe connections, pump, etc 729 

SSO cu. yds. gravel in filter beds 1,949 

3,385 cu. yds. sand in filter beds 4,201 

Sundries ■ 2,268 

Engineering and superintendence 1,800 

Total if 40,178 

This is equivalent to about $80,000 per acre, but, had it not been 
for the difficult conditions and winter work, the cost would have 
been $5,000 less, or $70,000 per acre, including pump well, sump 
well, effluent chamber, piping and housing. A further reduction of 
10 to 15 per cent in cost could be effected where building stone and 
suitable sand and gravel were near at hand. 

This plant filtered 1,100,000 gals, per day, or at the rate of 
2,200,000 gals, per acre per day. It required 10 scrapings of sand 
per year, removing 610 cu. yds. of sand, which was equivalent to 
1.52 cu. yds. of sand scraped per million gallons. The cost of this 
scraping was 62 cts. per million gallons, or 40 cts. per cu. yd. of 
sand, the cost of scraping a bed of one-sixth acre being as follows : 

3 men scraping, 1/2 day, at $1.50 $2.25 

2 men wheeling in filter, V> day, at $1.50.- 1.50 

1 man tending bucket at bottom, % day, at $1.50 0.75 

2 men load and dump at bottom, % day, at $1.50 1.50 

1 man wheeling away at top 0.75 

1 single team to hoist bucket 2.50 

Tools and sundries 0.50 

Total for 1/6 acre S.50 

There were 21 cu. yds. of sand (plus the mud) removed at each 
cleaning of a bed, making the cost 40 cts. per cu. yd. The dirty 
sand was not washed, but new, clean sand was delivered by contract 
and placed for $1 per cu. yd. Hence the cost of scraping sand and 
of replacing with new sand cost $1.40 per cu. yd. of sand scraped. 



738 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

or $2.13 per million gallons. Adding 13 cts. to this for superin- 
tendence, etc., the total cost of filtering was ?2.26 per million gals. 
At 5 per cent interest on the first cost of the plant, the capital 
charges are |5.05 per million gallons, making a total of $7.31 per 
million gallons. 

Cost of Filter, Berwyn, Pa. — Mr. J. W. Ledoux gives the fol- 
lowing data relative to a small (% acre) sand filter plant built in 
1898 at Berwyn, Pa. It has a nominal filtering capacity of 1,500,- 
000 gals, per day. The filters are built in 3 compartments (not 
roofed) each having 7,500 sq. ft. effective filtering area, or about 
85 ft. square. A vertical section through the filter beds shows 30 
ins. of sand, 6 ins. of gravel, 3 ins. of concrete floor and 8 ins. of 
puddle. The main drains are 12-in. vit. sewer pipe ; the laterals are 
4-in. tile, spaced 6 ft. apart, set in depressions in the concrete. The 
side walls are of rubble, outside of which is the embankment. The 
cost, including a $2,000 gate house and accessories, was as follows; 

6,77a cu. yds. excavation, at $0.241 $ 1,630.80 

528.3 cu. yds. stone masonry, filter basin, at $5.541 2,927.31 

2.4 cu. yds. brick masonry, filter basin, at $9.16 21.98 

304.5 cu. yds. concrete, filter basin, at $6.153 1,873.43 

2,432 sq. yds. plastering and forming gutters, at $0.243,.. 591.60 

3,200 lin. ft. 4-in. tile drain, in place, at $0.065 207.20 

246 lin. ft. 12-in. collecting drain, at $0.654 160.80 

286 lin. ft. 12-in. clean-out drain, at $1.198 342.64 

281 lin. ft. 12-in. cast-iron inlet and outlet pipes, at $1,571 441.57 

200 lin. ft. 14-in. cast-iron filter discharge, at $2.192 438.36 

542 cu. yds. puddle, at $0.709 384.63 

655.55 tons gravel in filter bottom, at $2.115 1,386.62 

2,696.83 tons sand in filter bottom, at $1.639 4,420.10 

97.2 cu. yds. stone masonry, gate house, at $7.234 703.07 

10.75 cu. yds. brick masonry, gate house, at $7.38 79.33 

125.3 cu. yds. excavation and back fill, gate house, at 

$0.9S5 123.43 

Roofing (slate), woodwork and painting, gate house 210.81 

9,584 lbs. flange pipe (12-in.), gaskets, etc., at $0.031 296.26 

Registering and weir apparatus 272.45 

Valves (6 to 12-in.), with boxes and band wheels 254.69 

Superintendence and engineering 729.00 

Incidentals 1,000.00 

Total $18,535.59 

Since the filter bed has a total area of 22,500 sq. ft, the cost was 
about 82 cts. per sq. ft. (including cost of the gate house), or 
$35,700 per acre. This cost is equivalent to $12,000 per million 
gallons of daily capacity. The "superintendence and engineering" 
was 4 per cent of the total cost. 

Cost of Filter, Nyack, N. Y — Mr. G. N. Houston gives the fol- 
lowing relative to a slow sand filter plant built in 1899 at Nyack, N. 
Y. The filter beds are not roofed. There are two beds 74 x 116 ft. 
each, having a combined filtering area of 0.38 acre. The maximum 
consumption of water at Nyack was 630,000 gals, per day, which 
would require a filtering capacity of 3,300,000 gals, per acre per 
day, if only one bed were used, but, in practice, both beds are used 
except when one is being cleaned. The raw water is drawn by 
gravity from a nearby creek. The filter is located in a swamp. 



WATHR UDRKS. 731) 

adjacent to tiie cieek. which made its construction expensive, in 
order to deliver the creeU water by gravity to tlie filter, it was nec- 
essary to excavate for the filter beds to a depth of 10 ft. The ma- 
terial was a wet tenacious clay whose banks would crack and slip, 
so fliat it was necessary to support the side walls on piles. The 
clay was spaded out in chunks that were lifted by hand into wagons. 
Temporary plank roads had to be laid. Sheet piles were driven all 
around the filter beds and left in place. Bents of bearing piles 
were driven underneath the retaining walls, capped and floored 
with plank. On this pile foundation, which cost $3 per lin. ft. of 
wall, was built a small concreted retaining wall for a height of 3 ft. 
8 ins., the top of this wall being about the same elevation as the top 
of the sand in the filter bed. The earth slope above the retaining 
wall was paved with 8 ins. of concrete and vitrified brick for a 
length of about 6 ft. measured up the 1 1^ to 1 slope. The division 
wall was also supported on a pile foundation, and was of concrete 
up to the level of the surface of the filter sand, and above that it 
was of vitrified brick 2 ft. thick. The work was done by contract 
at the following cost to the village : 

Excavation (lOVa ft. deep and about 7,000 cu. yds.) ? 5,270 

Grading and soiling 1,500 

Sheet piles, 66,000 ft. B. M., at $50 3,300 

Bearing piles, 352, at $4.42 1,558 

Hemlock caps and floor 838 

Yellow pine caps and floor 465 

Concrete floor, IQi/o ins. thick ($1.50 per sq. yd.) 2,738 

Concrete walls, 430 cu. yds., at $4.40 1,892 

Concrete slope paving 484 

Brick slope paving, 13.45 cu. yds., at $8.40 113 

Blue-stone curb 250 

Vitrified pipe drains (about 1,400 lin. ft. of 6-in. and 230 

ft. of 15-in. ) 347 

Gravel (12 ins.) and sand (36 ins.), 2,570 cu. yds., at $2.15. 5,524 

House over regulating chamber 150 

Pipe laying 58 

Miscellaneous 250 

Total $24,737 

Engineering ($3,644) and inspection ($713) 4,357 

Total, 0.38 acres, at $76,553 $29,094 

This is an unusually high cost, due to the conditions above given, 
and to the fact that the work was dragged along, which made the 
expense of engineering and inspection high. The price of filter 
gravel and sand was high, as it was brought by scow from Long 
Island. 

The above costs include a clear water well 25 ft. in diameter, 
with side walls 12 ft. high, and a dome-shaped roof of concrete. 

The plank "floor" includes not only the floor laid on the bearing 
piles, but a 1-in. hemlock floor laid over the entire bottom of the 
filter bed on which the concrete was placed. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Superior^ Wis.— Mr. R. D. Chase 
gives the following data relative to a sand filter and aeration plant 
buirt in 1899 for Superior, Wis., to remove the iron from water from 



740 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

driven wells. There are 3 filter beds, each 67 x 108 ft., and' with 
tl^se in operation there is 0.5 acre filtering area, with a capacity 
of 5,000,000 gals, daily, or 10,000,000 gals, per acre per day. This 
rapid rate of filtration is justified because there is no mud or 
bacteria. 

The pure water reservoir is 39x108 ft. The floor, sides and roof 
ai-e of concrete, the piers supporting the roof being of brick 20 ins. 
square and 12 ft. high. The floor is of inverted groined arches, and 
the roof is of groined arches, 12 ft. span and 214 ft. rise, 6 ins. 
thick at the crown. The roof is covered with 2 ft. of earth. 

The excavation was red clay, expensive to handle, the actual cost 
being 55 cts. per cu. yd. 

Each filter bed has 20 manholes, 3 ft. diam., 3 ft. high, of concrete 
8 ins. thick, with double covers of steel platee. 

The outside walls of the filter beds are 21/^ ft. thick at the top, 
and 3% ft. thick at the base. 

The construction of the pure water reservoir is similar to that of 
the filters, and the reservoir has a capacity of 300,000 gals. 

The main underdrains are 20-in. tile, laid in concrete beneath the 
floor. The lateral drains are of 6-in. tile, 12 ft. apart. The gravel 
was dredged from the lake. Under normal conditions 4 ft. of water 
is kept on top of the sand. 

The outside dimensions of the 3 filter beds and the pure water 
reservoir, all under one roof, are 116 ft. x 255 ft. 

Tlie construction was done by day labor, working under a con- 
tractor who was paid a percentage for supervision. Laborers wei-e 
inefficient, yet received $2 a day. The actual cost was as follows : 

Filters and pure water reservoirs : 

14,000 cu. yds. excavation, at ?0.55+ $ 7,630 

2,000 cu. yds. backfill (roof, etc.), at .?0.30+ 600 

3,000 cu. yds. concrete, at $7.85+ 23,500 

Arch centering ^'^i^ 

120 cu. yds. brickwork, at $10.00 1,200 

Tile pipe 860 

600 cu. yds. filter gravel, in place, at $4.95 2,9^0 

1,600 cu. yds. filter gravel, in place, at $3.04 4,864 

800 cu. yds. filter gravel, in place, at $0.97 776 

Aerator ; 470 

Miscellaneous charges ^'^a i 

Engineering and percentage to contractor 9,204 

Total ■• $56,334 

Land 6.28C 

Iron pipe, pump, pump house, etc 26, b m 

Grand total , $89,48- 

Since the total area was 116 x aoo = 29,580 sq. ft. (0.68 acre) 
the. excavation must have averaged about 13 ft. deep. 

n will be n6ted that the filter gravel was exceedingly expensive, 
as was most of the filter sand. The sand for one bed, however, 
was abtained without dredging and at a cost of only 97 cts. per 
cu. yd. 



%_ J^' WATER-WORKS. 741 

The cost of cleaning a filter bed is as follows : 

5 men scraping, 3 Ins., at 20 cts % 3.00 

1 team lioisting, 2 Ins., at 40 cts 0.80 

5 men lioisting, 2 hrs., at 20 cts 2.00 

5 men smoothing, 2 hrs., at 20 cts 2.00 

Total, labor, 10 cu. yds., at $0.78 .f 7.80 

10 (11. yds. new sand to be replaced, at $1 10.00 

Grand total, 10 cu. yds., at $1.78 $17.80 

About 12,000,000 gals, are filtered through each bed (0.25 acre) 
between scrapings, so tliat 0.83 cu. yd. of sand is scraped per mil- 
lion gallons, and the cost per million gallons is : 

Labor scraping and removing sand $0.65 

Clean .sand replaced 0.83 

Total $1.48 

The dirty sand is hoisted in tugs by a team, a tripod with a block 
and tackle being placed temporarily over each manliole during 
hoisting. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Washington, D. C. — Mr. Allen Hazen 
and Mr. E. D. Hardy give the following data : 

This is a slow sand filtration plant treating 70,000,000 gals, daily, 
and its cost was $3,356,300 (including $619,900 for land), or $47,950 
per million gallons daily capacity. Assuming interest and depreci- 
ation at 5 per cent per annum, the capital charge is $7 per million 
gallons, for an average of 67,000,000 gals, per day, and the operat- 
ing expense is about $2 per million gallons, making a total of $9 
per million gallons filtered. 

The summarized cost of the plant is as follows : 

Pumping station, etc ? 183,600 

29 filters. 29 acres, at $75,758 2,197,000 

Filtered water reservoir 150,000 

Lower gate house and pipe line 24.300 

Land 619,900 

Engineering and clerical 1 81,500 

Total, 29 acres, at $115,735 $3,356,300 

Total, exclusive of land 2,736,400 

The detail cost was as follows : 
Pumping Station : 

make, with gates and building $ 11,500 

,'enturi meters. 72-in. and 54-in 5,000 

Electric lighting, engines, etc 7,000 

'"our 200-hp. boilers, in place 14,800 

"our Roney stokers 4,100 

_^wo Green fuel economizers, in place 5,100 

three 36-in. centrifugal pumps and engines 42,000 

■'wo sand-washer pumps 8,100 

'iping, valves, etc 13,100 

"toal, oil and running tests 3,500 

Traveling crane ■ 1,600 

Chimney (with foundation) 5,800 

Building (with foundation and well ) 51,000 

Total, pumping station i?! 83.600 



742 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Twenty-nine Filters : 

862,700 cu. yds. excavation, at 30 cts '. $ 258,800 

i99,500 cu. yds. filling, at 30 cts 89,900 

Sodding and seeding slopes 7,300 

Roads and drains outside of filters 16,200 

Concrete tunnel under First St 3,100 

Concrete (including cement) : 

36,563 cu. yds., floors, at $6.75 246,800 

19,038 cu. yds., walls, at $7.35 139,900 

6,964 cu. yds., piers, at $8.25 57,500 

34,920 cu. yds., roof (vaulted), at $8.75 305,500 

Ramps leading to tops of filters 6,800 

Court paving 43,000 

7,900 ft. Central underdrains, at $1.65 13,000 

Interior drainage system, 29 filters, at $500 14,500 

Drainage of roofs, 29 filters, at $266 7,700 

Materials placed in concrete, 29 filters, at $200 5,800 

157,725 cu. yds. filter sand, at $2.65 418,000 

36,500 cu. yds. filter gravel, at $2.75 100,400 

Cast-iron pipe and specials 117,000 

Steel rising main and concrete backing 76,800 

Pressure pipe system 2,600 

Sand-washer pipe system 24,000 

Sand washers, 19 washers and 8 ejectors 4,800 

Elevated sand bins, 29, capacity 250 cu. yds. each 60,800 

Exterior drainage system 25,300 

Venturi meters and indicating apparatus 11,400 

Sluice gates and gate valves 19,900 

Regulator houses 27,300 

Office and laboratory 19,700 

Shelter house for workmen 4,800 

Water and gas lines to buildings 11,200 

Electric lighting for courts and filters 41,900 

Cleaning up and miscellaneous 11,600 



Total, filters, 29 acres, at $75,758 $2,197,000 

Filtered Water Reservoir : 

83,500 cu. yds. excavation, at 30 cts $ 25,100 

18,000 cu. yds. filling, at 30 cts 5,400 

15,290 cu. yds. concrete, at $7.60 116.000 

Gate house superstructure 3,500 



Total, reservoir $150,000 

Lower Gate House : 

Pipe lines $ 6,000 

Gate house 18,300 



Total, gate house $ 24,300 

Engineering and Clerical : 

General plans ' $ 36,000 

Surveying 32,000 

Field office force 21,000 

Main office force 67,000 

Watchmen 4,500 

Temporary office 1,000 

Total engineering $181,500 

The engineering was 6.65 per cent of the total cost of construc- 
tion, which is a high percentage on so large a contract. 

This Washington filter plant is similar to the Albany plant, but 



JJ'.ITER-irORKS. 743 

it tost G5 per cent more per acre, due principally to the higher con- 
tract prices, especially the price for filter sand which cost ?2.65 per 
cu. yd. at Washington as compared with $1 per cu. yd. at Albany. 
It was anticipated by the Wasliington contractors that tlie cost of 
producing filter sand of specified cleanliness would be far greater 
tlian it really was. 

Cost of Filtering at Washington, Albany and Philadelphia. — Mi. 
J. A. Vogleson gave the following table of cost of cleaning filter 
sand per cubic yard : 

Philadelphia 

Upper 
Washington Albany Belmont Roxboro" 

tlHOG). (1S99-1901). (1905). (1905). 

Scraping ifO.OS ifO.1.3 $0.21 ?0.18 

Removing 0.16 i).2.t 0.23 0.22 

Wa.shing 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.09 

ReiJlacing 0.13 0.25 0.25 0.30 

Total, per cu. yd $0.39 $0.93 $0.80 $0.79 

Rate of wages, per 8 hrs. $1.50 $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 

Cost, per million gals... $0.C0 $1.66 $1.25 $0.63 

The low cost of cleaning Washington filters is due to the method 
used. After scraping the sand into piles, it is shoveled into an 
ejector and carried through a hose to a 4-in. pipe, and thence to the 
sand washers, and thence through pipes to the sand bins, from 
which it is drawn off into carts and dumped through the roof of 
the filter into a rotatable chute which discharges it where desire J. 

The cost of 30 cts. per cu. yd. for "replacing" the sand at Upper 
Roxboro, Philadelphia, is the contract price, the work being done 
with wheelbarrows. Before the replacing was done by contract, it 
cost the city 52 cts. per cu. yd. by day labor, thus furnishing an- 
other one of the numberless examples of the greater efficiency of 
contract labor. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Albany, N. Y.^Mr. Allen Hazen 
describes the slow sand filter plant built at Albany, N. Y., in 189 8- 
1899, giving the following data: 

The plant has a capacity of 14,700,000 gals, per day, and its first 
cost was $500,000, including the pumping plant. There are 8 
filter beds of 0.7 acre filtering area each ( 121 .x 258-ft. bed), and 
with one bed out of use for the purpose of being cleaned the yield 
of the 7 beds is 14,700,000 gals, daily, or 3,000,000 gals, per acre 
of bed in active service. The water is pumped from the Hudson 
River into a 5-acre (14,600.000-gal. ) sedimentation basin '(380 x 
600 ft.), 9 ft. deep, the 2 centrifugal pumps having a total capacity 
of 24,000,000 gals, per 24 hrs. against a lift of 24 ft. Half of the 
pumping plant is capable of supplying the ordinary consumption. 
The clean water reservoir liolds only 600.000 gals., being very small 
because the old distributing reservoirs are used to store the filtered 
water after it is pumpel from the clear water reservoir. 



lU HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of this plant, in round numbers, was as follows : 

Sedimentation basin $ 60,000 

Clear water reservoir y'oOO 

Filters (at $45,600 per acre) 255,000 

Pumping station 50,000 

Conduit from Alter to pumping station 87,000 

Engineering, laboratory equipment, etc 31,000 

Total $492,000 

Land 8,000 

Grand total $500,000 

This is equivalent to nearly $35,000 per million gallons of daily 
capacity. Strictly speaking, the conduit from the filter to the pump- 
ing station should not be included, and, if its cost ($87,000 is de- 
ducted, we have a cost of about $30,000) per million gallons of daily 
capacity. 

The plant was built by contract, and the following is a more de- 
tailed statement of the cost to the city: 

Filters, Sedimentation Basin and Pure Water Reservoir : 

Preliminary draining $ 1,956.71 

70,672 cu. yds. excavation, at $0.308 21,761.64 

16,040 cu. yds. rolled embankment, at $0.52 8,340.80 

22,851 cu. yds. silt and loam filling, at .$0.15 3,427.65 

23,43'J cu. yds. general filling, road, at $0.18 4,219.02 

12,550 cu. yds. puddle, at $0.715 8,973.25 

1,775 cu. yds. gravel lining, at $0.85 1,508.75 

2,257 sq. yds. split stone lining, at $0.82 1,850.74 

11,737 cu. yds. concrete in floors, at $2.31 27,112.47 

7,792 cu. yds. concrete in roof vaulting, at $3.85 29,9<>9.20 

3,147 cu. yds. all other concrete, at $2.13 6,703.11 

4,382 cu. yds. brick woi'k, at $8.125 35,603.75 

31,715 bbls. Portland cement, at $1.935 61,368.53 

7.281 cu. yds. filter gravel, at $1.05 7,645.05 

36,488 cu. yds. filter sand, at $1.00 36,488.00 

Cast-iron pipes and specials 21,841.25 

Gates and valves 6,714.23 

672 filter manhole covers, at $4.40 2,956.80 

8 sand-run fixtures, at $407.50 •. 3,260.00 

8 regulator houses, at $862.24 6,897.92 

1 office and laboratory 4,881.00 

Vitrified brick paving 2,158.00 

Iron fence al)out court 1,704.00 

Extra work and minor items 9,692.01 

Total $324,217.20 

The excavation averaged 4 ft. deep. The 6-in. vitrified drains 
were placed 14 ft. apart. The main vitrified drains (12 to 30 ins.) 
were placed beneath the concrete floor, being bedded i;n concrete. 

The price for concrete does not include the Portland cement, 
wliich is a separate item. The concrete was mixed 1:3:5, a barrel 
being ^.8 cu. ft., and required 1.26 bbls. cement per cu. yd. 

The actual cost of the concrete is given on p. 748. 

The floor of the filter was of concrete, built in the form of in- 
verted grained arches to distribute the pressure over the subsoil. 
The roof was of concrete, groined arches ( 6 ins. thick at crown, 
span 12 ft., rise 2% ft.), supported by brick piers 21 ins. square by 



WATER-WORKS. T-lo 

9% ft. high. The outsiile walls were of concrete lined with S ins. 
of brick, and tlie division walls were of briclv. 

The gravel and sand were dredged from the river with a dipper 
ilredge having a daily capacity of 500 cu. yds., but the average out- 
put was 300 cu. yds. The sand was pumped into a stock pile. 

According to Mr. W. B. Fuller the cost of roofing the filter was 
about SO per cent of the total cost of the filters, or $13,700 per acre, 
or 311/^ cts. per sq. ft. This includes not only the brick piers and 
earth covering over the roof, but the e.xtra thickness of tlie lloor 
necessary to carry the added load. 

The cost of one section of concrete floor, brick piers and concrete 
roof, 13 ft. 8 ins. square (187 sq. ft.), at contract prices was: 

4.85 cu. yds. floor, at $4.75 $23.04 

1.24 cu. yds. brick, at $9.67 11.99 

5.40 cu. yds. roof, at $6.30 34.02 

Total, 187 sq. ft., at 36.9 cts $69.05 

This gives an average thickness of 7 ins. of concrete in the floor. 
Deducting tlie cost of the floor, we have left 25 cts. per sq. ft. 
as the cost of the piers and the roof. This does not include tlie 
L-ost of the 2-ft. earth fill over the concrete roof, which added about 
10 cts. per sq. ft., the price of the silt fill being only 15 cts. per cu. 
yd. This roof was entirely effective in preventing freezing. 

A reinforced concrete roof was considered, but was not adopted 
because the city water board objected to anything "experimental." 

The cost of operating the filter plant from September 5 to De- 
cember 25, 1899 (118 days), was $1.67 per million gallons, for 
12,500,000 gals, per day. 

The following was the ordinary force of men : 

Per day. 

10 laborers, at $1.50 for S lirs $15.00 

1 foreman 2.75 

1 watchman 1.50 

Total labor $19.25 

1 chemist 3.00 

Total ^22.25 

The cost of pumping was $2.52 per million sals., the following 
being the daily cost : 

3 engineers, at $2.48 $ 7.44 

3 firemen, at $1.98 5.94 

3 tons coal, at $2.72 8.16 

1 laborer, at $1.50 1.50 

9 gals, engine oil, at $0.09 0.81 

2 gals, cylinder oil, at $0.11 0.22 

5 gals, kerosene, at $0.10 o..->0 

5 lbs. waste, at $0.07 0.35 

Steam packing, sheet rubber, soap, .soda, 

maps, cloths, etc G.-'^S 

Total $31.50 

Neither of the above costs for filtering or pumping include in- 
terest, depreciation and repairs. 



746 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The amount of sand scraped and cleaned was 0.7 cu. yds. per mil- 
lion gallons. The labor cost was as follows per cubic yard : 

1.44 hrs. of man scraping, at 18% cts $0,270 

2.63 hrs. of man wheeling, at 18% cts 0.493 

2.44 hrs. of man washing, at 18% cts 0.458 

1.92 hrs. of man refilling, at 18% cts 0.360 

8.43 Total $1,581 

This is equivalent to $1.19 per million gallons, exclusive of fore- 
man's time, cost of wash water, etc. The volume of water for wash- 
ing the sand was about 13 times the volume of the sand. About 
% in. of sand (not including the mud) was scraped off at each 
scraping, requiring 76 hrs. of a man's time to scrape an acre. The 
sand was wheeled out in barrows averaging only 1 cu. ft. per barrow 
load, the average haul being 300 ft. from point of loading to the 
sand washer. The filters yielded 66,600,000,000 gals, per acre be- 
tween scrapings. 

The sand is washed in sand washers of the ejector type, there 
being 5 ejectors in each sand washer through which the dirty sand 
must pass. 

Mr. Geo. I. Bailey gives the following relative to the cost of 
filtering through slow sand filters at Albany, N. Y., and at Liaw- 
rence, Mass., both being for the year 1899: 

Albany Lawrence 

(3,817 million (1,170 million 

gals. ) gals. ) 

Ice cutting and snow .... $1.91 

Scraping sand $0.25 .... 

Scraping and replacing sand .... -3.18 

Wheeling out 0.50 

Washing sand 0.59 1.25 

Conveying sand .... 1.31 

Refilling 0.39 - 

Incidentals 0.20 0.43 

Repairing elevator and tools .... 0.11 

Cleaning basin 0.06 .... 



Total $1.99 $8.19 

Interest and depreciation are not included, nor is pumping. The 
Lawrence plant makes a miserable showing. Scraping and replac- 
ing includes scraping the beds, wheeling to a roadway, and carry- 
ing the sand back from the washing machine and spreading on the 
beds. Conveying sand means loading and transporting it (470 ft.) 
from the roadway to the washing machine. Wages were 25 cts. 
per hr. 

The Albany plant was operated 319 days (July 26, 1899, to July 
1, 1900), giving nearly 12,000,000 gals, per day. Labor was paid 
18% cts. per hr. The daily average was 2,630,000 gals, per acre. 
The average run was 65,500,000 gals, per acre between cleanings. 
There were 5,200 cu. yds. of sand and mud wheeled out (yielding 
3,687 cu. yds. washed sand), and 3,500 cu. yds. of washed sand 
wheeled back. Bach barrow wheeled out contained 2 cu. ft. (71,702 
wheelbarrow loads), and each barrow wheeled back contained 1.6 
cu. ft. (59,590 barrow loads). Hence there were practically 1 cu. 



WATER-WORKS. Ul 

yd. of washed sand per million gallons, and the above costs pel 
million gallons at Albany are also practically tlie costs per cubic 
yard of sand handled. 

The following is the cost for the 319 days at Albany (add 15 
per cont for a full year's cost of wages, etc., but also add 15 per 
cent to the amount Altered) : 

Filter: 

Labor $5,107.62 

Superintendence 1,392.58 

Tools and supplies 377.75 

Half tlie cost of miscellanies 304.75 

Wash water for sand at 1 ct. per 100 cu. ft 209.06 

Total, at .^1.94 per million gals $7,391.76 

(Add 5 cts. per million gals, for cleaning sedimentation basin.) 
Pumping: 

Engineers and firemen $4,258.65 

Laborers 387.00 

Coal and supplies 3,497.84 

Oil, packing, etc 799.06 

Half cost of miscellanies 304.75 

Total, at $2.42 per million gals $9,247.30 

Laboratory : 

Chemist $ 999.96 

Laborer 69.38 

Laboratory supplies 245.15 

Total, at $0.34 per million gals $1,314.49 

Total cost per million gals., incl. pumping, but not Incl. 

capital charges $ 4.75 

Mr. John H. Gregory gives the following relative to the Albany 
filter plant operation, during 1899 to 1900, covering a period of 500 
days. 

Scraping required 0.69 hrs. labor per cu. yd., or 13 cts. per cu. yd. 
of sand. There were 1.23 cu. yds. of sand scraped (to a deptli of 
0.66 in.) per million gallons, so that the cost of scraping was 16 cts. 
per million gallons. This covers only the labor cost of scraping the 
dirty sand into piles. 

Wheeling out the sand includes shoveling it into barrows, wheel- 
ing it 250 ft., and raking and screeding the filter bed. Its cost was 
1.29 hrs. labor, or 25 cts., per cu. yd. ; and, since there were 1.23 cu. 
yds. per million gals., the cost of wheeling was 30 cts. per mil- 
lion gallons. The raking and screeding of the bed consumed about 
25 per cent of the time of the men engaged in shoveling and wheel- 
ing, one man raking and screeding 11,000 sq. ft. per day. 

Washing the sand includes handling the dirty sand from the 
storage piles to the sand washer, attendance on the washer, and 
removing the washed sand to a storage pile. The ejector type of 
washer was used. The cost was 1.57 lirs. labor, or 30 cts. per cu. 
yd. of sand, or 27 cts. per million gallons filtered. 

Refilling filter beds with clean sand includes removal from stor- 
age piles to filter bed, loosening the top layer of sand about 6 ins. 
deep, and leveling the new sand. Its cost was 1.31 hrs. labor, or 
25 cts. per cu. yd., or 22 cts. per million gallons. 



748 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. George I. Bailey gives tlie cost of Altering at Albany, for the 
year 1900: 

Labor ? 6,131.63 

Incidentals 574.92 

Lost time 451.32 

Superintendence 2,161.43 

Supplies 552.25 

Supplies, miscel • 604.84 

Wash water 226.92 

Total $10,703.31 

Per million 

Hours. Total. gals. 

Scraping 5.481 $1,532.70 $0.24 

Wheeling out 10,238 2,863.20 0.45 

Refilling 7,437 2,081.66 0.32 

Incidentals 3,009 841.25 0.13 

Lost time 2,365 662.10 0.10 

Washing 8,923 2,722.40 0.42 

Total 37,453 $10,703.31 $1.66 

The equiv. cost per cu. yd. of sand was: 

Wheeling out $0.36 

Refilling 0.37 

Washing 0.48 

Wages are $1.50 per 8-hr. day. 

The round trip is 500 ft. from the filter bed to the storage piles. 

In scraping, a long-handled shovel with a blade 12 ins. wide 
enables a man to scrape more than 100 sq. yds. per hr. 

It was found that one run plank 14 ins. wide gives better service 
than two 10 to 12 -in. planks, and it takes half as long to place the 
single plank. 

The wheels of the ordinary wheelbarrows were readjusted so as 
not to put so much weight on the arms of the men. in ascending 
grades. 

The men shovel the dirty sand from the storage pile into a mov- 
able hopper, whence the sand is carried by a current of water 
through a pipe to the washer, thus saving wheeling it to the washer. 
Men wheel the sand away from the washer. 

The average run is 26 days between scrapings, or 70,000,000 gals, 
per acre, 12% parts of water to 1 part of sand are used in washing, 
costing 4 cts. per cu. yd. of sand. 

Cost of Groined Arches and Forms on the Albany Filter Plant. 
— The following data are given by Mr. Allen Hazen and Mr. Wil- 
liam B. Fuller. The concrete was mixed in 5-ft. cubical mixers in 
batches of 1.6 cu. yds. at the rate of 200 cu. yds. per mixer day. 
One barrel of cement, 380 lbs. net, assumed to be 3.8 cu. ft., was 
mixed with three volumes of sand weighing 90 lbs. per cu. ft., and 
five volumes of gravel weighing 100 lbs. per cu. ft. and having 
40% voids. On the average 1.26 bbls. of cement were required per 
cu. yd. The conveying plant consisted of two trestles (each 900 ft. 
long) 730 ft. apart, supporting four cableways. The cables were 
attached to carriages, which ran on I-beams on the top of the 
trestles. Rope drives were used to shift the cableways along the 
trestle. Three-ton loads were handled in each skip. The installa- 



WATER-WORKS. 740 

tion of this plant was slow, and its canying capacity was less than 
expected. It was found best to deliver the skips of concrete to llie 
cableway on small railway track, although the original plan liad 
been to move the cableway s horizontally along the ti'estle at the 
same time that the skip was traveling. 

The cost of mixing and placing the concrete was as follows : 

Per cu yd. 

Measuring, mixing and loading $0.20 

Transporting by rail and cables O.lii 

Liaying and tamping floors and walls, including 
setting forms 0.2a 

Total $0.54 

The cost of laying and tamping the concrete on the vaulting was 
14 cts. per cu. yd. The vaulting is a groined arch 6 ins. thick at 
the crown and 2Vi ft. thick at the piers. 

The lumber of the centering for the vaulting was spi'uce for the 
ribs and posts, and 1-in. hemlock for the lagging. Tlie centering 
was all cut by machinery, the ribs put togetlier to a template, and 
the lagging sawed to proper bevels and lengths. The centers were 
made so that they could be taken down in sections and used again. 
The cost of centering was as follows : 

Labor on centers covering 62,560 sq. ft. : 

Foreman, 435 hrs. at 35 cts $ 152.25 

Carpenters, 4,873 hrs. at 221/2 cts 1,096.42 

Laborers, 3,447 hrs. at 15 cts 517.05 

Painters, 577 hrs. at 15 cts SG.55 

Teaming, 324 hrs. at 40 cts 121.60 

Total labor building centers 313 M at $6.37. $1,973.87 

Materials for centers co\'ering 62.560 sq. ft. : 

313.000 ft. B. M. lumber, at $18.20 $5,700.00 

3,700 lbs. nails, at 3 cts 111.00 

8 bbls. tar, at $3 24.00 

Total $5,835.00 

These centers covered two filters, each having an area of 121% x 
258 ft. Tliere were six more filters of the same size, for whicla 
the same centers w^ere used. The cost of taking down, moving 
and putting up these centers (313 M) three times was as follows: 

Foreman, 2,359 hrs. at 35 cts $ 825.65 

Carpenters, 12,766 hrs. at 22i/> cts 2,872.35 

Laborers, 24,062 hrs. at 15 cts 3,609.30 

Team, 430 hrs. at 40 cts 172.00 

3,000 ft. B. M. lumber, at $20 60.00 

3,000 lbs. nails, at 3 cts 90.00 

Total cost moving centers to cover 196,660 

sq. ft $7,629.30 

The cost of moving the centers each time was $8.10 per M, show- 
ing that they w-ere practically rebuilt ; for the first building of 
the centers, as above shown, cost only $6.37 per M. In other words, 
the centers were not designed so as to be moved in sections as 
they should have been. Although the centers were used four times 
in all, the lumber was in fit condition for further iise. The cost 
of the labor and lumber for the building and moving of these cen- 



750 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ters for the 8 filter beds, having a total area of 259,220 sq. ft, was 
$15,438, or 6 cts. per sq. ft. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Lawrence, Mass. — Mr. Morris 
Knowles and Mr. Charles G. Hyde give the following data relative 
to the slow sand filter plant built in 1892 at Lawrence, Mass. The 
plant was built by day labor and cost $80,000. It consists of 25 
filter beds, having a total filtering area of 2.36 acres, so that the 
cost of the plant was $34,000 per acre. The raw water enters the 
filter from the Merrimac River bj^ gravity. The filters are not 
roofed, although, as will be seen later on, the cost of roofing is abun- 
dantly justified by the cost of ice removal. 

Between the years 1897 and 1900, inclusive, the beds were scraped 
15 times yearly. The average deptli of sand removed at each scrap- 
ing was % in., making a total of about 3,500 cu. yds. of sand yearly 
over the entire surface. About 1,200,000,000 gals, per year, or 
3,500,000 gals, per day, were filtered during this period, which is 
equivalent to only 1,4 00,000 gals, per acre per day, or about half 
what a modern slow sand filter delivers. Nearly 3 cu. yds. of sand 
were scraped per million gallons filtered, which is far in excess of 
amount ordinarily scraped. 

The cost per million gallons for the year 1900, which was typical, 
was as follows: 

Scraping sand $1.75 

Sandins 1.02 

Conveying sand 1.16 

Washing sand 1.25 

Removing snow and ice 1.92 

General 0.60 

Total $7.70 

Add (5% of $80,000) h- 2,100 mill, gals 1.90 

Total $9.60 

The capital charge of $1.90 per million gallons is none too high, 
and takes into consideration no cliarge for "special repairs." 

In this year of 1900, 3,000 cu. yds. of sand were scraped off in 
filtering 2,100 million gals., or 2.48 cu. j'-ds. per million gallons, 
hence the above figures of cost per million gallons if divided by 
2.48 will give tlie cost per cubic yard of sand handled, or: 

Scraoine $0.70 

Conveying 0.46 

Washing 0.50 

Sanding 0.40 

Total per cu. yd $2.06 

Scraping includes not only scraping off the dirty sand and throw- 
ing it into small piles, but loading and wheeling (75 to 150 ft.) 
in barrows to a temporary dump just inside the filter bed. It also 
includes smoothing the beds after cleaning. 

Conveying Including loading the dirty sand from the temporary 
dumps into carts and hauling and depositing in a permanent dump 
near the washer. 

Washing includes screening dirty sand, washing and transporting 
to the stock pile of clean sand. 



WATER-WORKS. 7oi 

Sanding includes cost of loading and wheeling in the clean washed 
Band and spreading it. 

Wages of laborers were $2 per 9-hr. day. 

The sand washer consists of 4 hoppers. The sand drops to the 
bottom of each hopper, where it strikes a horizontal jet of water 
and is carried into a pipe that leads up into the next hopper. The 
water required is about 10 times the volume of sand, or 270 cu. ft. 
of water per cu. yd. of sand. Four men attend to screening and 
Wheeling to the washer, washing and taking the sand away in dump 
cars; they can thus wash 21 cu. yds. of sand daily at a cost of $8 
for labor, or 38 cts. per cu. yd., but delays due to shifting of the 
washer, etc., and cost of repairs make a total cost of 50 cts. per 
cu. yd. 

Mr. M. F. Collins, superintendent of the plant, states that the 
average depth to which the sand is scraped is greater for an un- 
roofed filter than for one that is roofed, due to the fact that when 
there is any snow on the filter bed the men usually scrape too deep 
with their shovels, and when the bed is frozen slightly thoy neces- 
sarily must take off an excess of sand to get below the frost. Pos- 
sibly this accounts largely for the abnormally great amount of sand 
scraped at Lawrence ; possibly the method of scraping is itself not 
what it should be. 

Mr. John H. Gregory gives the following additional information 
for 1900. The cost per million gals, was as follows, labor being sep- 
arated from materials, supplies, etc., and from superintendence : 

Scraping (labor) $1.50 

Conveying (labor) 1.02 

Washing (labor) 0.94 

Sanding (labor) 0.90 

Removal of snow and ice (labor) 1.56 

General (labor) 0.38 

Superintendence 0.91 

Materials, supplies, etc 0.52 

Total $7.73 

He states that 1.94 cu. yds. were scraped per million gals, filtered, 
requiring 3.53 hrs. labor per cu. yd., or 77 cts. per cu. yd., wages 
being $2 for 9 hrs., average thickness scraped being % in. 

He states that 3,000 cu. yds. were washed in 1900, at a cost of 38 
cts. per cu. yd. for labor, requiring 1.72 hrs. labor per cu. yd. 

He states that 3,400 cu. yds. of clean sand were put on, at a cost 
of 32 cts. per cu. yd. for labor, or 1.47 hrs. labor per cu. yd. 

From the year 1896 to 1900, inclusive, the average cost of snow 
and ice removal was $2.20 per million gals., or nearly $1,100 per 
acre per annum. Since an acre could be roofed for about $15,000, 
it is evident that it would be much cheaper to pay interest on a roof. 
However, the Lawrence filters show about half the ordinary output 
of water per acre attained by well designed beds, so that if their 
filtering capacitj'' per acre were doubled, the cost of snow and ice 
removal would be $1.10 per million gals. 

Cost of Filter and Filtering, Vernon, N. Y. — A slow sand filter 
V3.S built at Mt. Vernon, N. Y., in 1894, at a cost of about $25,000. 
The area of the filter beds is 1.1 acres, and about 1,900,000 gals 



752 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

were filtered per day. The average cost of filtering during the 
years 1897 to 1900 was as follows per million gals.: 

Scraping and removing sand $1.63 

Washing sand 0.58 

Replacing sand 0.58 

Removing ice 0.42 

Miscellaneous 0.10 

Total $3.31 

6% interest on filter plant ($1,500 h- 680 million gals.) 2.20 

Grand total $5.51 

An average of 1,300 cu. yds. of sand was cleaned per year (there 
being about 15 scrapings a year), or nearly 2 cu. yds., cleaned per 
million gals. Hence by taking half of the above figures we have 
the cost of cleaning the sand per cubic yard, or a total of nearly 
$1.40 per cu. yd. The scraping is done with shovels, the sand being 
removed in wheelbarrows. The sand washers are like those used at 
Albany (hoppers with ejectors). It is estimated that 12,000 gals. 
of water are used to wash each cubic yard of sand. 

Cost of Filtering, Poughkeepsie. — Mr. Charles B. Fowler gives 
the following relative to the operation of the Poughkeepsie filter 
in 1900. 

The sand is not scraped into heaps, but is shoveled direct into 
barrows. Tlie back of a rake is used to level the surface after 
scraping. It takes 23 men 2 days of 8 hrs. each to scrape 1% 
acres, wages $1.50 a day, cost $49 per acre. This includes wheeling 
to the corners of the filter bed, throwing up to top of coping and 
trimming back the pile. 

The sand is stored and washed in October and replaced all at 
one time (16 days). Washing costs 32 cts. per cu. yd., and replac- 
ing costs 26 cts. per cu. yd., for a total of 910 cu. yds. 

The total number of scrapings per year is not stated, but if there 
were 15 the cost was $1.20 per cu. yd. for scraping, added to $0.58 
for washing and replacing; total $1.78 per cu. yd. (Mr. Gregory 
gives the cost of scraping at $1.30 per million gals, in 1900.) 

The cost of ice removal varied from $146 to $613 a year, and aver- 
aged $364 for four years prior to 1901, or $273 per year per acre. 
To remove a 16-in. layer of ice in 1901 cost $408 per acre of filter- 
ing area, wages being $1.50 per 8-hr. day. The ice was sawed in 
parallel lines in one direction and broken by chisels in the other 
direction. The cakes were floated to a run at the side of the basin 
and pulled up by men with pikes. The water level was about 1 ft. 
below the top of the coping. The cakes were then pushed on nearly 
horizontal runs to the place of deposit, which costs about half of the 
total cost of ice removal. The cost of ice removal was 94 cts. per 
million gals, filtered that year, and there was only this one re- 
moval. 

Cost of Washing Filter Sand, Poughkeepsie, N. Y — Mr. Charles 
E. Fowler gives the following relative to sand washing at the 
Poughkeepsie filters in 1897. With two hoppers, and an upward 
water jet in each, the cost of washing the sand was 24 cts. per cu. 



irjTLR-IIORKS. Toa 

yd., laborers being paid 18 cts. per hr. The sand was delivered 
through a pipe to a tank 130 ft. away, and, after tlie remaining 
silt hud flowed over the top of this tanlc, Uie sand was drawn oft 
througli a valve. Fifty cu. yds. of sand were washed per 10-hr. day, 
requiring IS cu. ft. of water to each cu. ft. of sand, the water 
costing 3 cts. per cu. yd. of sand. 

Cost Ice Removal From Filters. — Mr. John H. Gregory gives the 
following costs of snow and ice removal from Alter beds per million 
gallons : 

Lawrence (average 1806 to 1900) $2.20 

Poughl<eepsie (average 1S98 to 1900) 0.48 

Mt. Vernon (average 1897 to 1900) 0.28 

Estimated Cost of Filters and Filtering, Cincinnati, O. — Mr. 

George W. Fuller made the following comparative estimates of the 
cost of slow sand filtering and mechanical filtering for the city ot 
Cincinnati, O., in 1899. A year's worlc with an experimental plant, 
of 100,000 gals, daily capacity, preceded the estimate. Tlie plant 
designed for Cincinnati is to have a daily capacity of 80,000,000 
gals. Tlie estimated cost includes no allowance for cost of land, 
and covers only the expense from the time the water is discharged 
Into tlie subsiding basins until it leaves the clear water reservoir 
by gravity. The clear water reservoir is to hold 20,000,000 gals. 
The settling reservoirs are to hold 320,000,000 (48 hrs. subsidence 
or 96 hrs. capacity). The rate is to be 3,000,000 gals, per acre per 
day in the slow sand filter, and 125,000,000 in the mechanical filter. 
The following are the estimated first costs per million gallons daily 
capacity: 

Filter Plant. 

Slow sand. M.^eluinical. 

Reservoirs .?16,000 $16,000 

Pipe connections 500 500 

Filter beds, chemical devices, piping, labora- 
tory, etc 16,667 7,500 

Clear water reservoir 1,250 1,250 

Coagulating and supplementary subsiding 

reservoir (20,000,000 gals.) 1,500 



Total cost per million daily gals $34,417 $26,750 

Interest and sinking fund (5% per year) per 

million gals $4.72 $3.67 

The cost of operation of the slow sand filter plant is estimated 
thus : 

Pear year. 

1 superintendent $ 4,000 

1 assistant superintendent 2,400 

2 analysts, at $1,500 3,000 

3 assistants, clerks and janitor, at $600 1,800 

1 night watcliraan 720 

3 reservoir attendants, at $720 2,160 

3 filter attendants, at $720 2,160 

1 storekeeper 720 

5 chemical attendants for 6 mos. each year, at $360 1,800 

Extra labor 1,500 



Total, 29,200 million gals., at $0.72 $20,860 



754 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost per million gallons is estimated thus : 

Salaries (as above given) $ 0.72 

Ice removal, etc 0.30 

Scraping 20 times a year, 325 man-hrs. per scraping, at 20 

cts. per hr 1.19 

Washing sand, 1.75 cu. yds., at 40 cts 0.70 

Replacing sand, 1.75 cu. yds., at 20 cts 0.35 

Sulphate of alumina, 0.95 gr. per gal., at 1.4 cts. per lb 1.90 

Repairs, 0.5% cost per yr 0.47 

Total operating expense $ 5.63 

Capital charges (as above) 4.72 

Grand total $10.35 

The estimated cost of salaries for a mechanical filter plant of the 

same capacity is as follows: 

15 attendants for filters and chemical devices, at $720 $10,800 

3 firemen, at $720 2,160 

1 mechanic 1,440 

3 engineers, at $1,440 4,320 

1 superintendent 4,000 

1 assistant superintendent 2,400 

2 analyses 3,000 

3 assistants, clerks, etc 1,800 

1 night watchman 720 

3 reservoir attendants 2,160 

Extra labor 1,500 

Total, 29,200 million gals., at $1.17 $34,300 

The estimated cost of operating the mechanical filter plant is as 
follows per million gallons : 

Salaries (as above) $1.17 

Wash water, 5% of filtered water, at $15 per million gals 0.75 

Coal for power and light 0.1 5 

Sulphate of alumina, 1.6 grs. per gal., at 1.4 cts. per lb 3.20 

Repairs and replacements, machinery and chemical devices, 

10% per yr. on $2,500 0.69 

Other repairs, 0.5% of first cost per yr 0.33 

Total operating expense $6.29 

Capital charges (as above) 3.67 

Grand total $9.96 

For the turbid water of the Oliio River at Cincinnati, Mr. Fuller 
recommended a mechanical filter plant. 

Cost of Filtering and Ice Removal, Reading, Pa.* — The water 
supply of Reading, Pa., is obtained by gravity systems and by 
pumping. Two of the gravity supplies — the Antietam supply and 
the Bgelman supply — are filtered. Mr. Emil L. Neubling, Superin- 
tendent and Engineer of Waterworks, gives data for tYitt fiscal year 
ending April 6, 1908. 

Antietam Filters. — The Antietam supply is obtained from a drain- 
age area of 5.44 square miles. The storage reservoir capacity is 
101,000,000 gallons. During the year this supply was treated with 
copper sulphate in order to remove the oi-ganism anabaena and to 
lighten the work of scraping at the Antietam filters. Two treat- 



*Eiigineering-Contracting, Oct. 28, 1908. 



ir.lTER-lJ-ORKS. 75.J 

ments were given and the effect upon the operation of the filters 
was to reduce tlie total number of scrapings from 62 in the pre\ious 
year to 4 8 during the past year. 

The Antietam filters consist of tliree open sund beds, 108 x 14 1 ft. 
each, the capacity of eacli bed being 1,750,000 gallons per day. The 
filters were put into service on May 11, 1905. The total cost of 
operation and maintenance was $3,909.46 or $474.76 less than the 
previous year. Owing to the decreased efficiency of labor the cost 
of refilling the beds was 42 per cent liigiier per cubic yard than 
during the previous year. The cost of washing sand, however, was 
very materially reduced on account of placing the filter keeper in 
charge of the washing, thereby saving the services of an engineer. 
The cost of washing sand was reduced 11 cts. per cu. yd. 

During February and March. 1908, 885 cu. yds. of ice was re- 
moved from the filter. The mean thickness of the ice was 4.35 
ins., and the greatest average thickness was 5.3 ins. in Feb- 
ruary, when three beds were cleared. In March one bed was 
cleared, the average thickness of ice being 1.5 ins. The cost of re- 
moving the ice was as follows : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor, 238 hours $51.69 $0,062 

Superintendence 6.80 .007 

Supplies 90 .001 

Total $59.39 $0,070 

It will be noticed common labor was paid about 21 cts. per hour. 
The cost of sci'aping and wheeling out sand was as follows, 1,818 
cu. yds. being removed : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor, 3,589y2 hours $711.77 $0,391 

Superintendence • 38.82 .021 

Supplies 70.29 .039 

Sulphate treatment 42.77 .024 

Total $863.65 $0,475 

The cost of washing sand, 1,831 cu. yds. being washed, was as 
follows : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor, l,539i/2 hours $282.38 $0,154 

Superintendence 30.43 .017 

Supplies and repairs 794.49 .433 

Total $1,107.30 $0,604 

The cost of refilling the beds was as follows, 1,921 cu. yds. of 
sand being used for refilling : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor, 4,838 hours $917.95 $0,478 

Superintendence 37.03 .020 

Supplies 18.36 .010 

Total $973.34 $0,508 

The total number of gallons of water filtered during the year 
was 1.182,557,923. The average quantity of water filtered between 
scrapings was 73,909,870 gallons or at- the rate of 69,626,123 gallons 
per acre. The average quantity of water filtered per day was 



756 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

3,231,033 gallons, or at the rate of 3,043,765 gallons per day per 
acre. The cost of filtering water per million gallons was as follows : 

Per 
Total, million gals. 

Removing ice ? 59.39 $0,050 

Scraping and wheeling out sand 863.65 .730 

Washing sand 1,107.30 .936 

Refilling beds 973.34 .823 

Care of grounds 513.86 .434 

Analyses 37.38 .030 

Watching 150.09 .130 

Operation and general maintenance 204.45 .180 

Total $3,909.46 $3,313 

The cost of filtering water per million gallons, excluding analyses 
and care of grounds was $2.84. 

Engelman Filters. — The Bngelman supply has a drainage area of 
0.6 square miles and a storage reservoir capacity of 6,900,000 gal- 
lons. The Engelman filter consists of two open sand beds, 40 x 55 ft. 
each; the capacity of each bed is 250,000 gals, per day. The filters 
were put into service on July 11, 1903. 

On account of not washing sand and refilling beds during the 
year, the cost of operation was considerably less than for the pre- 
vious year. The unit cost of scraping and wheeling out sand was 
3 cts. per cubic yard more than for the previous year, and the cost 
of ice removal 2 cts. per cubic yard less. 

A total of 147 cu. yds. of ice was removed from these filters, the 
mean thickness of the ice being 3.6 ins. The greatest thickness was 
5.2 ins. in February, 1908. The cost of removing ice was 10 cts. 
per cubic yard, the work requiring 67 hours labor at a total cost of 
$11.05. 

The cost of scraping and wheeling out sand was as follows : 

Total. 

Labor, 4501/2 hours $82.82 

Superintendence 1.70 

Total $84.52 

A total of 122 cu. yds. of sand was removed, the cost per cubic 
yard being $0.69. 

The total number of gallons of water filtered during the year 
was 79,784,796. The average quantity of water filtered between 
scrapings was 4,693,234 gallons, or at the i-ate of 48,675,541 gallons 
per acre. The average quantity of water filtered per day was 217,- 
992 gallons, or at the rate of 2,260,888 gallons per acre per day. 

The cost of filtering the water per million gallons was as follows : 

Per 
Total, million gals. 

Removing ice $ 14.05 $0,177 

Scraping and wheeling out sand 82.82 1.038 

Operation and general maintenance..., 109.56 1.373 

Analvses 31.10 .391 

Care of grounds 45.25 .567 

Total $284.48 $3,546 



WATER-WORKS. ToT 

The cost of filtering water per million gallons, exclusive of cost 
of analyses and cure of grounds was $2.61. 

Cost of Filtering, Brooklyn, N. Y. — Mr. I. M. de Varona gives the 
following data relative to 4 filter plants in Brooklyn, 2 mechanical 
and 2 slow sand filters. The mechanical filter plant at Baiseleys Is 
of the gravity type and has a normal capacity of 5,000,000 gals. 
per day. It has circular wooden tanks ; air is used to agitate the 
sand during washing. 

The mechanical filter plant at Springfield is similar to that at 
Baiseleys, but its normal capacity is only 3,000,000 gals, per day. 
For the 12 mos. of 1905 the cost of opei-ating these plants was as 
follows : 

Baiseleys. Springfield. 

Inspection ? 4SL80 $ 462.70 

Operation 4,714.08 3,182.91 

Laboratory 443.68 409.23 

Repairs 507.78 232.53 

Interest and sinking fund 3,218.64 2,366.28 

Total .t;9.363.98 $6,653.74 

Million gals, filtered , 1,435.5 694.6 

Cost per million gals $6.53 $9.58 

The Forest Stream slow sand filter plant has two sand beds hav- 
ing a daily capacity of 6,000,000 gals., the area of the bottom of 
the beds being 2 acres. The beds have no covering and have no 
impervious bottom, nor side walls. Collecting pipes are laid below 
the ground water level, so there Is practically no loss of water by 
this form of construction. The bed is underlaid by gravel, and the 
6-in. underdrains are 12% ft., c. to c. 

The Hempstead slow sand filter plant is similar to the Forest 
Stream plant, but the two beds have an area of only 0.9 acre and a 
daily capacity of 3,000,000 gals. 

The cost of operating these plants during 1905 was as follows: 

Forest Stream. Hempstead. 

Inspection % 348.91 % 214.76 

Laboratory 335.12 419.26 

Labor and materials 710.00 239.47 

Interest only 1,058.40 330.00 

Total $2,452.43 $1,203.49 

Million gals, filtered 1,075.3 416.8 

Cost per million gals $2.28 $2.89 

At Hempstead a new method of cleaning the beds was used, 
which consists in washing the beds Instead of scraping them. The 
cost of this cleaning by washing was 40 cts. per million gals, instead 
of $1 by scraping. The beds are divided into channels 20 ft. wide, 
by means of boards set vertically, extending 8 ins. above the sur- 
face and 6 ins. below the bottom of the sand. The boards are laid 
to within 15 ft. of the ends of the beds, and boards can be placed 
across the ends of the channel ways so as to cause a flow of water 
through any desired channel way. When the bed is ready to be 
cleaned it is drained so that only 4 or 5 ins. of water are left on 
the bed, and waste pipe gate is opened ; then a gate on the pipe 



758 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

between the two beds is opened to allow the raw water in the ad- 
joining bed to flow into the bed to be cleaned. The velocity of the 
water is regiilated so that it will not quite carry the sand. Men 
with rakes stir up the surface of the bed, so that the dirt is carried 
away in suspension. The men work from the head of the bed 
toward the outlet. When one channel is cleaned, stop planks are 
placed across its end, and a second channel is cleaned. One bed 
<0.45 acres) is cleaned by 8 men in 4 hrs., using 250,000 gals, of 
water. The quantity of water Altered between cleanings is about 
25% less when the beds are washed instead of scraped. 

At the Forest Stream plant, 60,000,000 gals, are filtered between 
scrapings. 

Output of Sand Washers.* — In a sand filtration plant the sand is, 
in a way, the most important part of the filters. It is important, 
therefore, to secure the best sand that can be reasonably obtained. 
The following method of securing and preparing filter sand was 
used in the construction of the water filtration plant of Washing- 
ton, D. C, and was described by Mr. Allen Hazen and Mr. B. D. 
Hardy, Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., 1906. 

The contractor furnished sand from a bank at Laurel, Md., on 
the main line of the Baltimore & Ohio R. R., half way to Baltimore. 
This bank was probably of tertiary origin, and consisted of layers 
of clay and sand. The sand in the sand layers was of good quality, 
except that more or less clay was distributed through it. The layers 
of clay ranged in thickness from a few inches to several feet, and 
the mixture was such that it was not possible to take the sand with- 
out the clay. 

The method of securing and preparing filter sand of the requisite 
cleanliness and of the quality specified was as follows : The sand 
was excavated from the bank with steam shovels, taking the mixed 
material, to a depth often reaching 20 ft. The material obtained in 
this way consisted mostly of sand, but large and small lumps of 
clay were always mixed with it, and the top soil was not separated. 
The proportion of the material which could not form part of the 
filter sand was rather large. The sand was loaded on cars, which 
carried it on temporary tracks to the screening and washing plant 
built close to the main line of the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. 

The material was first dumped from the cars through a coarse 
grating which separated many of the largest lumps of clay. It 
then passed through a revolving screen, with holes about 2 ins. in 
diameter, which removed further quantities of clay in lumps. It 
was then taken by a link-belt elevator to the top of a timber trestle, 
and discharged into a revolving screen, with round holes having Et 
size of separation of about 4 mm. Water jets played upon this 
screen and facilitated the passage of sand through it, while much 
fine gravel and some additional lumps of clay were removed. The 
specifications provided that the sand must be free from particles 
more than 5 mm. in diameter, and the screen secured this result. 
The material passing through the screen consisted of the sand, to- 

*Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 20, 1907. ■ 



WATER-WORKS. 759 

gethcr with a large quantity of clay, partly pulverized and partly 
in lumps, all carried by a considerable quantity of water. The 
mixture tlien passed to a series of pug-mills. The revolving arms 
In tliese brolce up and pulverized the remaining clay lumps. This 
treatment was necessary for a material containing clay in lumps, 
but would be unnecessary for sand not containing such material. 

The pug-mills incidentally served to separate a portion of the 
clay from the sand, for an excess of water entered them, and ex- 
tremely dirty water was constantly wasting over their tops, while 
the sand was drawn out from points near tlie bottoms in much the 
same way as it was subsequently drawn from the sand washers. 

The mixture of sand, clay and water leaving the pug-mills next 
passed to the washers. These washers, Fig. 24, consisted of three 
long, narrow boxes with bottoms having slopes of 1 in 6 to the point 
of discharge. The boxes were 16 ft. long, 24 in. wide and 18 in. 
deep at the upper end. There were four pipes, perforated for their 
entire length, In the bottom of each box, the holes opening directly 
downward. Water was forced through these pipes at a rate of 
about 1 cu. ft. per min. per sq. ft. of box area. This water went 
upward and overflowed into a trough running lengthwise of the box 
at the top. The mixed materials entered this box at the upper end, 
flowed through it, and were discharged at the lower end from the 
bottom. There were, therefore, two movements in each box ; first, 
a movement of wash-water upward from the bottom of the box 
to the top and out througli the waste overflow ; and second, a for- 
ward movement of sand from one end of the box to the other. The 
upward movement of water, starting from the whole area of the 
bottom and oveiflowing from most of the area of the top, kept the 
sand in a semi-suspended state and practically in the condition of 
quicksand. 

Under these conditions the larger particles of sand rapidly sank 
to the bottom while the finer particles were carried to the top. 
The sand at the bottom was in contact with the clean water as it 
first entered the box, while, by controlling the quantities of sand 
let in and drawn out, the finer particles could be forced to the top 
and out through the waste overflow to any desired extent. The 
level of the sand in the box was usually carried not more than about 
6 in. below the surface of the water. 

As the sand in the box was in the state of quicksand, it was pos- 
sible to draw it out, through a gate placed just above the bottom 
at the lower end of the washer, in the form of a fluid containing 
very littfe water. Generally, 10 parts of the mixture drawn from 
the outlet contained 9 parts of solid sand. The mixture fell into a 
large hopper, from which a gate allowed it to flow from time to 
time into cars on a side-track below, often without further separa- 
tion of water, except as it gradually drained out through the cracks 
in the hopper and in the bottoms of the cars. 

In general, it was found that 1 cu. yd. of sand per hour could 
be washed for each square foot of box area, and sometimes a larger 
<iuantity was passed. 



JCO 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



"d 



© 



S> . 



3 



r-J±d: 



© 



0^ 



^ 



3±±: 



n 



I I I II I I -M-L 








II'.ITI'R-II'ORKS. 701 

A washing box of this character was first designed by one of the 
Writers for use in preparing filter sand at Yonkers, N. Y. The 
same type of box was used in preparing all the sand placed in the 
filters at Providence, R. I., and has also been used elsewhere. 

The separation of the clay from the sand in such large quantities 
and so cheaply was an achievement which would hardly luive been 
regarded as possible at the time the contract for filter sand was 
made, and the use of this process cheapened the sand washing very 
greatly, the actual cost to the contractor being far below the con- 
tract price. 

Although exact figures are not at hand, it appears that the vol- 
ume of water used in washing the sand was not more than five or 
six times that of the sand. The wash-water was obtained from 
a .small creek nearby, and was pumped through a 10-in. pipe. After 
rains the water in this creek was quite turbid, but this turbidity 
did not interfere materially with the washing, or with the quality 
of the sand produced. 

In a working- day of 10 liours more than 900 cu. yds. of filter 
sand were frequently produced, and, had it been possiljle to handle 
the sand at the filtei's more rapidly, the plant could have worked 
at night, with a greatly increased output. 

The specifications provided that tlie filtering sand should be en- 
tirely free from clay. The specification liad proved sufficient in 
securing sand from river deposits and from sand banks of glacial 
origin. It did not prove satisfactory in the case of this sand, as 
the raw material contained large quantities of clay. The clay 
stuck to the particles of sand on drying, and the ordinary mechan- 
ical analysis, by sifting tlie material in a dry state, was inadequate 
to show its presence or amount. 

It becomes apparent at once that a method of measuring the 
amouTit of clay in the sand must be found and used, and definite 
limits set to the amount of clay that could be present, which should 
be substantially equivalent to the requirements of the specifications. 

The method adopted of determining the amount of clay was as 
follows: A weighed ciuantity of sand, usually 25 g. — but less if 
there was considerable clay in it, and more if tliere was but lit- 
tle — was agitated for some minutes with several times its volume 
of water. The sand for this purpose was taken directly from tlie 
washers and was not dried, as drying increased the difficulty of 
getting the clay in suspension. If the sand liad dried before test- 
ing, it was necessary to keep it moist and agitate it for some time 
to get all the clay loose. When this was accomplished the mixture 
was made up to a volume of 1 liter in a graduated glass. This was 
allowed to stand for 1 min. The turbidity of the supernatant fluid 
was then taken by observing the depth below the surface that a 
platinum wire could be seen, by the method of the U. S. Geologi- 
cal Survey. 

These observations were taken in tlie graduated glass for con- 
venience. This was not strictly in accordance witli the official in- 
structions, but it was more convenient, and the comparative re- 



762 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

suits were good. Jackson's turbidimeter was used with good results 
for night work, but the rod was preferred by the inspectors' when 
it could be used. The turbidity of the water thus found was multi- 
plied by the ratio of the volume of the mixture to the weight of 
sand taken. That is to say, for the quantities above stated it was 
multiplied by 40. The figures thus represent approximately the 
turbidity in the sand in parts per million by weight. One part of 
clay by weight actually produces about two parts of turbidity, be- 
cause the particles of clay are much finer than the particles of 
standard turbidity, but this matter is overlooked, and the results 
are expressed as standard turbidity in parts per million. To get 
the actual weight of tlie claj-, therefore, the figures should be divid- 
ed by two. 

It was decided after study that a reasonable interpretation of 
the specification, expressed in terms of turbidity, was represented 
by 4,000 parts per million, and this limit was rigidly insisted upon. 
Generally, the sand contained less than 3,000 and frequently less 
than 2,000 turbidity, the last figure corresponding to less than 0.1 
per cent of actual clay by weight in the sand as delivered. That 
this result could be regularly secured from a bank where a consid- 
erable percentage of the total material was clay is, the writers 
think, a very remarkable result, indicating both an excellent ap- 
paratus and most efficient management, on the part of the con- 
tractor, and by the sand inspectors. 

Part of the sand-wasliing plant was duplicated. This was done 
before the full capacity of the part first built was realized. It 
was intended to insure against delay in case of accident and to 
alloAV an increased output, but the first part did so well that the- 
second part was used hardly enough to test it. 

The sand was taken in cars to an elevated siding near the filters, 
and dumped into hoppers. These hoppers were provided with 
sand-gates, and carts were driven underneath and loaded from 
them. These carts were taken over the roofs of the filters, and the 
sand was dumped through the manholes. Chutes were arranged 
under the manholes, upon which the sand fell. This broke the force 
of the fall which, otherwise, might have compacted the sand to 
an undesirable extent, and also threw it to a considerable dis- 
tance horizontally. The chutes were revolved, and in this way most 
of the filter sand was placed directly where it was wanted without 
further handling. It was necessary to place only a small part of 
it with shovels. This method of placing the sand in the filters is 
so simple and cheap that it has been adopted for regular use in 
replacing the washed sand in the filters. 

The sand settled, on an average, about 5 per cent when it was 
wet and the filters were placed in service. The average depth of 
the sand in the filters after settling v/as 38 ins., but different 
filters were filled to different depths, so that when sand is re- 
placed from the washers in the filters it will go first to the filters 
having initially the least sand, and a i-egular regime is thus estab- 
lished from the start. 



WATER-WORKS. 763 

Cost of Filter^ Lambertville, N. J.— Mr. Churcliill Hungcrford 
gives the following relative to a small slow sand filter at Lambert- 
ville, N. J., built in 1S76. There are two filter beds, each 60 x 100 
ft., giving a total of 0.28 acre, and the oo.st was $5,600, or at the 
rate of $20,000 per acre. They were built in clay and not lined 
witli conciete, but the side slopes and bottom were riprapped with 
stone. A puddle trench 4 ft. wide runs beneath all the embank- 
ments, averaging about 10 ft. deep. The basins are 9 ft. deep. A 
12-in. vitrified pipe runs the entire length of each basin, on one 
side, and is fed by 4-in. vitrified pipes .spaced 2 ft. c. to c. Gravel 
was placed around and over the pipes, and a layer of sand 2V^ ft. 
tliick. The filter delivers 225,000 gals, per day, but has a much 
greater capacity. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Roof for Filter, Indianapolis. — Mr. 
William Curtis Mabee gives the following data relative to the cost 
of covering 4.8 acres of filter beds witli a reinforced concrete roof 
resting on steel beams and cast-iron posts, built in 1905, for the 
Indianapolis Water Co., by day labor. 

The filter beds had been in operation for a year or more, but 
ice and algae had caused so much trouble that it was decided to 
roof them, disturbing the filter sand as little as possible. The 
roofing cost 35 '^ cts. per sq. ft., including 2 ft. of cinders and a 
concrete parapet wall all around the roof to hold the cinders. The 
concrete for the roof was mixed 1:2:4, and amounts to 0.017 cu. 
yd. per sq. ft. The roof is a continuous slab 3 ins. thick, reinforced 
with 1/4 -in. corrugated rods spaced 3 ins. c. to c. in parallel lines. 
and with cross rods of the same size sp.iced similarly. The roof 
slab is supported by concrete girders, S ins. wide, with a depth of 
1 ins. below the roof slab, and spaced 6 ft. 9 ins. c. to c. Each 
gii-der is designed as a continuous beam, reinforced with four %-in. 
corrugated rods, each bar being so bent that for three-quarters of 
its length it is near the bottom of the beam, and then passes 
along the top of the beam and over the supporting I-beam for about 
a quarter span ; hence each bar has a lengtli of about 1 14 times the 
length of the beam. These reinforced concrete beams are sup- 
ported by steel I-beams. The I-beams are IS-in. (55 lb.), spaced 
19 1{. ft. c. to c, and are embedded in conciete 10 ins. thick. The 
I-beams are spliced at the ciuarter point of the span. The I-beams 
are supported by 7-in. cast-iron columns spaced 20 ft. c. to c, 
filled with concrete. The columns rest on concrete pedestals, the 
top of which is 6 ins. above the surface of the filter sand. The 
excavation for these columns was accomplished by the aid of light 
steel cylinders that were sunk through 4 ft. of filter material, 
and then filled with concrete. The cast-iron columns are lli/4 to 
12 ft. long. Being only 7 ins. diam. and spaced 20 ft. apart, there 
is a gain of more than 1 per cent in the effective filtering area 
under the roof, as compared with the ordinarj^ brick columns 20 ins. 
square and spaced 14 ft. c. to c. 

The use of cinders instead of earth effects a decided saving in 
the amount of material required for the roof, and the cinders, in 



rG4 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



this case, cost no more than earth. The roof was designed to 
support the cinders and such water as they would hold. A factor 
of safety of 3 was adopted for the roof reinforcement, based upon 
50,000 lbs. per sa. in. elastic limit of steel, and using 1 per cent 
reinforcement. 

The iron, steel and concrete were handled by a movable cableway 
spanning the filter beds. 

The centering was supported from the steel I-beams, by U-bolts, 
and was left in place 10 to 14 days, or until the concrete would 
ring under a hammer when struck lightly. 

Cost of Seven IVIechanical Filters. — Table XIV gives the first cost 
of 7 mechanical filter plants of the Jewell type : 

Table XIV. 

Cost Cost 

without with 

Capacity buildings buildings 

When per day, or clear and clear 

Locality. finished. gals. reservoir. reservoir. 

Terre Haute, Ind 1891 4,000,000 $30,000 $45,000(1) 

Chattanooga, Tenn 1893 3.000,000 30,000 32,000(2) 

Burlington, la 1894 3,500,000 33,000 75,000(3) 

Ottumwa, la 1895 2,000,000 13,500 21,500(4) 

Danville, Pa 1895 1,000,000 6,000 14,000(5) 

Lexington, Ky 1895 2,000,000 27,000(6) 

Cedar Rapids, la 1896 4,000,000 32,000 47,000(7) 

Total 19,500,000 $261,500 

Notes. — (1) The buildings cost $5,000 and the clear water reser- 
voir cost $10,000. 

(2) Tliere is no clear water reservoir. 

(3) The clear water reservoir holds 500,000 gals. 

(4) The settling tanks are combined with the filtering tanks, be- 
ing below the filtering material. The 6 filters are housed in a 
brick building, 41 x 95 ft. 

(5) Extra pumps, $1,000; clear water reservoir of 90,000 gals, 
(roofed), $7,000; it is not clear whether a building is included in 
the $14,000. 

(6) The clear water re.sorvoir holds 330,000 gals. 

(7) Brick building, 40x140 ft., clear water reservoir beneath. 
The cost includes two 3,000,000-gal. low service pumps. 

Cost of IVIechanical Filter, Danville, III. — A mechanical filter plant 
built at Danville, 111., in 1903, cost $75,000 for buildings, filters, 
■coagulating basins, clear water reservoir, and the operating ma- 
chinery. The capacity of tlie plant is 6,000,000 gals, per day. The 
filter beds have a capacity of 125,000,000 gals, per acre per day. 
The coagulant is lime and sulphate of iron specified not to cost 
more than $1.10 per million gallons when the water has "average 
turbidity." 

Cost of Mechanical Filter and of Filtering, Norfolk, Va. — Mr. Ed- 
mund B. Weston gives the following relative to a mechanical filter 
plant built in 1899 at Norfolk, Va. The plant has a capacity of 
8,000,000 gals, per day. There are 16 filters, each 15 ft. in diam- 
eter. At a rate of 127,000,000 gals, per acre per day, each filter has 
a daily capacity of 500,000 gals. The cost of the filter plant, ex- 
clusive of a 5,000,000-gal. subsiding reservoir and a 1,000,000-gal. 
clear water reservoir, was as follows: 



WATER-WORKS. 705 

Filter buildings and foundations $ 23,?>42 

Filters and auxiliaries 74,083 

Pump for supplying filters l.BiJO 

Electric light equipment, etc 693 

Total ? 99,808 

Work upon subsiding reservoir iiu'luilius diainage pump.. 4.()90 

Total .?104,49S 

The subsiding reservoir was already in existence, being an old 
reservoir. 

The cost of operation during the month of March. 1900, which 
was typical, was as follows, per million gallons : 

Labor $1:13 

Coal at $3 per ton 0.86 

Clearing subsiding reservoir 0.08 

1.95 grains of sulphate of alumina per gal., at 1.2 els. per lb.. . 3.40 

Total $.5.47 

Additional labor if pumping station were not adjacent to filter 
building 0.33 

Total $5.80 

This does not include interest, depreciation and repairs, which 
it is safe to say, would amount to at least $3 per million gallons, 
if the cost of the subsiding reservoir and clear water reservoir 
are included. 

Cost of Mechanical p'llter and of Filtering, Walkes-Barre, Pa. — 

A mechanical filter plant (of the Jewell type) was built in 1895 
at Wilkes-Barre, Pa. The cost was $122,400, including a brick 
building having 11,200 ft. floor area. There are 20 filter tanks, 
having a combined area of 2,260 sq. ft., and a daily capacity of 
10,000,000 gals. There are two 50-hp. boilers, a 10 x 10 x 12-in. 
pump for raising filtered water for washing the filters, a 15-hp. 
engine for driving the sand agitators, a 6 x 10 x 12-in. air com- 
pressor for agitating the solution in the coagulant tank, and a 
dynamo for lighting. Sulphate of alumina is used as a coagulant, 
the maximum being % gr. per gal. 
The cost of operation per day was : 

2 engineers, at $2.15 $ 4.30 

2 foremen, at $1.75 3.50 

2 laborers, at $1.50 3.00 

Coal 0.78 

Hauling coal 0.75 

250 lbs. alum (for 7,000,000 gals.), at 1.75 cts 3.82 

Total, 7,000,000 gals, at $2.31 $16.15 

In 1896 the labor and fuel cost of filtering 9,000,000-.gals. per day 
was reduced to the following daily cost : 

2 engineers, at $2.15 $4.30 

2 washers, at $1.621/2 3.25 

Fuel 1.30 

Oil, waste, etc 0.11 

Total $8.96 



766 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This is $1 per million gals, exclusive of the coagiilent and of 
interest and depreciation of plant. The first cost of the plant 
was $12,200 per million gals, of daily capacity. 

Cost of Mechanical Filter, Asbury Park, N. J. — A mechanical 
filter (Continental) was built in 1894 at Asbury Park, N. J., for 
removing the iron from artesian well water. Its capacity is 2,000,- 
000 gals, per day, and its cost was $20,000, not including a bricK 
building 45x45 ft. (2,025 sq. ft.), estimated to cost $1,500. This 
does not include a 12-ft. standpipe 125 ft. high, which receives 
the clear water. About 10 per cent of the total pumpage is used 
for washing the filters. 

Cost of Mechanical Filter and Filtering, Elmira, N. Y. — Mr. J. M. 

Diven's states that the mechanical filter plant at Elmira, N. Y., 
has a capacity of 6 inillion gals, daily, and its cost was $66,000, 
including building. The cost of filtering, $2.80 per million gals., 
to which $0.70 should be added for Interest and depreciation; 
total, $3.50. 

Cost of Water Softening. — Mr. W. B. Gerrish gives the follow- 
ing relative to a water softening plant built in 1905 at Oberlin, O. 
The plant cost $12,000, and treats 165,000 gals, per day. The water 
is softened by the use of lime and soda. From 6 to 17 grains of 
lime and 2 to 6 grains of soda are used per gallon. The two 
(7x7 ft.) pressure filters are washed twice a week. The cost of 
treatment averages as follows per million gallons : 

Chemicals $10 

Labor, interest and depreciation 15 

Total $25 

Cost of Concrete, Asphalt and Brick Reservoir Lining. — Mr. Ar- 
thur L. Adams gives the following data on the Astoria (Ore.) City 
Water Works : The reservoir bottom is lined with 6 ins. of con- 
crete (laid with expansion joints), %-in. of cement mortar, one 
coat of liquid asphalt, and one harder asphalt coat. The lining 
of the slopes is the same except that a layer of brick laid flat, 
after dipping each brick in hot asphalt, was laid on the concrete. 
The bricks were laid on an asphalt coating and given a final 
asphalt coat. The actual cost per sq. ft. was : 

Slope. Per sq. ft. Bottom. Per sq. ft. 

6-in. concrete $0.1187 6-in. concrete $0.1031 

1st coat asphalt 0.0100 Cement mortar finish... 0.0113 

Brick in asphalt 0.0889 1st coat asphalt..! 0.0077 

2d coat asphalt 0.0131 2d coat asphalt 0.0082 

Chinking cre^'ices with 

asphalt* 0.0030 

Ironing 0.0035 



Total $0.2372 Total $0.1303 

♦These crevices developed near the top of the slope, due to sliding 
of the brick slope. 

The detailed cost of this lining work was as follows : 

The concrete was composed of basalt rock, quarried and crushed 



IVATHR-IIORKS. 7(j7 

near the work, of river gravel, sand nml imported Portland cement. 
One cubic yard of concrete contained 0.9 cu. yd. stone, 0.5 cu. yd. 
gravel, 0.1 cu. yd. sand and 1 bbl. cement. There were 603 cu. yds. 
of concrete on slopes and 678 cu. yds. on the bottom. The work 
was well managed, each man averaging 1.84 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day, 
mixed and placed on the slopes, and 2.3.5 cu. yds. on the bottom. 
The men were Italians. The rock was quarried and crushed and 
<lelivered at the work (800 ft. haul) for 95 cts. per cu. yd. Sand 
and gravel were bought at 86 14 cts. per cu. yd., and cement at $2.4.'5 
per bbl. All mixing was done by hand. There were tliree gangs 
of mixers, 6 men in a gang, supplied with materials by 9 wheel- 
barrow men (n on rock, 3 on gravel and sand and 1 on cement). 
The 18 mixers placed the concrete for b men to rake and ram. 
Beside this force of 33 men, there were: 3 helper at the cement, 
1 man tending water, 1 man sprinkling concrete already laid, 1 
water-boy and 1 foreman. The gravel, sand and cement were 
mixed dry, then mixed wet, and stone added ; the concrete w-as 
then turned three times, and once more when deposited. On the 
slopes a rough linishing coat of mortar was applied by taking a 
little mortar from the next batch. The concrete was mixed with 
very little water. By raking the coarse rock down the slopes and 
by using a straight edge before ramming, even slopes were 
secured. 

On the bottom the % -In. mortar (1:2) coat was applied by two 
finishers using smoothing trowels, and they were served by 4 men 
mixing and carrying the mortar. 

On the slopes the concrete was placed in sheets 10 ft. wide from 
top to bottom; and on the bottom it was laid in squares, 20 ft. on 
a side ; 2 x 6-in. planks being used to hold the free sides of the 
concrete. When a new square was laid adjoining an old square, the 
2x6 pieces were removed, and replaced by a piece of % x 4-in. 
weather boarding. Two weeks later these 14 -in. strips were re- 
moved so that the grooves could be run full of asphalt. The %-in. 
strips should be beveled and laid w-ith the wide edge up, or they 
will be removed with difficulty. The labor cost of concreting was 
.$1.07 per cu. yd. on the slopes and 67 cts. on the bottom, wages 
being 15 cts. an hour. 

Two grades of Alcatraz asphalt were used : the L. and the 
XXX, or paving brand. The L grade is a natural liquid asphalt, 
and the XXX grade is the product of refining the natural rock 
asphalt with about 20 per cent of the liquid as a flux ; they are 
sold in barrels holding 400 lbs. No asphalt was placed on the con- 
crete until it had been in place two weeks and was dry on the sur- 
face. On the bottom of the reservoir the first coat applied was the 
L grade, the second coat w'as the XXX grade. On the slopes none 
of the L. grade was used, because of its tendency to creep ; moreover 
the harder asphalt when at the proper temperature runs readily 
and fills all crevices. The only advantage of the L grade is that 
it will adhere to a damp surface where the XXX will not. 



7C8 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Por best results all work should be done in the dry summer 
months. All dust must be carefully swept off the concrete as it 
prevents bonding with the asphalt. The asphalt applied with mops 
made of twine, was delivered in sheet-iron buckets by attendants 
who carried it from two melting kettles holding 3,000 lbs. each. 

The bricks used on the slopes were half vitrified and half com- 
mon, due to inability to get the full number of vitrified bricks. 
They were submerged in a bucket of hot asphalt and placed on the 
slope with iron tongs ; a common laborer, after a little practice, 
readily averaged 2,300 bricks laid in 10 hrs. A push joint was 
made. To secure close joints and consequent economy in asphalt, 
the asphalt must be kept hot enough to run like water. 

The asphalt finishing coat followed the brick laying as closely 
as possible, to avoid delays due to rain-water standing in open 
joints. The slope was ironed with hot irons to improve the ap- 
pearance. 0\'erheating of the irons is apt to injure the asphalt. 
During hot weather the brick slid on the slope somewhat by closing 
up thick joints laid in colder weather ; but all motion ceased in a 
few weeks. The advantage of asphalt lies in retarding the pas- 
sage of water through brick or concrete ; it does not exclude 
water, for an asphalt coated brick submerged in water will eventu- 
ally absorb as much water as an uncoated brick. 

Cost of First Asphalt Coat on Concrete Slopes (29,637 sq. ft.). 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. scj. ft. 

Building sheds ? 5.00 $0.00017 

Spreading, 91 hours at 20 cts 18.20 0.00061 

Boiling. 91V. hours at 15 cts 13.72 0.00046 

Helpers, 73i/. hours at 15 cts 11.02 0.00037 

Sweeping, 49 V- hours at 15 cts 7.43 0.00025 

Materials : 

Asphalt, 19,243 lbs. at .?0.1225 235.73 0.00795 

Fuel, 1 cord wood at .$2.50 2.50 0.00009 

Hauling 9.6 tons asphalt at $0.47 4.50 0.00015 

Totals $29S.10 $0.01005 

Cost of Asphalt Finishing Coat on Slopes (29,637 sq. ft.). 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. sq. ft. 

Building sheds $ 5.00 $0.00017 

Spreading, 95% hours at 15 cts 14.36 0.00049 

Boiling, 7314 hours at 15 cts 10.99 0.00037 

Helpers, lAiVi>. hours at 15 cts 21.68 0.00073 

Sweeping, 20 hours at 15 cts 3.00 0.00010 

Foreman, 60 hours at 25 cts 15.00 0.00051 

Materials : 

Asphalt, 25,230 lbs. at $0.01225 309.07 0.01042 

Fuel, 1 cord 2.50. O.OOOOS 

Hauling, 12.6 tons at $0.47 5.92 0.00020 

Totals $387.52 $0.01307 

Cost of Ironing Asphalt Slope (29,637 sq. ft.). 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. sq. ft. 

Troners, 295.5 hours at 15 cts $ 44.33 $0.00150 

Heaters, 75 hours at 15 cts 11.25 0.00038 

Helpers and sweeping, 34 Vj hrs. at 15 cts.... 5.18 0.00017 

Foreman, 49Mi hours at 25 cts 12.37 0.00042 



WATER-WORKS. 



769 



Materials : 

Irons, 20 at $1.50 30.00 0.00101 

Fuel. 1 cord at $2.50 2.50 0.00008 

Totals $105.63 $0.00356 

Cost of First Asphalt Coat on Concrete Bottom (34,454 sq. ft.). 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. sq. ft. 

Building sheds, 2a hours at 20 cts $ 5.00 $0.00015 

Spreading-, 38 hours at 20 cts 7.60 0.00022 

Boiling. 37 hours at 15 cts 5.55 0.00016 

Helpers?. 43 hours at 15 cts 6.45 0.0001!> 

Sweeping, 44 hours at 15 cts 6.60 0.00019- 

Materials : 

Asphalt, 18,490 lbs. at $0.01225 226.50 0.0065S 

Fuel, 1 cord 2.50 0.00012 

Hauling, 9.25 tons at $0.47 4.35 0.00007 

Totals .'!;264.55 $0.0076S 

Cost of Second Asphalt Coat on Bottom (34,4 54 sq. ft.) 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. sq. ft. 

Building sheds $ 5.00 $0.0001.> 

Spreading, 35 hours at 15 cts 5.25 0.0001.5 

Boiling, 30 hours at 15 cts 4.50 0.00013 

Helpers, 52% hours at 15 cts 7.88 0.00023 

S-n'eeping, 441^ hours at 15 cts 6.68 0.0002O 

Foreman, 17 Va hours at 25 cts 4.38 0.00013 

Materials : 

Asphalt, 19,591 lbs. at $0.01225 239.99 0.00702- 

Fuel, 1 cord at $2.50 2.50 0.00007 

Hauling, 9.8 tons at $0.47 4.G1 0.00013 

Totals $280.79 $0.00821 

Cost of Laying Brick on Slopes (132,000 Bricks Dipped in Asphalt 
and Laid Flat; 29,637 sq. ft.). 

Total Cost per 

Labor : cost. M. 
Unloading brick from barge, 290 hrs. at 15 cts; 

foreman, 22 hrs. at 25 cts $ 49.00 $ 0.37122: 

Hauling and storing, 160 hrs. at 35 cts. and 140 

hrs. at 55 cts 152.43 1.15473 

Laying, 561 hrs. at 15 cts 84.15 0.63750 

Attendance, 1,341 hrs. at 15 cts 201.15 1.52387 

Boiling asphalt. 220 hrs. at 15 cts 33.00 0.24500 

Foreman, 96 hrs. at 25 cts 24.00 0. 18180 

Materials : 

Brick, 132 M at $7.00 924.00 7.00000- 

Asphalt, 93,372 lbs. at $0.01225 1,143.81 8.66516 

Asphalt haul, 46.7 tons at $0.47 21.95 0.16628- 

Totals $2,633.49 $19.95055 



Cost of Lining a Reservoir With Asphalt. — In Trans. Am. Soc. 
C. E., 1892, Vol. 27, p. 629, Mr. James D. Schuyler discusses the 
use of California asphalt for lining two reservoirs of the Citizens* 
Water Co., at Denver, Colo. 



T7U HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The earth slopes of a reservoir were first sprinkled and rolled 
with a 5-ton slope roller, operated by a hoisting engine mounted 
on rails on top of the embankment. Slopes were 1% to 1, and depth 
of water was 20 ft. Beginning at the bottom the asphalt was laid 
on the earth slopes in horizontal strips 10 ft. wide, 1% ins. thick, 
spread with hot rakes, tamped with hot tampers, and ironed with 
hot smoothing irons. Asphalt was hauled 2 1/2 miles and delivered 
at a temperature of 250°. While the asphalt sheet was still warm, 
anchor spikes, of Vs x 1-in. strap iron 8 ins. long, were driven 
through the asphalt into the bank in rows 1 ft. apart. Every other 
row was driven flush, the alternate rows being temporarily left 
projecting li/<. ins., to ser\e as a rest for 2 x 4-in. strips of lumber, 
forming steps for the workmen. When the finishing coat came to 
be applied these spikes were driven in flush. 

The bottom was coated with asphalt 1 in. thick, and after 
tamping was rolled with a cold 5-ton steam roller. The finishing 
coat of refined Trinidad asphalt, fluxed with residuum oil, was 
poured on hot from buckets and ironed with smoothers heated to 
cherry red. When first applied the irons produced a yellow smoke, 
and had to be moved rapidly, but thus only could a good bond be 
secured with the first coat. 

The cost of asphalting a reservoir having a bottom area of 
87,300 sq. ft. and a side-slope area of 65,300 sq. ft., or a total of 
152,600 sq. ft., was as follows: 

1,304 tons, 20% asphalt mastic, 80% sand, at $12 $15,648.00 

15 tons, 15% asphalt mastic, 85% sand, at $10 580.00 

86.21 tons liquid asphalt fluxed with oil, at $40 3,448.40 

Fuel for heating irons and for steam roller 276.02 

Lights 36.00 

Tools 179.75 

Pegirons, material and labor of cutting and dipping in 

asphalt 650.00 

Labor 1,921.50 

Use of roller 6 days 60.00 

Total for 152,600 sq. ft., at 14.94 cts. per sq. ft $22,799.67 

Mr. Schuyler informs me that, as nearly as he can remember, 
men were paid $1.75 per 10-hr. day, although possibly the rate was 
$2 a day. 

The second reservoir was lined in a manner similar to the first, 
just described. The total area of bottom and slopes was 143,670 sq. 
ft., which required 1,156 short tons of the asphalt and sand mix- 
ture for the first coat ; and as this mixture weighed 127 lbs. per 
cu. ft. after compression, the average thickness was 1.53 ins., re- 
quiring 16 lbs. per sq. ft. The finishing coat was Vs to %-in. thick, 
and required 1.24 lbs. of asphalt per sq. ft. The cost of lining 
this reservoir was as follows : 

Cts. per sq. ft. 

Materials for first coat 8.98 

Materials for second coat 2.48 

Labor, fuel, spikes, etc 1.99 

Total cost of both coats 13.45 



I 



WATRR-WORKS. 771 

In preparing the mastio tor the first coat 78% of La Patera 
•.isphalt and 'iZ'/c of Las Conchas tlux were boiled together in open 
kettles for 12 hrs., at 250" to 300-, with froquent stirring. Tlien 
2 0% (by weiglit) of this mastic was mixed with 80% of sand heated 
to 300', a cylinder witli strong paddles being used for the mixing, 
which took about 2 mins. The cliarge was dumped into a cart, 
liauled to the reservoir and dumped upon a wooden platform, and 
tlionce takon in hot scoops, spread and ralied. Hot rollers were 
tlien used, and they were superior to tamping and ironing. Tliese 
rollers were made from sections of cast iron pipe, turned smootli on 
the outside, and fitted inside witli a hanging basket in wliich a fire 
was maintained. For the bottom rolling a 30-in. pipe was used ; 
for the slopes a 14-in. pipe. Dulled with a %-in. wire cable passing 
over a pulley at the top of the slope, was used. 

Asphalt as a reservoir lining possesses several advantages : It 
will not crack even when there is considerable settlement of the 
embankment. If cracks do occur it is easily patched, the new 
material imiting perfectly with the old. 

To prevent earth from crumbling and rolling down upon the 
partly completed asphalt, it is often wise to plaster the earth with 
a mortar of sand, cement and lime to a thickness of nearly 1 in., 
which will cost about % ct. per sq. ft. On this should be spread 
a thin coat of liquid asphalt as a binder, which would have the 
additional advantage of protecting tlie asphalt from ground water. 
To prevent accumulated ground water from forcing off tht, asphalt 
lining, when tlie water in a reservoir is drawn down, it is often 
necessary to provide broken stone drains back of the lining. These 
drains may be led to a receiving well connected with the reservoir 
by pipes provided with valves opening automatically into the 
reservoir. 

Ice, 18 ins. thick, has been frozen fast to the asphalt lining 
all around, and the water lowered and raised again 3 or 4 ft. with- 
out damaging the lining in the least. 

I am informed (September, 1904) by Mr. Geo. S. Prince, Asst. 
Ch. Engr. the Denver Union "Water Co., that this asphalt lining has 
not been durable. "It has run considerably on the slopes and this 
has resulted in the cracking and disintegrating of the asphalt so 
that considerable expense has been involved in keeping it in any- 
tliing like serviceable condition and we would not consider using 
it again in this connection, preferring rather to employ concrete 
linings." 

Cost of Lining a Reservoir With Concrete. — Mr. G. L. Christian 
gives the following: In laying 3,000 cu. yds. of 1:3:6 concrete, 
6 ins. deep, over the bottom of a reservoir, the wages paid were : 
Foreman, $2.50 ; laborers, $1.35, and teams, $4 a day. The cost 
of blasting the rock is not included, but the cost of loading, liaul- 
ing and crushing is Included : 



772 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Pex' cu. yd. 

Sand $ .37 

Natural cement 1.10 

Loading and hauling stone to crusher 25 

Labor at crusher, at $1.35 a day 20 

Rent of crusher 01 

Coal for crusher 05 

Hauling stone from crusher 15 

Foreman of concrete gang: 05 

Laborers concreting, at $1.35 50 

Teams concreting, at $4 OS 

Total $2.76 

9% for supt., timekeeper, office help, etc 24 

Total $3.00 

The concrete was mixed very wet. 

Cost of a Concrete Reservoir Floor at Pittsburg, Pa. — Mr. E'mile 
Low gives the following data ; 

The floor of the Highland Ave. Reservoir at Pittsburg, Pa., was 
covered in 1884 to a depth of 5 ins. witli concrete, laid on a clay 
puddle foundation. The concrete mortar was made of 1 bbl. natural 
cement to 2 bbls. sand, mixed to a tliin grout in wooden boxes stand- 
ing on legs. Five barrels of stone (standstone) were spread on a 
platform of 2-in. plank, 10x16 ft., and the grout was poured over 
it, the whole mass being then turned over three times with shovels, 
then deposited to the depth of 5 ins. and rammed. The stone was 
quarried and hauled 20 miles by rail, then unloaded into small 
cars and hauled l^ mile to tlie reservoir. The sand was obtained in 
the reservoir limits, and cost merely the work of excavation, or 
1% cts. per bushel. 

The following was the cost of two days' work : 

27 laborers, 2 days, at $1.25 $72.90 

1 foreman, 2 days, at $2.50 5.00 

Total, 101 cu. yds., at 77 cts $77.90 

During one month the labor cost was : 

Total cost. 

642 days, laborers at $1.35 $866.70 

17 days, water-boy, at 60 cts 10.20 

22 days, foreman, at $2.50 55.00 

Total, 1,302 cu. yds., at 71 Vo cts $931.90 

During another month 1,425 cu. yds. were laid at 95 cts. per cu. 
yd., wages being $1.25 a day. 

The average cost of the 7,680 cu. yds. of 1:2:5 concrete was: 

Per cu. yd. 

Quarrying stone " $ .15 

Transporting stone 50 

Breaking stone (2i/<j-in. ring) 35 

11/3 bbl. natural cement 1.80 

8 bu. sand 10 

Water 05 

Labor (wages $1.25 a day), mixing and laying 75 

Incidentals 05 

Total $4.05 

The contract price was $6 per cu. yd. 



WATER-WORKS. 773 

Cost of Reservoir, Forbes Hill, IVIass.— Mr. C. M. Saville gives 
the following lelaLive to a saiiiU reservoir (Forbes Hill) at Quincy, 
Mass., holding 5,000,000 gals. The bottom is 100x280 ft., and tlie 
sidu'S slope 1 to l-;4. The lining is concrete-. The excavated earth 
was used to build the banks, which are 17 ft. wide on top. 

The cost, at contract prices, was as follows : 

30,100 cu. yds. earth excavation, at $0.3S $11,438 

Rock excavation, at $:i.5U 52 

2,337 cu. yds. concrete, at $5.25 to $S 15,045 

6,822 sq. yds. plastering, at $0.25 1,706 

695 sq. yds. granolithic walk, at $0.21 1,313 

Seeding 21 

Railing 425 

Miscellaneous extras 462 



Total $30,462 

For detailed cost of the concrete lining and plastering, see the 
following section. 

The gate chamber cost $7,765. 

Cost of Concrete Lining and Plastering a Reservoir, Forbes Hill, 
Mass. — Mr. C. M. Savillc is autliority for the following cost data 
on the Forbes Hill Reservoir, Quincy, Mass., built by contract in 
1900-1901. Common laborers were paid $1.50 per 10-hr. day. There 
were four classes of concrete used, and their itemized costs were as 
follows : 

Class "A" ; Concrete 1 : 214 : 4. 

1.35 bbl. Portland cement, at $2.23 $3.01 

0.46 cu. yd. sand, at $1.13 52 

0.74 cu. yd. stone, at $1.13 84 

25 ft. B. M. lumber for forms, at $20.00 per M. . .50 

Labor, on forms 59 

Labor, mixing and placing 1.15 

Labor, general expenses 20 



Total (279 cu. yds.) per cu. yd $6.81 

I 

Class "B" ; Concrete 1:3:6. 

1.07 bbl. Portland cement, at $2.23 $2.39 

0.44 cu. yd. sand, at $1.13 50 

0.88 cu. yd. stone, at $1.13 99 

6Vj ft. B. M. lumber for forms, at $20.00 per M. . .13 

Labor, on forms 21 

Labor, mixing and placing 97 

Labor, general expenses 15 



Total (284 cu. yds.) per cu. yd $5.34 

Class "C" ; Concrete 1:2:5. 

1.25 bbl. natural cement, at $1.08 $1.35 

0.34 cu. yd. sand, at $1.02 35 

0.86 cu. yd. stone, at $1.57 1.35 

41/2 ft. B. M. lumber, at $20.00 per M 09 

Labor, on forms 10 

Labor, mixing and placing 1.17 

Labor, general expenses 08 



Total (400 cu. yds.) per cu. yd $4.49 



774 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Class "r»" ; Concrete l:2V':6i/>. 

1.08 bbl. Portland cement, at $1.53 $1.65 

0.37 cu. yd. sand, at $1.02 38 

0.96 cu. yd. stone, at $1.57 1.51 

1 ft. B. M. lumber, at $20.00 per M 02 

Labor, on forms 12 

Labor, mixing and placing 1.21 

Labor, general expenses 18 

Total (615 cu. yds.) per cu. yd $5.07 

Class "E" ; Concrete l:2yo: 4. 

1.37 bbl. Portland cement, at $1.53 $2.09 

0.47 cu. yd. sand, at $1.02 48 

0.75 cu. yd. stone, at $1.57 I.IT 

121/2 ft. B. M. lumber in forms, at $20.00 per M. . . .25 

Labor, on forms 26 

Labor, mixing and placing 1.53 

Labor, general expenses 15 

Total (1,222 cu. yds.) per cu. yd $5.93 

In all cases the lumber was used more than once, so that the cost 
of the labor on the forms cannot be computed per M ft. B. M. 

Class "A" was used for walls and floors of gate vault and gate 
chamber, and for cut-off walls. 

Class "B" was used for the foundations of a standpipe. 

Class "C," the only natural cement concrete on the work, was 
used for the lower layer of the bottom of the reservoir. Then 
came a layer of Portland cement plaster %-in. thick, on which was 
placed the top layer of Portland cement concrete. Class "B." The 
slopes of the reservoir were lined in a similar manner, except that 
Class "D" was substituted for Class "C." The upper layer of 
concrete was laid in 10 ft. squares, alternate squares being laid 
and allowed to harden, and then the other squares were laid. 

The cement was mostly Atlas, delivered in bags, four of which 
made a barrel, and assumed to be 3.7 cu. ft. All concrete, except 
on the sides, was made rather wet, and was kept wet for a week. 
The cost of laying with the ordinary concrete gang was as follows, 
wages being $1.50 per 10-hr. day: 

Cost per 
cu. yd. 

2 men measuring materials $ .15 

2 men mixing mortar 15 

3 men turning concrete (3 times) 22 

3 men wheeling concrete .23 

1 man placing concrete 07 

2 men ramming concrete 15 

1 sub-foreman ($2.50) .13 

Total (20 cu. yds. per day) $1.10 

In addition to this gang there were 3 plasterers and 3 helpers 
working on the slopes. The %-in. layer of plaster between the con- 
crete layers was put down in strips 4 ft. wide and finished similar 
to the surface of a granolithic walk. This plaster was mostly 1 : 2 
mortar with finishing surface of 1:4. Strips of coarse burlap 
soaked in water were used to keep this layer wet and cool ; in spite 



IVATIIR-irORKS. 775 

of wliich some cracks appeared. This plastering gang averaged 
:i,100 sq. ft. per day, the cost being as follows for Vj-in. plaster: 

Cost per 

100 sq. ft. 

Cement, at $1.53 per bbl $l.lu 

Sand, at $1.02 13 

Burlap 02 

Labor 9i2 



5q. yd. 


Cu. yd. 


$0,103 


!li7.42 


0.012 


.86 


0.002 


.14 


0.083 


6.00 



Totals S2.22 $0,200 $14.42 

Although plastering work is usually measured in square yards, 
1 have computed it in areas of 100 sq. ft., and in cubic yards for 
purposes of comparison. It will be seen that it took more than 5 
bbls. of cement per cu. yd. of tliis 1 : 2 mortar, and that it losL 
$6 per cu. yd. for the labor. 

Returning again to the concrete, the stone was cobbles picked 
out of the hardpan excavated to make embankments. It was 
washed before crushing, and had to be gathered up from scat- 
tered piles, which accounts in part for the high cost. It was 
crushed with a 9x15 Farrel crusher operated by a 12-lip. engine. 
The crusher was i-ated at 125 tons a day, but averaged only about 
40 tons. The bin had a capacity of 30 cu. yds., divided into three 
compartments, one for stone less than 1 y^ ins. diameter, one for 
stone between IVi and 2i/4 ins., and the third for stone over 2^2 ins. 
which had to be recrushed. The stone had about 46% voids and 
weighed 95 lbs. per cu. ft. 

Cost of a Concrete Lined Reservoir, Canton, III. — Mr. G. W. 
Chandler gives the following relative to a small reservoir built in 
1901 at Canton, 111. The reservoir has a capacity of 1,140,000 gals., 
and cost $7,900. It is 80x160 ft., and 13 ft. deep, 7 ft. being ex- 
cavation, and carries 12 ft. of water. The concrete bottom is 10 ins. 
thick, including %-in. coat of cement mortar. The footings and 
copings of the side walls are of concrete, but the walls are of brick. 
Concrete was mixed l:3i/^:7i/^. The cement was 0.9 cu. ft. per 
95-lb. sack. The cost of the concrete was: 

Per cu. yd. 

0.856 bbl. cement, at $2.50 , ... $2.14 

0.857 cu. yd. broken stone, at $2.17 1.86 

10.1 bu. sand (100 lbs. per bu.), at 5% cts 0.58 

Labor, at 19 cts. per hr 0.80 



Total : $5.38 

No. 1 paving bricks (at $6.50 per M) were laid in 1: 2% cement 
mortar for the walls, which were 30 ins. thick at the base and 
13 ins. at the top. The concrete footing was 36 ins. wide x 2 ft. 
thick. The coping was 6 ins. thick. There were brick pilasters 
20 ft c. to c. 

Cost of Covered Reservoirs of Various Sizes — Mr. Freeman C. 
Coffin gives the following relative to a covered reservoir built by 
contract in 189 8 at Wellesley, Mass. The reservoir is circular, 82 
ft. diam., 15 ft. deep, and its capacity is 600,000 gals. The floor is 
lined with concrete, 4 ins. thick; the roof is of concrete (groined 
arches) resting on brick pillars. The walls are 15 ft. high from 



776 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

floor to spring line, 2 ft. thiclv for 5 ft. below the spring line and 
3.33 ft. thick at the base. The roof arches have a 12 ft. clear span, 
2% -ft. rise, and are 6 ins. thick at the crown. The earth covering 
on the roof is 21/.. ft. thick at the walls and 3 ft. thick at the center. 
The centers used in building the concrete roof cost the contractor' 
22% cts. per sq. ft. if used only once. He atteinpted to use them 
several times, but the braces against some of the brick piers were 
carelessly removed after a portion of the centers had been taken 
down, and the lateral thrust of the concrete arches overthrew the 
piers and caused a loss of part of the roof. The cost of the reser- 
voir to the city was $10,415. 

Some of the items were as follows : 

3,446 cu. yds. earth excavation. 
310 cu. yds. rubble masonry. 
503 cu. yds. concrete niasonry. 

61 cu. yds. brick masonry. 
143 cu. yds, gravel on roof. 
439 cu. yds. loam on roof. 
A steel ring was embedded in the circular wall. The weight re- 
quired for such a steel ring is given by the following formula : 
W= 0.912 D-'. 

D being the diameter of reservoir in feet, and W being the total 
weight in pounds, including an allowance of 25% for splicing and 
rivets. 

In Table XV, Mr. Coffin gives the estimated cost of covered reser- 
voirs built with economic dimensions, and of the same general de- 
sign as the one at Wellesley, Mass. 

Table XV. — Cost of Covered Reservoirs. 

Capacity — Round Reservoirs. — — Square Reservoirs. — 

Gallons. Diam. Depth. Cost. Side. Depth. Cost. 

250,000 60 12 $ 4,700 54.5 11 $ 4,800 

500,000 75 16 7,800 69.5 14 8,100 

750,000 88 17 10,500 79.5 16 11,000 

1,000,000 98 18 12,900 88.5 17 13,600 

1,250,000 106% 19 15,200 99.5 17 16,000 

1,500,000 115i/> 19 17,600 106.0 18 18,400 

1,750,000 120 21 20,000 111.5 19 21,700 

2,000,000 125 22 22,000 118.5 19 22,900 

.2,500,000 134 24 26,200 130.0 20 27,300 

3,000,000 144 25 30,200 142.5 20 31,500 

4,000,000 166* 25* 37,900 153.5 23 39,500 

.5,000,000 186* 25* 45,600 165* 25* 47,-100 

*These are not exactly the most economic dimensions. 

The above estimates are teased upon the following unit prices : 

Earth excavation, per cu. yd $ 0.50 

Concrete walls, floors and pier foundations 6.00 

Concrete roof, per cu. yd 6.50 

Brickv;ork in piers, per cu. yd 13.00 

Plastering walls, per sq. yd 0.25 

Plastering floor, per sq. yd 0.15 

Gravel on roof arches, per cu. yd 1.00 

Steel ring, per lb 0.05 

■Centers, per sq. ft. of reservoir area 0.15 



irjTER-irORKS. 777 

Cost of Small Covered Reservoir, Portersville, Calif. — Mr. I'liillip 
E. Harrows gives the following- data relative to a 100,000-gal. reser- 
voir built in lit 04 for the waterworks at Portersville, Gal. 

The work was done by day labor, at 20 cts. per hr. The reser- 
voir is 50 ft. diam., 7 ft. deep, lined with 4 ins. of concrete on the 
bottom and 12 ins. on the sidt-s. It is roofed with 2 x 10-in. 
stringers, 4 ft. apart, supporting IVi-in. plank. The ends of the 
stringers rested on the concrete walls and on an 8 x 10-in. girder 
wliich ran across the center of the reservoir and was supported on 
a pier at the center. Tlie e.xcavated material was a heavy clay, 
loaded with picks and shovels into wagons. The excavation aver- 
aged 4 ft. deep, and the embankment was 4 ft. high. 

The cost was as follows : 

330 cu. yds. excavation, at 58.6 cts ? 101.08 

300 cu. yds. hauled % mi., at 20.4 cts 53.98- 

75 cu: yds. concrete (labor, $3.03, and materials, $5.31), 

at $8.34 624.74 

35 squares plaster finish at $2.92 102.45 

4,000 ft. B. M. roof, at $45.49 181.96 

Trimming outer slopes 18.70 

Total $1,172.91 

The plaster labor cost $0.5 7 per square on the bottom and $1.12 
on the vertical sides. 

The roof labor cost $12.43 per M, wages of carpenters being $3 
to $4.37. 

Cost of a Covered Reinforced Concrete Reservoir. — In Gillette 
and Hill's "Concrete Construction — Methods and Cost," pp. 589 to 
597, the design of a small, square, covered reservoir (30x31 ft.) is 
given, together with detailed costs and methods of construction, of 
whicli the following is a very brief abstract. The reservoir is 12 ft. 
deep and holds 75,000 gals. There were 580 cu. yds. of earth exca- 
vation and 83 cu. yds. of concrete. The cost of the concrete was : 

IVa bbls. cement, at $1.12 $ 1.49 

1 cu. yd. stone 1.86 

1/2 cu. yd. sand 0.60 

Steel for reinforcement 4.76 

Forms, 100 ft. B. M., at $.18.30 1.85 

Labor on forms 2.41 

Labor on concrete and steel 2.65 

Total $15.62 

The excavation cost the contractor 90 cts. per cu. yd. 

The total cost of the reservoir to the contractor was $2,362, but 
it leaked so badly that he was subsequently compelled to excavate 
all around and build a brick wall (1 brick thick) a few inches 
from the concrete and fill in between with rich cement mortaiv 
This additional and unexpected work cost $1,240 for labor and 
materials. 

Cost of a Covered Reinforced Concrete Reservoir, Fort Meade, 
S. D.* — Mr. Samuel H. Lea gives the following: 

The construction of a 500,000-gallon reinforced concrete reservoir 



"Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 27, 1901 



>8 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



at Fort Meade, S. D., while not comprising any features of unusual 
interest, was, nevertlieless, an interesting work from an engineering 
as well as an economical point of view. The writer, who was in 
direct charge of the work, believes that an analysis of the various 
items of cost and a brief description of the methods employed will 
be of interest to engineers and others interested in concrete work. 
The general design of the structure was furnished by the 
Quartermaster-General, U. S. Army, and the details of reinforcement 
were worked out by the firms offering bids. The successful bidder 
submitted a design embodying the use of expanded metal and cor- 
rugated bars, this form of reinforcement being furnished by the 




C^^ j^^"'""* '^i^tLUMii ■'■iii'iii i^^jjj^;^^ _^ 



Seci-ion 



■^'corrBars 6'i.nC. 



Fig. 25. — Reinforced Concrete Reservoir. 



St. Louis Expanded Metal Fireproofiing Co., of St. Louis, Mo. As 
shown in Fig. 25, the reservoir comprises two compartments of 
equal size, divided by a partition wall. Each compartment is 50 x 
60 ft., inside dimensions, with rounded corners. The roof is a flat 
slab, 3 ins. thick, resting upon girders, these girders being supported 
by columns of a square cross-section. 

Reinforcement. — The reinforcement is rather heavy, especially for 
the walls. As the latter are thin, the metal reinforcement occupies 
a relatively large portion of the wall space. The reinforcement con- 
sists of corrugated bars for the footings, floor, walls, columns, beams 
and roof girders, and expanded metal for the roof slab. The bars 
were of four different sizes: Vj-in., %-in., %-in. and 1-in., and of 
different lengths, varying according to the location where used. In 



IVATER-UORKS. 779 

the floor the reinforcement consisted of %-in. bars laid crosswise in 
two layers and spaced 12 ins. apart in each layer. In the walls the 
reinforcement was placed close to both inner and outer faces. Near 
the inner face a row of upright, %-m. bars, spaced 12 ins. between 
centers, e.xtended the entire length of enclosing and partition walls. 
Horizontal Ya-in. bars, 24 ins. between centers, were placed against 
these uprights. Near the outer wall face %-in. upright bars were 
used, spaced !> ins. between centers ; and the horizontal reinforce- 
ment was of Vj-in. bars, 24 ins. between centers. In the footings 
two layers of •'Ji-in. bars were used. These were laid crosswise and 
spaced 6 ins. apart in each layer. 

Concrete. — The specifications required broken stone of hard con- 
sistency, not larger than a %-in. cube, and clean, sharp sand, the 
composition of the concrete to be one cement to two sand and four 
stone. These proportions were used throughout the work. Colo- 
rado Portland cement was used for the greater part of the work. 
Towards the finish a carload of lola, Kansas, Portland cement was 
used. Both cements showed up well under frequent tests and gave 
excellent results in the work. The sand was obtained from a pit 
about three miles distant ; it was of medium quality and fairly 
clean. The stone used was obtained partly from a limestone quarry 
situated .at some distance from the reservoir site ; but the greater 
portion of the supply was obtained from boulders found on the 
surface in the vicinity. 

Excavation. — The reservoir was built so that about half of its 
height was below the natural level of the ground. The excavation 
was made in coarse gravel mixed with some sand and clay, the 
material being handled with teams and scrapers. The force em- 
ployed in excavating consisted usually of four or six teams and 
about the same number of men in addition to the drivers. The 
men were paid $2.50 per 10-hour day and the wage for team and 
■driver was ?5 per day. A portion of the material was removed by 
drag scrapers, but the bulk of the excavation, consisting of com- 
pact gravel mixed with small boulders, required the use of wagons. 
The material was loosened by plow for scraper work for the upper 
portion of the excavation. It was found later, however, that better 
headway could be made by loosening the material with picks and 
shoveling it into wagon by hand. The total volume of material ex- 
cavated was 2,275 cu. yds. at a cost of $1,114.75, or 49 cts. per cu. 
yd., divided as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Loosening and loading 20 cts. 

Hauling and depositing 25 cts. 

Supervision, tools, etc 4 cts. 

Total 49 cts. 

After the excavation was completed the bottom of the pit was 
compacted with a heavy roller, then the excavations for wall and 
column footings were carefully made by hand. 

Concrete Work. — The concrete was mixed by hand on a movable 
platform ; its composition is given above. 



780 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A concrete gang consisted of foui- men who were each paid $2.75 
per day. They wheeled the materials from the supply piles to the 
mixing platform, mixed the concrete and deposited it in place. 
During the construction of the footings and floor two concrete gangs 
were employed, but after the walls were started one gang only was 
required for concrete work ; the other gang was then put to work 
assisting the carpenters. 

The sand and stone were wheeled to the platform in iron wheel- 
barrows of 2% cu. ft. capacity. The cement was in %-btal. sacks 
and each sack was taken as 1 cu. ft. Each batch of concrete con- 
tained the following quantity of material : 

2 % sacks of cement 2 % cu. ft. 

2 wheelbarrows of sand 5 cu. ft. 

4 wheelbarrows of stone 10 cu. ft. 

The quantities of sand and stone were adjusted so as to form the 
proper proportion for making a dense concrete. From time to time 
as the work progressed, experiments were made by the writer to de- 
termine the percentage of voids both in the sand and the crushed 
stone ; and, in this way, uniformity in composition was secured for 
the concrete. The mixture was made quite wet in order to insure a 
free flow around the reinforcing bars. On account of the narrow 
space inside the forms and the number of reinforcing bars therein 
care was taken to cause the mixture to be well distributed through- 
out. The wet concrete was well spaded in an effort to secure a 
smooth surface next to the forms. This was generally accom- 
plished, but some rough places which showed after the removal 
of the forms required patching up. 

In constructing the footings some concrete was first deposited in 
place and the metal reinforcement was embedded therein. For the 
floor reinforcement the lower bars were carefully embedded in the 
concrete after it had been brought to a suitable height ; the upper 
bars were then placed crosswise upon the lower ones and kept in 
position until the remainder of the concrete had been deposited 
around and over them. In the wall footings a depression or groove, 
several inches deep, was left under the wall space for its entire 
length. This insured a good bond between the wall proper and the 
footing. 

The concrete floor in each compartment was built in one con- 
tinuous operation, the object being to secure a practically monolithic 
construction. The lower reinforcing bars in the floor were em- 
bedded at the proper depth in the fresh concrete and the upper 
bars were then placed crosswise upon the lower ones ; the two sets 
were then wired together at a sufficient number of places to pre- 
vent displacement while the remaining concrete was being deposited 
around and over them. 

Placing Reinforcement . — The reinforcement for the walls and col- 
umns was erected in place upon the footings and formed a steel 
skeleton around which the forms were erected. The upright bars in 
the walls were held together and at the proper distance apart by 
means of templets consisting of wooden strips in which holes were 
bored at suitable intervals to receive the bars. These templets 



]1'ATER-IV0RKS. 781 

were maintained in u horizontal position and were moved upward as 
the concrete advanced in heiglit. The horizontal reinforcing bars 
were wired in place to the upright bars ; they were placed in posi- 
tion ahead of the concreting as the wall was built up. 

The corrugated bars in beam and girders were placed in position 
in the forms and held up by blocks which were removed as the 
forms were filled with concrete. The expanded metal reinforcement 
for the roof slab was placed so as to be close to the lower face of 
the slab, but far enough up to be entirelj'- enveloped in the concrete. 

Form Construction. — The wall forms were made of 2-in. planks, 
surfaced on the inner side and placed horizontally on edge. They 
were held in place by 4 x 4-in. posts spaced at intervals of about 
4 ft., in pairs on opposite sides of the wall. The posts were firmly 
braced on the outside ; they were prevented from spreading by con- 
necting wires passing through tlie wall space between tlie edges of 
adjacent planks. At the rounded corners of the reservoir the pairs 
of posts were spaced about two feet apart and the curve was made 
by springing thin boards into place to fit the curve and nailing them 
to the posts. The posts were high enough to reach to the top of the 
wall ; the siding was built up one plank at a time as the concrete 
work progressed. Column forms were made of 2-in. planks on end, 
extending from floor to girder. Three sides were enclosed and one 
side was left open to receive the concrete ; this side was closed 
up as the concreting advanced in height. 

The beam and girder forms were open troughs of the required 
dimensions, made of 2-in. plank, svirfaced on inner faces. The form 
of centering for the roof slab consisted of a sinooth, tight floor of 
2-in. planks, extending between the open tops of column, beain and 
girder forms over the entire area between enclosing walls of the 
reservoir. The centering and the beam and girder forms were 
supported by 6 x 6-in. posts resting upon the floor below. 

The regular carpenter gang consisted of a foreman carpenter at 
$5 per day, a carpenter at $3.50 per day, and two helpers at $2.75 
per day. During the early concrete work of making footings and 
floor, where forms were not required, the carpenter force was em- 
ployed in erecting the steel skeleton for the walls. The upright bars 
were placed in position and secured by temporary wooden stays ex- 
tending from the upper portion of bars to the surface of ground 
outside of excavation. These stays were removed after concreting 
had advanced to a sufficient height to hold the steel securely in 
place. 

Cost of Concrete Work. — The wages paid the concrete gang which 
mixed and placed all the concrete and the cai'penter gang which 
constructed and erected the forms and placed the reinforcement 
Iiave been given above. The costs of construction materials on the 
site were : 

Cement, per barrel ? 2.57 

Sand, per cu. yd 1.80 

Stone, per cu. yd 3.15 

Lumber, per M ft. B. M 27.50 



782 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The quantities In the completed concrete structure were as 
follows : 

Cu. yds. 

Total volume of concrete in reservoir 704.71 

Total volume of steel reinforcement in reservoir. 5.57 

Total volume of material in completed structure. 710.28 
Volume of material in structure exclusive of 

roof slab 648.35 

Volume of material in roof slab 61.93 

Total 710.28 

The cost of the structure per cubic yard of concrete, exclusive- 
of the roof slab, was as follows : 

Item. Per cu. yd. 

Crushed stone % 3.168 

Sand 842 

Cement ♦. 3.859 

Reinforcement 4.959 

Labor, mixing and placing concrete 1.721 

Forms, labor and material 2.966 

Total $17,509 

In constructing the roof slab the expanded metal reinforcement 
raised the unit cost. For this portion of the work the costs were : 
Item. Per cu. yd. 

Expanded metal reinforcement $ 5.241 

Other items, same as above 12.550 

Total 517.791 

Plastering and Waterproofing. — According to the requirements of 
the specifications the floor and the inside surface of reservoir walls 
were covered with a coating of cement mortar composed of one part 
Portland cement and one part sand. The wall plastering was fronx 
% in. to %-in. thick; it was applied in two coats. The floor finish 
was laid in alternate strips about 1 in. thick and 3 ft. wide. After 
the strips first laid had hardened the remaining strips w^ere laid, 
tlie edges being grouted to insure tight joints. 

The outside of walls and roof was covered with a coating of tar 
which was heated in an open kettle to a temperature of about 360° 
F. and then applied with a brush or mop. 

The cOst of wall and floor plastering was 44.4 cts. per square yard, 
itemized as follows: 

Cement 26.4 cts. 

Sand 2.6 cts. 

Labor 15.4 cts. 

Total 44.4 cts. 

The cost of outside waterproofiing was 4 cts. per square yard, dis- 
tributed as follows : 

Material 2.5 cts. 

Labor 1.5 cts. 

Total 4.0 cts. 

Backfilling. — The entire structure, after completion, was covered 
with earth to a depth of 2 ft. above the roof, sloping on all sides 
to the natural surface of the ground. The earth composing this 
fill was handled by means of teams and scrapers ; this method 



WATER-WORKS. 783 

caused the material to be compacted firmly in place and at the 
same time afforded a good test of tlie rigidity and strengtli of tlie 
roof. 

The baclifill gang consisted of four teams and from four to six 
laborers in addition to the drivers. Drag scrapers were used to 
move the material from the spoil banks and place it over and 
around the reservoir. Part of the material was side dumped from 
runways and shoveled to place between the walls of reservoir and 
sides of excavation. This material was carefully tamped and 
compacted as the filling progressed. The wage of team and driver 
was $5 per day, and for laborers for this work, $2.50 per day of ten 
liours. 

The amount of backfilling was 2,039 cu. yds. and its cost was 30 
cts. per cubic yard, distributed as follows : 

Loosening and loading materials 12 cts. 

Hauling and depositing 17 cts. 

Supervision, tools, etc 1 ct. 

Total 30 cts. 

Summary of Costs. — The total cost of the completed reservoir, ex- 
clusive of pipe connections with water mains, was $15,068.76. The 
cost of the various items was distributed as follows : 

Main structure, 648.35 cu. yds., at $17.509 . .|11, 351. 96 

Roof slab, 61.93 cu. yds., at $17.91 1,101.79 

Ventilators, doors, stepping irons, etc 164.08 

Plastering, 1,517 sq. yds., at 44.4 cts 673.08 

Waterproofing, 1,285 sq. yds., at 4 cts 51.40 

Excavation, 2,275 cu. yds., at 49 cts 1,114.75 

Back fill, 2,039 cu. yds., at 30 cts 611.70 

Total $15,068.76 

While some of the cost items are apparently high when com- 
pared with the cost of similar work in other places, it should be 
remembered that the isolated locality and the local conditions were 
imfavorable for low cost. Owing to the isolated location of the 
reservoir with respect to large markets and also to local* sources of 
supply the cost of material and labor was quite high. All con- 
struction material, except some of the stone for crushing, had to be 
hauled over a mountain road from 3 to 4 miles to the top of the hill 
selected for the reservoir site. Labor was scarce and commanded 
a wage of $2.50 per day for ordinary work; the laborers mixing 
concrete were paid $2.75 per day. Another source of considerable 
expense was the high cost of lumber and carpenter work on the 
forms. On account of the thinness of the walls and roof, the cost 
of lumber and labor required per cubic yard of concrete was consid- 
erable. A part of the lumber was used the second time in forms, 
but it was found impracticable to delay the work by waiting for the 
concrete to terden before beginning the new portions of .the walls. 
This lumber was sold after tlie completion of the work, but the sal- 
vage was inconsiderable, amounting to less than 10 per cent of the 
original cost. 

The writer kept a record of cost of the various items of material 
and labor entering into the construction of tnis reservoir. This 



r84 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



record was verified by comparison with the vouchers and pay rolls 
of the contractor and was made as complete and accurate as pos- 
sible. From these data the above statements of construction cost 
have been compiled. 

Cost of Concrete Reservoir, Pomona, Cal.*— Mr. Charles Kirby 
Fox gives the following : 

The concrete reservoir herein described was erected in the sum- 
mer of 1904 on Point Lookout, Ganesha Park, Pomona, Cal. It was 
designed by Mr. Geo. P. Robinson, City Engineer, and Mr. Albert 
Simmons had the contract. The writer was in direct charge of 
construction. 

The reservoir is oval in form (Fig. 26), being 77.7 ft. by 40.7 ft. 
over all. It is 12 ft. deep and the floor has a slight slope to the 





Fig. 26. — Concrete Reservoir. 



sluice box. Iron ladders are placed in each of the quarter points. 
The inlet and overflow pipes are near the top of the walls, the dis- 
charge pipe is 12 ins. above the bottom of the reservoir and the 
sluice pipe is set in a bowl 3 ft. in diameter and 4 ins. deep. It is 
the lowest part of the reservoir. 

The walls (Fig. 27) are 12 ft. high. They were designed to be 
6 ins. thick at the top and 15 ins. thick at the bottom and to be 
connected with the bottom of the reservoir with a 12-in. radius. 
The bottom is 4 ins. 'thick. Before the walls were started it was 
decided to add a 6 x 30-in. ring to the outside of the top, making the 



* Engineering-Contracting, April 15, 1908. 



WATER-WORKS. 785 

top 12 ins. wide. The joint connecting the walls with the bottom 
was put in about 12 ins. from the inside edge of the radius. 

Around the sluices and inlet and outlet pipes a larger mass of 
concrete was used. The finish was i/o-in. thick and was water- 
proofed. 

The contract price of the reservoir was $1,625.00 

Extra concrete in ring, 8.3 cu. yds 60.90 

Extra valve, screws, etc 16.00 

$1,701.90 

Include valve box changed $ 2S.00 

Cost of reservoir 1,726.90 

Excavation. — The greater part of the excavation of the oval, about 
77 X -10 ft., and the tunnel was done by the city by force account, l 







Fi£ 



■Joirjt connectmpf 
•iva/Js ano/ i?ofiVr?7 

Cpof- Ccntr. 
!T. — Concrete Reservoir Wall. 



have no records of the costs of this part of the work. The con- 
tractor trimmed down the sides and bottom of the reservoir, in all 
about 5,000 sq. ft., at a cost of $71.60, or li/a cts. per sq. ft. 

Pipes, Valves, Etc. — The pipes, valves, etc., as provided in the 
specifications cost $455.52 and the extra valve sets installed cost 
$16. The laying of the pipe cost $9.70. The tunnel excavation to 
get down to grade cost $52.38, making a total of $533.60. This 
includes 5 6-ln. Ludlow valves, 270 lin. ft. of hes^i'y 6-in. cast-iron 
pipe and 80 ft. of 6-in. vitrified pipe, all installed. 

Cleaning Up — The contractor mixed the concrete for the walls 
on the floor of the reservoir and to clean out his old concrete cost 
him $22.25. The final clean up cost him $7.0v/, making a total cost 
for cleaning up of $29.25. 



786 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Concrete. — The concrete was specified to be 1 part cement, 2 parts 
sand and 4 parts gravel (pea size to 2 -in. ring). As put in, a 
cement barrel was filled and emptied six times with the bin run 
of sand and gravel and four saclts of cement (1 bbl. ) were emptied 
on top of it ; it was then turned wet. The costs per cu. yd. were : 

Per cu. yd. 

L,abor $1.09 

Cement, 1.08 bbl., at $3, delivered 3.23 

Sand and gravel, at $1 0.93 

Water (had to be pumped) 0.34 

Forms, labor and lumber • • ■ • ^-^^ 

Total ?6.35 

The wages paid labor were $1.75 and $2 per day, foreman mason 
.?4 per day. Carpenters were paid 43 cts. per hour and lumber cost 
$33 per M ft. B. M. A 9-hour daj^ was worked. 

Finish. — The %-in. finish was specified to be 1:1, but that did 
not work well, so we increased the amount of sand. It was water- 
proofed. It was mixed very thoroughly with 35 lbs. alum at 6 cts. 
per lb., and then the water, containing 35 lbs. good potasli soap per 
cubic yard of mortar was added. The finisli cost : 

Per cu. yd. 

Materials $14.45 

Labor, mixing and applying 11.90 

Total $26.35 

On the finishing there were two masons at $4 plastering and 
enough laborers to keep them supplied with mortar. Tlie com- 
pleted floor cost 9 cts per sa- ft. 
Summary of costs : 

Cement, at $3 per bbl $ 481.50 { 

Sand, at $1 per cu. yd 113.30 ? 

Soap and alum, at 6 cts. per lb 21.00 - 

Water 43.00 f 

Timber 30.00 

Labor and superintendence 361.35 

Pipe laying (contract price) 533.60 

Total $1,583.75 

The reservoir has now been in use 31/^ years and has given excel- 
lent satisfaction. Only a few hair cracks have appeared on the 
surface and none of the plaster has scaled off. 

Cost of Storage Reservoir, Hagerstown, Md.* — In 1902-3 the 
water supply of Plagerstown, Md., was improved by the construc- 
tion of a storage reservoir to impound tlie waters of the, two streams 
known as Warner's Hollow Creek and Raven Rock Creek. The 
worlds were designed and constructed by the American Pipe Manu- 
facturing Co., of,. Philadelphia, Pa., Mr. J. W. Ledoux, M. Am. Soc. 
C. B., Chief Engineer. 

Earth Dam and Accessories. — The general construction of the 
earth dam is shown by the section of Fig. 28. Owing to scarcity of 



^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 10, 1906. 



WATER-WORKS. 



787 



£/.905.P !'/'5'x 



WaterSurfcsrce. El. 901. 



it-.l 



iJ-f^i^-^ 



. ^<f^ \Se/ecfeci *^^<^ 

Materia/ \ ((^rnpacteel ^^^. 



''^30"C.LBIow-off i%-PuMe 

^^ Wcf/I 
Section along Blow-off Pipe. 



I 




El.905.0 <-''■'> 



^"'^ 



C^rc^/nary 
Mcrfenal 
Compacfed, 



''~IE" Dischcrrofe Drain 

Section along Discharge Main. 




Puddle 
Wall 



£1.905.0 '^^^'^ 




O Vz^ff^^rd/nary 
.'cj;of<^=*^ Mafend/ 



El. 9 01.0 



y jW//>>^^y jj^^/;?^^ g^;Zil^Zt^j(^^Z^^k^ ^^Z ::^ ^ 



E.NG.-(2DNT1^. 




Selected X^ 
Material ^^<o. 
Compacted 



''-IF /luxil/ary 

Section along Auxiliary Main 
Fig-. 28. — Sections of Earth Dam. 



■Puddle 
Wall 



788 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

available material only the upstream half of the dam and the puddle 
walls were made of selected material ; the downstream half of 
the dam was made of earth and loose rock. The main puddle wall 
varied from 5 to 10 ft. in widtli and from 6 to 20 ft. In depth, and 
contained 1,602 cu. yds. of material ; the secondary puddle wall was 
nai-rower and shallower, containing only 712 cu. yds. of material. 
Both slopes of the dam are riprapped and it is pierced by a 30-in. 
oast-iron pipe blow-off and two 12-in. cast-iron supply mains. There 
was also some 1,2S6 cu. yds. of 3y2-ft. thick dry rubble retaining 
wall built in connection with the dam work. The costs of these 
several items of the dam work are given from figures furnished by 
Mr. 1 ledoux, as follows : 

Dam. — There were 93,200 cu. yds. of embankment built at a total 
cost of ?60,532, or $0.65 per cu. yd. The several items of cost were 
as follows ; 

Items. Per cu. yd. 

Foreman ?0.0243 

Hauling 0.2694 

Labor 0.2252 

Sprinkling 0.0144 

Picking Btones ." 0.0192 

Trimining slopes 0.0080 

Tools, blaoksmithing, powder, etc 0.0479 

Superintend<^nce and engineering 0.0354 

Protecting for winter 0.0056 

Total ?0.6494 

Rip-rap. — The emb;inkment slopes were rip-rapped with stones 
of % cu. ft. or less, platted by hand to fairly uniform thickness, after 
which broken stone o) 3 or 4-in. sizes were spreaxl on top and 
trimmed to an even slope. Altogether 3,844 cu. yds. of rip-rap stone 
and 1,882 cu. yds. of broken stone were placed at a cost of 
.<P5,059.69, or ?0.884 per cu. yd. 

Puddle Walls. — The two puddle walls aggregated 2,314 cu. yds. 
of puddle, the main wall having 1,602 cu. yds. and the secondary 
wall 712 cu. yds. The puddle was deposited loose and then flooded 
with water and tramped oy men with rubber boots. When the 
top of the puddle reached a Xevel about 3 ft. from the natural surface 
of the ground the amount of water was diminished to just enough 
to permit the clay to be tamped with rammers weighing about 2 
lbs. The cost of the puddle walls was as follows : 

No. 1. Per cu. yd. 

1,602 cu. yds. excavation ?1.02 

Placing puddle 0.60 

Tools, etc ■ 0.48 

Total $2.10 

No. 2. 

712 cu. yds. excavation $0.98 

Placing puddle 0.80 

Crushed stone in puddle 0.26 

Pumping, tools, etc 0.40 

Total $2.44 



IVATER-JVORKS. 789 

Masonry Walls. — The cost of these was : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Masonry cut-off walls, 52 cu. yds $ 262.34 ^5. 04 

Dry retaining wall, 1,286 cu. yds $1,601.53 ?1.245 

Gate House. — The gate house cost §9.J1.T6, made up ot the fol- 
lowing items: 

Concrete, Zy., cu. yds ? 13.20 ?5.28 

Rubble masonry, 15 cu. yds !t3.41 6.23 

Broken range masonry, 24 cu. yds 534.07 23.07 

Red tile roof, complete 311.08 .... 

Total i5951.7G 

Blow-Off Pipe. — The 30-in. cast-iron blow-off pipe through the 
dam cost $1,761.79, or $5.96 per lin. ft., made up of the following 
items : 

Items. Per lin. ft. 

Pipe ?4.00 

Excavation 0.36 

Filling 0.23 

Freight, hauling and laying 1.17 

Total $5.76 

Spillway. — The spillway contained 1,224 cu. yds. of 1:3:5 con- 
crete masonry. Its total cost was $9,820.43, made up of the follow- 
ing items : 

Concrete $6,457.72 

Top lining of 1-in. yellow pine 918.05 

Excavation 1,830.90 

Rip-rap on slopes above walls 78.44 

Timber, crib at foot 535.32 

Total $9,820.43 

The concrete work, 1,224 cu. yds., cost $5.25 per cu. yd., made 
up as follows : 

Item. Per cu yd. 

Cement, 4.82 bags $1,795 

Sand 0.860 

Stone 1.081 

Labor 0.971 

Tools, forms, etc 0.541 

Total . .$5,248 

Raven Rock Creelc Intake. — To bring the water from Raven Rock 
Creek to the main storage reservoir a masonry intake dam w^as con- 
structed on that stream, and from this dam a 30-in. terra cotta pipe 
line was constructed to the storage reservoir. The cost of the intake 
dam was $3,223.89. The itemized cost of the masonry work was: 
Item. Per cu. yd. 

Excavation, 145 cu. yds $ 0.92 

Rubble masonry, 158 cu. yds 12.45 

Concrete coping, 14 cu. yds 13.21 

The 30-in. pipe line is composed of extra heavy terra cotta pipe, 
with deep bells corrugated on the Inside, furnished by A. N. Pierson, 



790 HANPBOOK OF COST DATA. 

New York, N. T. It was 2,244 ft. long and cost, complete, $8,932.05. 
The itemized oi»st per foot was as follows: 

Item. Per lin. ft. 

Pipe 12.486 

Cement for joints 0.057 

Jute for joints 0.068 

Trench, tools, etc 1.370 

Total '. $3,981 

Grubbing and Clearing. — The reservoir area of 15.1 acres had all 
trees and brush cleared off and all stumps grubbed up. The trees 
were generally removed by blasting. A force of about 20 men was 
worked, their wages being $1.50 per day. No record was kept of 
the area cleared per day, but the cost of clearing and grubbing if 
given as $107.13 per acre. The costs of two floodwood racks wer 
$30.74 and $21.66; both were constructed as follows: Two heavy 
logs were laid horizontally across stream, one about 3 ft. above the 
bottom of the stream and the other about 8 ft. above the bottom and 
parallel to the first, but upstream, so as to make a slope of about 1 
on 1. To these two logs were spiked 6-in. timbers reaching down to 
the bed of the stream. The transverse logs were supported against 
the roots of trees and all the timber was rough stuff, such as could 
be obtained on the site — chestnut, oak or spruce. While the work was 
in progress water was supplied by means of 1,776 ft. of rectangular 
trough, composed of three 12-in. posts nailed together and laid at a 
grade of 1 per cent. Considerable trestling was necessary. This 
trough cost $303.93, or 17.1 cts. per lin. ft. 

Cost of a Wooden Covering for Reservoir, Quincy, III. — Mr. Don 

R. Gwinn gives the following: 

The reservoir was 415 x 317 ft. at top, 26 ft. deep, inside slopes 
1 % to 1. A vegetable growth had given much trouble, so the 
reservoir was roofed over in 1898 at a cost of 4 cts. per sq. ft, the 
price of lumber being at that time only $15 per M. There were 
260,000 ft. B. M. used (or 2 ft. B. M. per sq. ft), and 38 kegs of 
nails at $1.85 per keg. The pedestal piers or foundations for the 
posts were of brick ($7 per M), 21 ins. sq. at the base, 16 ins. at 
the top, 18 ins. high and capped with a limestone slab 12 x 12 x 6 ins. 
(43 cts. per cap). A % x 3-in. dowel pin was let into each cap 1% 
ins. The posts were 6 x 6-in. x 22 ft., spaced 14 ft. in one direction 
and 18 ft. in the other. They were capped with 6 x 6-in. caps, or 
girders, 18 ft. long. On these caps were laid 2 x 6-in. joists or string- 
ers 14 ft. long spaced 4 ft. c. to c. ; and on the stringers were laid 
1-in. roofing boards (1 x 10 in. x 16 ft. ). These boards were laid 
north and south to exclude sunlight from the cracks as much as 
possible. 

Two posts and a cap were framed and fastened together on the 
ground, and sway braced with two braces of 2x6, and then up- 
-ended. Joists were then shoved out from the completed part of the 
roof, and laid flat upon the caps ; two joists being thus laid upon, 
and nailed to, each end of the cap, to serve as walking planks for 
the workmen. The joists were then spaced properly by means of 



WATER-WORKS. 791 

gages, and then braced with 2 x 4-in. "bridging." White pine was 
used tlirougliout, all the dimension stuff being No. 1, and the roof- 
ing boards No. 2. Of the total surface of the roof, 25% is trap doors. 

Ill the section on Timberwork will be found further data on the 
cost of wooden coverings for reservoii'. See the index under "Tim- 
berwork, reservoir roof." 

Cost of a Reservoir Embankment. — The Tabeaud Dam in CaH- 
fornia is an earth embankment 100 ft. high, containing 370,000 cu. 
yds. of embankment. Mr. Burr Bassell is authority for the fol- 
lowing : 

The dam was built by contract in 1901, the contract price being 
40 cts. per cu. yd. During the months of August, September and 
October more than 2,000 cu. yds. were built per working day 
(53,000 cu. yds. per month). Mr. Bassell states that the maximum 
force was 233 men and 416 horses and mules. Fresno scrapers 
were used to load wagons through "traps." There were 4 horses 
on each fresno and 4 horses on each wagon. Assuming $1.50 per 
day for laborers and .?1.00 per day for horses, we have a daily cost 
of $716, or nearly 36 cts. per cu. yd., the output being 2,000 cu. yds. 
per day. The wagons, tools, etc. (exclusive of horses) were worth 
about $16,000. Allowing 3% per month for interest, depreciation 
and repairs, the daily plant charge would be about $20, or 1 ct. per 
cu. yd. Allowing 5% for general supervision and overhead charges, 
we have nearly 2 cts. more per cu. yd., or a total cost of 39 cts. 
per cu. yd. 

The average haul was % mile. 

The earth (a clay mixed with gravel) was spread in 6-in. layers, 
sprinkled and rolled. To spread the 2,000 cu. yds. of embankment 
daily, there were 3 road graders operated by 6 horses and 2 men 
on each grader. There were 2 rollers, each operated by 6 horses 
and one driver. There were 2 harrows, and, while Mr. Bassell doe.s 
not so state, presumably 4 horses and a driver to each harrow. At 
$1.50 per 10 hr. day for each man and $1 for each horse, we have 
following cost: 

Per cu. yd. 
Cts. 

Spreading 1.5 

Sprinkling O.S 

Harrowing 0.6 

Rolling O.S 

Total 3.7 

Loading and hauling 32.3 

• General expense (estimated) 2.0 

Plant charge (estimated) 1.0 

Total 39.0 

Test pits dug in this dam showed a weight of 133 lbs. per cu. ft. 
of compacted earth. 

The above given yardage relates to the yardage in the embank- 
ment, not in the barrow pits. 

The rates of wages are merely assumed for illustration. It is 
probable that laborers received $2 per day at that time and place. 



792 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost of a Concrete Core Wall.* — This article covers the construc- 
tion of 2,184 ft. of core wall, being a portion of a wall which will 
ultimately be 2 ^ miles long. This wall was built along the toe on 
the pool sides of a rock-lill dam in a trench excavated to solid 
rock. The face of the wall has a batter of 31/^ in 12 and the back 
conforms to the face of the side of the trench below water and is 
practically vertical above water, being 2 ft. wide on top. Lievei 
with the top a 6-in. concrete apron extends back 20 ft. over the top 
of the rock-fill dam. The wall varies in height from 10 to 21 ft. It 
was built of 1 : 5 gravel concrete and is reinforced as follows: A 
longitudinal line of old steel bars was placed in the center of the 
wall 6 ins. below the top. Over this horizontal bar were hooked 
vertical bars spaced 5 ft. apart. This reinforcement was used 
principally to anchor down any pieces of the wall top which might 
break awaj^ 

Forms. — As fast as the dipper dredge opened the footing trench 
to rock, 2 -in. holes 10 ft. apart were drilled into the ledge. Uprights 
of 6 X 8 in. timbers having 2-in. rods 5 ft. long bolted to the bottoms 
were erected by inserting the rods in the drilled holes and bracing 
the tops back to posts set into the rock-till dam. The uprights 
were set to the inclination of the face of the wall. Waling pieces, 
6x6 ins. X 16 ft. were connected several end to end by bevel joints, 
with one bolt in each so the joint would be flexible. The several 
lengths of waling pieces were thus connected inside the uprights. 
A vertical plank was then bolted to the waling near a joint, and by 
it the joint was pushed down under water 3 ft., and a second waling 
was bolted to the plank at the surface of the water. Other planks 
were then bolted to the first waling at the joints on each side of the 
joint first sunk, and these joints were in turn pushed down 3 ft., 
permitting the second waling to be bolted to the planks. In this 
manner one waling after another was added at 3-ft. intervals until 
the first waling had been pushed down to rock. The walings were 
not fastened to the uprights, as the up-thrust of the water pushing 
them against the slant of the uprights held theni fast. 

The lagging consisted of vertical 2 x 12-in. planks, set close in- 
side the walings ; these planks were nailed to the topmost waling, 
but were not fastened to the lower walings. 

The forms were built around curves without alterations, as the 
one-bolt waling joints gave considerable flexibility. Ordinarily, the 
wall was concreted in alternate 30 to 50-ft. sections. The forms 
were built continuously in advance, and torn down behind as fast 
as the concrete set. At the ends of sections of wall, transverse 
bulkheads were built inside the form and bonding recess forms 
fastened to them. To remove the forms the braces from the tops 
of the uprights were unbolted and the whole form was pushed 
away from the wall and taken apart. As the forms were not 
nailed, except at one point, as noted above, the lumber was but lit- 
tle damaged, and, with the addition of a small amount of lagging. 



*Engineering-Contractmg, Mar. 10, 1909. 



WATER-WORKS. 793 

there is enough lumber remaining from the form-work for the first 
2,184 ft. of wall to build the remainder of the wall. The form 
lumber was used from three to four times on the portion of tlic 
wall that is now completed. 

Concreting. — The concrete mixing and handling plant was mount- 
ed on an ISVl. x 100 ft. barge. On one end of the barge was a \\ 
cu. j-d. Chicago concrete mixer with a gravel supply bin mounted 
overhead. On the opposite end of tlie barge a stiff-leg derrick, 
operated by a bull wheel, was erected. This derrick handled the 
gravel from stock barges moored alongside to the supply bin over 
the mixer, and also handled the concrete, from the mixer into the 
forms. A wooden bottom dump bucket was used to deposit the 
concrete under water and did the work successfully up to a depth 
of 17 ft. 

Wages and Cost. — The gang for forms consisted of 2 carpenters 
and from 2 to 6 helpers and a drill boat crew setting uprights ; and 
the gang for concreting of 14 men, including foreman, derrickman, 
mixerman. etc. The wages paid were as follows: 

Drillmen, per month .$ 60 

Foreman, per month 75 

Overseer, per month 125 

Carpenters, per day 2.50 

Laborers, per day ¥1 to $1.25 

All men were subsisted in addition to regular wages, which was 
considered equivalent to 50 cts. per day per man additional. Tlie 
prices of materials were as follows : 

Coal, per ton $ 2.20 

Corrugated bars 2.85 

Round bars 1.80 

Cement, per bbl.. f. o. b. Molina 1.14 

Gravel, per cu. yd. on barge, towing extra 0.65 

Lumber, per M. ft., B. M 26.50 

The cost of the work was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Preliminary expense $ 9,074.30 $2.0441 

Supt. and office 1,798.30 0.4051 

Excavation 467.50 0.1053 



Totals $11,340.10 $2.5545 

Concj'ete work: 
Forms — 

Materials $ 2,575.30 $0.0351 

Labor 940.06 0.2117 

Drilling 168.10 0.0379 

Coal for drills 94.57 0.0213 



Totals $3,778.03 $0.8060 

Concrete materials — 

Cement $ 7,059.48 $1.5901 

Cement handling 169.11 0.0381 

Cement testing 130.68 0.0294 

Gravel 2,847.85 0.6415 

Reinforcement 104.08 0.0235 

Towing 945.78 0.2131 

Towing, coal for 378.28 0.0852 



Totals $11,635.26 $2.6210 



794 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mixing and placing concrete : 

Labor $2,054.60 ?0.4628 

Coal 283.71 0.0639 

Totals % 2,338.31 $0.5267 

Back filling ? 203.64 $0.0459 

Subsistence 1,327.32 0.2991 

Plant repairs 298.66 0.0673 

Totals ? 1,829.62 $0.4123 

Grand total (4,339.1 cu. yds.) $30,721.32 $6.9205 

Regarding these items it needs to be noted that the $9,074.30 for 
preliminary expenses includes a large number of miscellaneous 
items, including new machinery, erection of plant, etc., charged 
out in full. To compare the work with a contract job the engi- 
neer suggests taking this item at about $5,000, which represents 
about a 20 per cent depreciation charge on all plant used. It should 
be noted also that all form lumber is charged in full against this 
."^,17 8 ft. of wall, j'-et, as stated above, it is enough to build the re- 
mainder of the wall and should ultimately be charged against the 
total yardage. In the same way most of the items constituting pre- 
liminary charges must be distributed over a large yardage in addi- 
tion to that of the wall already built. 

The wall was built by day labor, under the direction of J. B. 
Bassett, M. Am. See.' C. E.. U. S. Assistant Engineer, Rock Island, 
111. We are indebted to Mr. Bassett for the data from which this 
analysis of costs has been prepared. The dam was a portion of the 
Mississippi improvement work at Moline, 111. 

Cost of Puddle. — Puddle is a mixture of gravel and clay which is 
wet and rammed or rolled into place. Many engineers use the clay 
as they would a mortar to fill the voids in the gravel. A few engi- 
neers use the gravel merely to insure the crumbling of the sides and 
roof of any incipient hole in the puddle so as to fill it up. 

Fanning gives the following proportions measured loose : 

Cu. yd. 

Coarse gravel 1.00 

Fine gravel 0.35 

Sand 0.15 

Clay 0.20 

Total loose 1.70 

This when mixed, he says, will make 1.3 cu. yds., and when thor- 
oughly rammed 1.25 cu. yds. 
Another mixture given is : 

Cu. yd. 

Gravel 1.00 

Sand 0.35 

Clay 025 

Total 1.60 

This when mixed and spread makes 1.16 cu. yds., and when 

rammed 1.1 cu. yd. 

When clay is not available, very fine sand and a little loam can 

be used to fill the voids in gravel. Where puddle is used to cover 



WATER-WORKS. '^^8 

a large area, like the bottom of a reservoir, tlie gravel is first spread 
in a layer about 3 ins. tluek, tlie clay is spread over the gravel, and 
the sand over the clay in their proper proportions. Then an ordi- 
nary harrow is dragged by a team back and fortli until mixing is 
complete. Water is next sprinkled over in amount sufficient to 
cause the mass to knead like stiff dough under a 214 -ton rolling 
tamper or under a 2-ton sectional roller. Such a puddle is as heavy 
as concrete and resists abrasion almost as well. With labor at .?1.50 
and teams at $3.50, the cost is about as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Spreading by hand 8 cts. 

Harrowing 5 cts. 

Sprinkling 2 cts. 

Rolling 5 cts. 

Total 20 cts. 

An exacting engineer, however, can readily double this cost, bring- 
ing it to 40 cts. per cu. yd., which is about what it costs to spread, 
sprinkle and roll a cu. yd. of macadam road. 

Where puddle is used in confined places, like trenches, it must be 
mixed like concrete and rammed to place, the cost then being 30 to 
50 cts. per cu. yd. On the Erie Canal, in 1896, with wages at $1.50 
for 10 hrs., the contract prices for mixing and laying puddle ranged 
from 20 to 60 cts. per cu. yd., the average price being 35 cts. per cu. 
yd., exclusive of the materials. 

Cost of Sheeting and Bracing a Small Circular Reservoir. — Mr. 
George A. Rogers gives the following relative to the cost of sheeting 
and bracing a circular pit excavated for a reservoir at Kinston, 
N. C, in 1905: 

The reservoir is 60 ft. inside diam., 20 ft. deep, and holds 15 ft. of 
water, or 350,000 gals. The sides and bottom are lined with brick, 
of which 200,000 were required. The brick side walls are 12 ins. 
thick at the top and 36 ins. at the bottom. The bottom lining is 6 
ins. thick, being three layers of brick laid flatwise. 

Tlie first 5 ft. were excavated with drag scrapers ; below that the 
material was a running sand which was loaded by hand into skips. 
The sheeting was 2x8 ins. x 18 ft., plank dressed on three sides. 
It was held by three rings (70 ft. diameter) of rangers (8x8-in) 
encircling the pit ; which were held in line by 8 x 8-in. posts, 4 ft. 
long, spaced 5 ft. apart and bolted to the rangers. The rangers 
were 12 ft. long, mitered at the ends and with joints bolted. 
The cost of this timber work was as follows : 

10,000 ft. B. M., at ?10 $100.00 

Iron 30.00 

6 days carpenter, at $2.50 15.00 

12 days helper, at $1.00 12.00 

Total $157.00 

This labor cost includes framing and assembling the rings and 
braces, but not the driving of the sheeting. There were about 
6,000 ft. B. M. of rangers and braces, so that this framing and 
erecting cost $4.50 per M. 



796 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A ditch was dug all around the inside of the sheeting to lead the 
ground water to a sump whence it was raised by a plusometer at the 
rate of 450 gals, per min. 

By this style of circular ring bracing, not only was very little 
timber required (4 ft. B. M. per cu. yd. of pit enclosed by sheeting), 
but the pit was left entirelj' open. 

Cost of Dams Per Million Feet of Water Stored. — ^It is not un- 
usual for hydraulic engineers to compare the cost of small reser- 
voirs in terms of the cost per million gallons of water stored, and, in 
like manner, to compare large reservoirs or dams in terms of the 
cost per million cubic feet of water stored. The cost of small arti- 
ficial reservoirs, made by throwing up banks of earth excavated 
from the interior, can be compared in this way with some rough 
degree of accuracy, but a little consideration shows how absurd it 
is thus to compare large reservoirs made by building a dam across 
a natural valley. How much water a dam will impound depends 
far less upon the size, and therefore upon the cost, of the dam 
than upon the topography of the valley above the dam. The fol- 
lowing tabulation brings out this fact very clearly : 

Cost per 

Height Masonry 1,090,000 cu. ft. 

Dam. ft. cu. yds. Cost. stored. 

New Croton, N. Y 297 83.5,000 $7,600,000 $1,900 

Wachusett, Mass 207 280,000 2,000,000 238 

•Roosevelt, Ariz.- 280 350,000 3,850,000 63 

Shoshone, Wyo 308 69,000 1,000,000 50 

Pathfinder, Wyo 210 53,000 1,000,000 23 

Cross References on Dams and Reservoirs. — The following sec- 
tions of this book contain data on dams : Earth Excavation and 
Embankment, Stone Masonry, Concrete Construction. Consult the 
Index under Dams and under Reservoirs. 

Waterworks Valuation and Plant Depreciation — A vei'y com- 
plete discussion of this subject by Leonard Metcalf is given in 
Engineering-Contractino. Dec. 16 and 23, 1908, and Jan. 6 and 13, 
1909. Mr. Metcalf gives also an excellent compendium of legal de- 
cisions and a very full bibliography of articles bearing upon valu- 
ations. 

Figs. 29 and 30 give the depreciated value when estimated by 
the sinking fund formula of depreciation, for a discussion of which 
consult Section I, of this book. See the index under Depreciation. 

Table XVI gives the life and annual contributions to the sinking 
fund to cover depreciation. 

"Going Value" of Waterworks.— A (Kscussion of this subject by 
John W. Alvord, with data and illustrative diagrams, will be found 
in Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 4, 1909. 

A discussion of the subject by Chas. B Burdick is also given 
in Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 23, 1907. 

Life of Cast Iron Water Pipe. — Regarding the life of cast Iron 
water pipe, Mr. John W. Alvord says: 



WATER'IVORKS. 



r97 



"It is generally conceded that cast iron pipe of hard, light-gray, 
close-grained iron of even texture, properly coated with good 
preservatives, laid in ordinary soils and conveying water of average 
quality, has a life that we have as yet no reliable data to deter- 
mine, because a sufficient amount of it has not, as yet, lived its 
life, and we can only approximate what a fair average may be. The 
uncoated pipe first laid in England and this country about 100 
years ago (1803) are every now and then taken up and exam- 

Table XVI. 

Annual contribution to De- 
preciation Account or Sink- 
ing Fund in per cent of 
cost. 

General 
At 5 % annual rate approximate 
Useful life. sinking fund. results. 

Years.* Per cent. Per cent. 

Reservoirs 50-100 0.4777-0.0383 1/2-0 

Standpipes :i5- 40 l*. 0952-0. !5278 2 -1 

Masonry buildings 40-50 0.S27S-0.4777 1 - Mj 

Wooden buildings 20-50 3.0243-0.4777 3 -1 

Cast-iron pipe of large 

diameter 50-75 0.4777-0.1322 %-%: 

Cast-iron pipe of small 

diameter 20-40 3.0243-0.8278 3 -% 

Steel pipe 25- 50 2.0952-0.4777 2 - % 

Wood-stave pipe 20- 30 3.0243-1.5051 3 -2 

Wrought-iron service pipe.15- 30 4.6342-1.5051 5 -2 

Meters 20-30 3.0243-1.5051 3 -2 

Hydrants 40-50 0.8278-0.4777 1 -% 

Gates 40- 50 0.8278-0.4777 1 - % 

Pumping and auxiliary 

machinerv 20- 30 3.0243-1.5051 4 -2 

Steam engines 15- 25 4.6342-2.0952 5 -3 

Boilers 12-16 6.2825-4.2270 6 -4 

Electrical machinery 20- 30 3.0243-1.5051 4 -2 

Average for entire plant (gravity system) 1% to %% 

Average for entire plant (pumping system) 2% tol%% 



♦Except where subject to heavy deposit of silt. 

ined with the result that while always found to be filled with the 
result of oxidation and tuberculation to a serious degree the actual 
body of the iron, although somewhat brittle, does not seem to have 
been seriously diminished in thickness." 

"The coating process of Dr. Angus Smith was first introduced into 
this country in 1858, and by 1869 the method of coating by coal 
tar varnish was generally adopted, with great resulting benefit, pre- 
serving the life and carrying capacity of the cast iron pipe in a 
manner, and to an extent which, as has been before said, is still to 
be determined by future observations." 

Life of Pipe Wrought Iron Pipe, Lowell, Mass. — In the Proceed- 
ings of the American Water Works Association, 1894, page 181 et 
seq., are given some data as to the corrosion of iron and steel. An 
instance is cited of a wrought iron pipe, % in. thick, laid at the 
Merrimack Co.'s Mills, Lowell, Mass., in 1845. A piece was cut 



798 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




WATER-WORKS. 



799 




S » 



c- S o 5 ft 

^ aon^iatanoav pnnj SaiJiuig 



800 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

out in 1887, and it was evident that the pipe was good for another 
40 years. The outside and inside of the pipe had originally been 
coated with coal tar. The conditions of soil and water were ex- 
ceptionally favorable. 

Life of Pipe in Salty Soli. — In the Proceedings of the American 
Waterworks Association, 1899, page 103, Mr. S. Tomlinson says that 
a 32-in. cast iron pipe, laid in an embankment across land washed 
by the ocean tides, was badly corroded in 10 years, and after 30 
years is unfit for further use, in many places the iron being con- 
verted to oxide % to % in. in thickness, leaving a mere shell of 
solid iron. 

In the Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers (Great 
Britain), Vol. 143 (1901), p. 259, Mr. William Wark says that 
wrought iron service pipes lasted only 7 years at Hay, whereas such 
pipes were still in good condition after 27 years' service at Bath- 
hurst. The soil at Hay is of a light sandy nature, containing large 
quantities of salt. The soil at Bathhurst is of a rotten granite 
nature. Cast iron water mains at Hay show no signs of injury, 
but wrought iron gas mains lasted only 11 years. 

Life of Pipe, St. John, N. B. — Mr. Gilbert Murdoch gave, in 
1892, the following relative to the life of cast iron pipe at St. John, 
K. B. : 

A 4-in cast iron pipe, 33 yrs. old, buried in marsli mud, burst un- 
der a pressure of 65 lbs. per sq. in. The outside of the pipe had 
undergone a softening at the break, which was along some air cells 
in the body of the shell. 

A G-in pipe, 52 yrs. old, in soft, slaty rock failed. The pipe was 
as easily cut as plumbago. 

A 24-in. pipe, 36 yrs. old, in well drained, gravelly brick-clay, 
failed. 

The Life of Pipe and Appraisal of Syracuse Waterworks. — Mr. 
Stephen E. Babcock gives the following relative to the life of cast 
iron pipe. In 1891, in the city of Syracuse, N. Y., condemnation 
proceedings were undertaken preliminary to the purchase of tlie 
waterworks owned by a private company. The engineering experts 
for the water company dug up sections of pipe and tested it in the 
presence of the court. Uncoated cast iron pipe that had been laid 
40 years was found to be apparently as perfect as when first laid; 
it had become coated neatly and uniformly with a coating not ex- 
ceeding l/64th of an inch thick. It stood a pressure of 700 lbs. 
per sq. in. The water is unusually hard. Cement lined pipe (with 
a wrought iron core) was also dug up and tested, sizes being 4 to 
10-in. It stood 300 lbs. per sq. in., and where the cement was re- 
moved the iron appeared as perfect as when laid in 1862. 

Tlie experts for the city claimed that practically no value should 
be assigned to existing 4 in. and 6 in. pipes, as they were too small. 
In rebutal it was shown that the mileage of pipes of these sizes 
was as follows in different cities: 



WATER-WORKS. 801 

Per cent. 

Syracuse, N. Y ^z 

Rochester, N. Y 70 

TValthiim, Mass 81 

Fitehburgh, Mass 76 

Erie, Pa 90 

Washington, D. C 85 

Schenectady, N. Y 87 

Cincinnati, 6(j 

Binghamton, N. Y 74 

Port Huron, Mich 75 

As the reservoir had been built many years beiore, all records 
of the amount of excavation, etc., had been lost. The experts for 
the water company submitted evidence to show what similar reser- 
voirs had cost per million gallons of storage capacity, as being the 
only rational means of arriving at the value of this reservoir whose 
capacity was known. 

Estimated Depreciation of Water Pipe^ Los Angeles, Calif In 

estimating the depreciation of water pipes in Los Angeles. Calif.» 
a board of four engineers (Jas. D. Schuyler, A. L. Adams. A. H. 
Koebig and J. P. Lippincott) adopted the following rates of annual 
depreciation, for purposes of appraisal of present value : 

Cast iron pipe in good soil 1.25 

Cast iron pipe in poor soil 2.00 

Sheet iron pipe in good soil 4.00 

Sheet iron pipe in poor soil 6.77 

Wrought iron pipe in good soil 3.33 

Wrought iron pipe in poor soil 5.71 

These depreciations were applied to the cost of the pipe in place 
(including pipe, lead, labor of laying, removing and replacing pave- 
ment, etc.) Soils ranging from salty shales and alkaline adobe 
(clay) to heavy clay were classed as "poor," and the balance as 
"good." After deducting the above depreciation from the first cost, 
a further depreciation, called internal depreciation due to tubercu- 
lation. was calculated on those depreciated values and deduced 
therefrom. The annual internal depreciation was estimated as fol- 
lows : 

Per cent. 
Per year. 

Cast iron pipe, 4 in. and over 0.6 

Cast iron pipe, 3 in. for less than 10-yrs. of age... 2.0 

Cast iron pipe, 3 in. for over 10 jts. of age 1.0 

Sheet iron and steel 0.75 

Wrought iron, under 4 ins., for less than 10 yrs. of 

age 2.00 

Wrought iron, under 4 ins., for over 10 yrs. of age.. 1.00 
Wrought iron, 4 ijis 1-50 



SECTION VIII. 

SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS, 

General Considerations. — Trenches for sewers are usually much 
deeper than trenches for water pipes, because it is generally desir- 
able to~have a sewer deep enough to drain cellars and basements. 
In cities a common depth of trench is 8 to 11 ft. If the depth is 
more than about 6 ft., even in narrow trench work, men will be 
required on the surface to shovel the earth back from the edge of 
the trench after it has been cast up. In such cases always cast the 
earth onto plank, for reasons given in Section 2 on Earthwork. 
When the depth much exceeds 8 ft., it is advisable to cast the earth 
out of the trench in stages, using platforms about 6 ft. apart — or 
less if the earth is sloppy. Bear in mind that where the trench is 
a wide one, there is much handling of the earth after it reaches- 
the surface, both in stacking it up in pile and in moving it back 
into the trench ("backfilling") after the sewer has been laid. In 
large sewer construction there is more excavation than backfill, and 
the excess must be loaded and carted away. Each case must be 
estimated separately, which can be done with the data given in 
Section 2 on Earthwork, and with the data in this section and in 
the previous section on Waterworks. 

Deep trenching is beset with so many difficulties, such as the 
handling of unexpected bodies of water, the caving of banks even 
when well sheeted, and the like, that liberal estimates of cost should 
always be made. Then $7 to $10 a day should ordinarily be added 
for rental of a trench machine, for even where owned by the con- 
tractor a liberal allowance must be made for wear and tear and 
interest, since so much of the time the machine is ordinarily idle. 
The cost of the sheeting plank and bracing must be added, also that 
of pumping, if the soil is wet. In many localities glacial boulders 
are likely to be encountered, greatly delaying work and adding to 
the cost. 

Accidents to men are frequent — so much so in some cities that ac- 
cident insurance companies absolutely refuse to insure a sewer 
contractor's men. Aocident insurance is seldom less than 1% of the 
pay roll, even on safe work, and on sewer work it often runs up to 
several per cent. 

Cost of Sheetina at Peoria, III.— On a trench 13 ft. wide X 45 ft. 
deep, at Peoria, 111., sheeting in 16-ft. lengths cost as follows for 
labor : 

802 



I 



SEiyr.KS, COXDUITS .ixn DR.IIXS. 803 

2 men on top, at if 2 $4 

2 men setting sheeting, at $2.50 5 

8 men driving slieeting, at $1.50 12 

8 men pulling sheeting, at $1.50 12 • 

2 men moving lumber ahead, at $1.50 3 

Total daily wages of gang $36 

This gang sheeted 12 lin. ft. of trench per day at a cost of $3 
per lin. ft., all work being by hand; this is equivalent to 6% cts. 
per lin. ft. of trench for each foot of depth. If 2-in. sheet plank 
were used, there were 192 ft. B. M. of sheet plank per lin. ft. of 
trencli and probably 38 ft. B. M. of stringers and braces, say 230 
ft. B. M. per lin. ft. From which we see tliat driving and pulling 
sheeting, including bracing, cost for labor about $13 per M (= 1,000 
ft. B. M. ) at the rate of wages above given, wliich is a higla cost. 

The cost of exactly tlie same kind of work, using an Adams* 
trend! machine with steam power for driving and pulling the sheet- 
ing, was as follows : 

2 timber men on top, at $2 $4.00 

2 men setting, at $2.50 $5.00 

1 man operating driver 2.00 

2 helpers, at $1.50 3.00 

1 man pulling 2.00 

2 helpers, at $1.50 3.00 

1 engineer 2.09 

1 man moving lumber ahead 1.50 

Coal, oil, steam liose and repairs 2.50 

Total $25.00 

Twelve lineal feet of trench, 45 ft. deep, were timbered per day 
at this cost of $25, or at $2.08 per lin. ft., which is practically % the 
cost by hand above given, and in addition the wear of the sheet 
plank was less than with hand driving. 

The following cost of sheeting is for hand work, trench being 
12 ft. wide X 35 ft. deep : 

2 timber men on top, at $2 $4.00 

1 man setting 2.50 

6 men driving, at $1.50 9.00 

4 men pulling, at $1.50 6.00 

1 man moving lumber 1.50 

Total $23.00 

At this cost, 13 lin. ft. of trench were slieeted per day, or at the 
rate of $1.77 per lin. ft. 

Smaller trenches, 8 ft. to 16 ft. deep in sand, cost from 10 to 25 
cts. per lin. ft. for labor of slieeting with 2 x 7-in. hemlock. String- 
ers in trenches 35 ft. or more deep were 8x8 ins. yellow pine, witli 
6 X 8-in. white pine braces. In trendies of less depth 6 x 6-in. hem- 
lock stringers and braces were useu. The above costs do not in- 
clude wear and tear on timber. Some sewer contractors figure on 
using hemlock sheeting about 4 times, with hand-driving, before it 
is worn out. 



804 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Pumping Water From Trenches. — The cost of pumping 
water from trenches is given by Mr. Eliot C. Clarke as follows for 
three kinds of wet trenches, namely, "slightly wet," "quite wet" and 
"very wet." 

In a "slightly wet" trench one hand pump was used. 

In a "quite wet" trench one steam pump and a line of 8-in. pipe 
was used, sumps or wells being 500 ft. apart ; the rent of this plant 
is rated at ?3 a day; the engineman $2.50 a day; the price of fuel 
is not given. 

In a "very wet" trench two steam pumps and wells every 250 ft. 
were used ; three enginemen. 

The cost of pumping per lineal foot of trench was as follows: 

Depth of trench, ft 5 10 15 20 25 

Shghtly wet, cost per ft $0.06 $0.07 $0.10 $0.12 $0.18 

Quite wet, cost per ft 0.71 0.73 0.76 1.04 1.27 

Very wet, cost per ft 1.17 1.19 1.26 1.64 2.26 

Cost of Trenching With Trench Excavators. — Mr. Ernest McCul- 
lough gives the following data relating to work done by the "Chicago 
Trench Excavator" — a machine made by the Municipal Engineering 
and Contracting Co. 

The machine consists of an endless chain provided with cutters 
and scrapers which deliver the earth onto a traveling belt, the ex- 
cavators and conveyors being carried by a four-wheeled traction 
engine, which furnishes the power. These machines are rented or 
sold to contractors. 

In laying 7% miles of pipe sewers at Marshfield, Wis., the daily 
cost of operating the machine and laying pipe was as follows : 

Operator of trench digger $ 3.00 

Engineman of trench digger 2.75 

Fireman of trench digger 2.25 

Man trimming bottom of trench 2.25 

2 men bracing trench with plank 4.00 

2 pipe layers, at $2.50 5.00 

2 men furnishing pipe and mortar 4.00 

2 men tamping earth around pipe 4.00 

1 man shoveling earth down to the tampers. 2.00 

2 teams and drivers scraping backfill 7.50 

4 men holding the scrapers 8.00 



Total labor per 10-hr. day $44.75 

About %-ton of coal was used daily. 

The trench was 27 ins. wide and averaged 7 ft. deep. The best 
day's run was 850 lin. ft. of trench, or 500 cu. yds. in 10 hrs., in dry 
clay containing no stones. On another day nearly 500 ft. were run 
in spite of many stops to blast out boulders. A fair average was 
400 to 500 lin. ft., or 300 cu. yds., per day. Due to the jarring of 
the ground by the machine it is necessary to brace the trench. 

(I am informed by Mr. McCullough that records of 650 cu. yds. 
per day have recently been made with this machine.) 



SEWERS. COXDUITS AND DRAINS. »05 

These trench excavators are made in four sizes to excavate from 
14 ins. to GO ins. in widtli and up to 20 ft. in depth. 

/s confirming tliese data of Mr. McCullough's, the following 
records given by Mr. B. Ewing are of value : In the summer of 
1904, many miles of pipe sewers were built at Wheaton, 111., by con- 
tract. Two Chicago Excavators were used, cutting a trench 2Vi ft. 
wide, 7 to 18 ft. deep. One niacliine would excavate 750 lin. ft. of 
trench 7 ft. deep through hard clay mixed with small stones, in a 
10-hr. day. In cutting treiwhes 15 to 18 ft., a machine would 
average 150 to 200 lin. ft. per day, depending upon how much 
bracing was necessary. 

See page 651 for data on the cost of trenching with a Buckeye 
Traction Ditcher. 

Cost of Excavating With Trench Machines. — A trench machine, 
as the term is here used, does not mean an earth digger, but an 
earth conveyor. The Carson trench machine is a good example of 
the type. It consists essentially of a single rail track on which 
a trolley travels, being hauled back and forth by the cables of a 
hoisting engine. The trolley carries the bucliet into which the earth 
or rock has been loaded by hand. Tlie single rail track is sup- 
ported at intervals by a light trestle made of bents that are A- 
shaped. 

The legs of the A-bents are provided with wheels at the bottom 
riding on a track straddling the trench, and the whole trestle can 
be moved forward in 5 to 10 mins., from time to time, as the work 
advances, without taking the trestle apart, unless a curve has to 
be rounded. Tliese A-bents are of 6 x 8-in. spruce, 20 ft. high and 
have a spread of IS ft. at the bottom. The trestle is 288 ft. long, 
and buckets of 1 cu. yd. each are handled. The crew and the cost 
of operation are the same as for a cableway. 

Mr. A. W. Byrne states that in completing one 4,000-ft. section 
of the Metropolitan sewer system, at Boston, he used the follow- 
ing force : 

1 engineman I 3.00 

1 loclvman 2.00 

1 dumper 1.50 

8 shovelers, at ?1.75 14.00 

2 bracers, at $2.50 5.00 

2 tenders, at ?2.00 4.00 

4 plank drivers, at $2.00 8.00 

2 men cutting down planks, at $2.00 4.00 

8 men pulling planks, etc,, at $1.75 14.00 

Total $55.50 

The force working in a trench 9 ft. wide x 20 to 30 ft. deep aver- 
aged 64 lin. ft. a week in "boiling sand," the pressure of which 
would break 6 x 8-in. stringers 2% ft. apart, and 192 ft. a weelv 
in gravel and coarse sand, which is equivalent to 70 to 110 cu. yds. 
a day in the running sand, and 200 cu. yds. in good ground, or at 
a cost ranging from 80 to 25 cts. cu. yd. A steam pump running 
at a cost of $10 a day was also requii'ed, and about %-ton of coal 



80G HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was used by the trench machine. The work mentioned was done 
after the trench machine was set up, and tlie gang well organized. 
Another contractor states tliat it took liim two days to dismantle a 
machine, move it 1,000 ft. and set up again. 

The Adams trench machine consists of a series of wrought-iron fl- 
shaped bents, tine lower feet of tlie fl being provided with wheels 
running on rails laid eacli side of the trench. These n bents car- 
ried two rails, on each side, beneath the top of the bent, and a car 
ran along these rails ; this car is pulled back and forth by cables 
from a hoisting engine at one ertd of the trench ; and the same 
engine raises buckets up to the car where they are gripped. Work- 
ing in sand at Peoria, 111., the following was the cost in a trench 
13 ft. wide X 45 ft. deep : 

Per day. 

18 men loading buckets, at $1.50 $27.00 

1 man operating bucket car 2.00 

1 foreman 3.00 

1 engineman 2.50 

1 waterboy 50 

Coal, oil, etc 1.00 

Total per day $36.00 

This force excavated 284 buckets of 1 1/9 cu. yds. each, of 316 
cu. yds., daily at a cost of 11.4 cts. per cu. yd., as the average of 
1 month. 

The same gang operating in a trench, 12 ft. wide x 33 ft. deep, 
averaged 288 buckets a day, at a cost of 12.5 cts. per cu. yd. Most 
of the excavated material was dumped directly from the buckets as 
backfill into the trench where the sewer was completed. 

A Moore Hoister and Conveyor, which differed only in having the 
bucket car travel on top of the bent, instead of below, required one 
more man handling the buckets, making the daily force account $38. 
In a trench 12 ft. wide x 35 ft. deep the Moore machine daily 
averaged 286 buckets of 1 cu. yd. each, at a cost of 13.3 cts. per 
cu. yd. 

These records for Adams and Moore machines show unusually low 
costs. They should not be taken as averages, but rather as show- 
ing the very best that can be done under favorable conditions. Mr. 
A. D. Thompson is my authority for these cost records. The cost 
of sheeting these trenches is given on pages 435 and 436. 

Cost of Trench Excavation in Massachusetts, Using a Carson 
IVlachlne. — Mr. H. H. Carter gives the following account of work 
done by contract in Massachusetts in 1884: A trench 2,100 ft. 
long, 9% ft. deep and 20 ft. wide was dug for a conduit along the 
shore of a pond and about 30 ft. away from the water's edge. The 
water in the pond was 8 ft. higher than the bottom of the trench, 
but most of the water that entered the trench seeped in from the 
side farthest away from the pond. The water was handled by two 
Pulsometer Steam Pumps. A large quantity flowed in at some 
places. All water was pumped from sumps located ahead of the 



SHIVERS. COMJUITS AXD DRAIXS. 807 

laj-ing of the brick conduit. No underdralns were left under the 
ttnished conduit. The material excavated was variable. The 
greater part of the conduit was built on a hard, coarse sand and 
gravel bottom ; but for several liundred feet quicksand was en- 
countered in the bottom. A Carson trencli machine was used for 
10 weelcs. The total excavation was 15,100 cu. yds., or 7.2 cu. yds. 
per lin. ft. of trench. The backlill amounted to only 1.5 cu. yds. 
per lin. ft. of trench. The itemized cost was as follows for 2,100 
ft., or 15,100 cu. yds. : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, 66 days, at ?4.00 ? 264.00] $0,044 

Foreman, 159 days, at $2.50 397. 50j 

Engineman, 123 days, at .?2.50 307.50 0.020 

Fireman, 147 days, at .n.75 257.25 0.016 

Pumpman, 94 days, at $3.00 282.00] 0.026 

Pumpman, 56 days, at $1.75 98.00J - 

Laborer, 2,400 days, at .^-25 . 3,000.00 0.200 

Laborer, 2,200 days, at $1.50 3,300.00 0.220 

Bracer, 366 days, at $1.75 640.50 0.042 

Carpenter, 7 days, at $2.00 14.00 0.001 

Horse and cart, 88 days, at $4.00... 352.00 0.023 

Horse and cart, 10 days, at $3.15 31.50 0.002 

Scraper, 71 days, at $5.00 355.00 0.024 

Carson machine, 10 weeks, at $45.00...... 450.00 0.030 

Engines, 103 days, at $2.00 . ...... 206.00 0.014 

Boiler, 129 days, at $1.00 129.00 0.009 

Pumps (two), 199 days, at $0.80. . c. . . . . . o . 159.20 0.011 

Derricks, 72 days, at $1.00 72.00 0.005 

Tools 71.00 0.005 

Coal, 80 tons, at $6.00 480.00 0.032 

Sheeting, loss on, at $14 per M. 200.00 0.013 

Iron, at 3 cts. per lb 15.00 0.001 

Miscellaneous 26.00 0.002 

Total $11,107.45 $0,740 

The backfilling and embankment cost is included in the above cost 
of 74 cts. per cu. yd. of trench excavation. Properly it sliould be 
separated, as follows: 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavating trench $3.20 

Bracing trench, labor 0.30 

Bracing trench, lumber 0.10 

Pumping trench 0.45 

Backfilling 0.71 

Embankment 0.69 

Miscellaneous 0.28 

Total, per lin. ft $5.73 

Deducting the backfilling and enioankment, we have left $4.33 
per lin. ft., or 60 cts. per cu. yd. of trench. The backfilling itself 
cost 18 cts, per cu. yd. backfilled. 

This same trench work was extended across a pond that had been 
filled with an embankment of gravel and sand from a trestle. The 
trench was excavated in the center of this embankment, and was 18 
ft. wide, with sheet piles on both sides, and its bottom was 6 ft. 
below the level of tlie pond. Tlie water was handled by two pul- 
someters and one Andrews pump. The trench was 1,550 ft. long, 



808 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

containing 8,070 cu. yds. and took 125 days to excavate. The item- 
ized cost was as follows: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, 35 days, at $3.50 $ 122.50 $0,015 

Foreman, 150 days, at $2.50 375.00 0.047 

Engineman, 146 days, at $2.50 465.00 0.058 

Pumpman, 286 days, at $1.75 500.50 0.062 

Laborer, 400 days, at $1.65 680.00 0.085 

Laborer, 460 days, at $1.50 690.00 0.086 

Laborer, 2,500 days, at $1.25 3,125.00 0.383 

Bracer, 255 days, at $1.75 446.25 0.056 

Horse and cart, 12 days, at $3.15 37.80 0.004 

Engines, 125 days, at $2.00 250.00 0.031 

Boiler, 125 days, at $1.00 125.00 0.015 

Pulsometers, 223 days, at $0.80 178.40 0.022 

Pump (Andrews), 67 days, at $2.00 134.00 0.017 

Derricks, 125 days, at $1.00 125.00 0.015 

Tools '57.00 0.007 

Coal, 52 tons, at $6.00 312.00 0.039 

Spruce, 49 M left in, at $14.00 686.00 0.086 

Miscellaneous 35.00 0.004 

Total (1,550 lin. ft.) $8,344.45 $1,032 

This cost of $1.03 per cu. yd. includes some but not all of the 
backfilling. The cost per lin. ft. was distributed as follows : 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavating $3.25 

Bracing, labor 0.29 

Bracing, lumber 0.45 

Pumping 0.72 

Backfilling and embankment 0.66 

Total $5.37 

Deducting the backfilling we have $4.71 per lin. ft., which is 
equivalent to 90 cts. per cu. yd. of trench. The backfilling itself 
cost 19 cts. per cu. yd. backfilled. The contractor's price was less 
than half what the work cost him, but it appears evident that he 
did not manage his work very well. 

Cost of Excavating With a Potter Trench Machine. — The follow- 
ing data were published in Engineering-Contracting, April, 1906, 
and January 28, 1908. Fig. 1 shows a Potter trench machine, made 
by the Potter Mfg. Co., Indianapolis, Ind. The machine consists 
of a track supported by bents that span the trench. On this track 
travels a carriage having drums for hoisting the buckets of earth 
from the trench. The track is ordinarily 270 ft. long, the hoisting 
engine being located at one end. Two men ride on the carriage to 
handle the buckets. Buckets loaded by hand are lifted from the 
trench by the machine and carried back and dumped on the com- 
pleted sewer for backfill. 

Certain sections of an intercepting sewer were built by day labor ] 
in Chicago, during 1901-1903. A Potter trench machine 370 ft. 
long was used. An ordinary double drum hoisting engine wasj 
placed at the front end of the machine. By means of two cables 
and a series of drum sheaves, the engine hoisted the bucket and 
moved the carrier along the trackway as required. The entire ma- 



SEIVERS. COXDUITS JXD DR.IIXS. 



80<J 



chine, including the engine, was supported on traclt on each side of 
the trench. After the traclt was built, 5 mins. was ample time in 
which to move the whole machine 48 ft., that amount of trench 
being worked at a time. Tlie Potter trench machine was used to 
remove the clay and about 2 ft. of overlying sand. 

In the excavation six %-yd. buckets were used, four in the trench 
and two on the carrier. Two empty buckets were placed in ad- 
joining sections and two full ones removed on each trip. The 
trench machine crew consisted of the following : One hoisting 
engineman, one fireman, and two carrier men. The number of 
bottom men or diggers ranged from 17 to 21, depending on the 




yery'Herrd Blue CJay 



Fig. 1. Trench Machine. 



kind and amount of excavation. In addition, the track supporting 
the machine was built by a gang of timber men, whose other duties 
Were the removal of braces, and miscellaneous work. 

The rates of wages of the trench machine crew were as follows : 

Rate. Total. 

1 foreman $4.00 $4.00 

2 enginemen 4.80 9.60 

1 fireman 2.75 2.75 

2 carrier men 3.75 7.50 

17 bottom men 3.25 55.25 

Total daily labor cost $78.10 

Note that the wages of laborers were very high. 

One ton of coal, costing $2.90, per day was used; adding this to 



810 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the total labor cost and we get $81. About 190 cu. yds. were 
excavated each day, so the cost, per cu. yd., was 40.2 cts. per cu. 
yd., exclusive of plant rental, and cost of laying track. 

During 1906, there were 2,440 lin. ft. of concrete sewer (51^ ft. 
dlam.) built by contract for the city of South Bend, Ind. 

The section of the city through which this sewer was built was 
flat and marshy. The material, in consequence of this, was loose 
black soil for a depth of about 4 ft. Then sand and gravel were 
encountered, and for the last 4 or 5 ft. of the trench this material 
was water soaked. This made pumping necessary in the excava- 
tion work and also during the progress of the concrete construction. 

The trench was lOiA ft. wide, and 18 ft. was the average depth. 
This gave 7 cu. yds. of excavation per lin. ft. of trench. Shoring 
of the sides of the trench was necessarj'. The first 2 or 3 ft. of the 
trench was excavated either by men casting the material from the 
trench or was plowed and moved with scrapers. 

After this much excavation was done a Potter trench machine, 
manufactured by the Potter Manufacturing Co., Indianapolis, Ind., 
was installed and used for all the work of excavation and for 
handling the concrete. 

The trench machine was used to excavate from 5 to 6 cu. yds. 
per lin. ft., but, as no separate record was kept of the first excava- 
tion done, the entire cost of the excavation is figured as done with 
the machine. 

It is stated that the carriage that handled the buckets could make 
a round trip in one minute, including the time of lowering and 
hoisting the buckets. The following data were furnished by Mr. 
W. A. Morris, Asst. City Engineer of South Bend. 

On the work described it was the custom to keep about 200 ft. of 
the trench open at one time. The material was taken from in 
front of the sewer and dumped on the completed portion. The 
excavation on top was dry, but as it neared the bottom, as pre- 
viously stated, water was encountered. The following system of 
drainage was used. The water came from the gravel and sand. 
A sub-drain pipe was laid of second class and cull pipe, the bot- 
tom of this being laid 30 ins. below the grade of the invert of the 
sewer. The joints were loosely caulked with tufts of sod in order 
to prevent the fine sand from entering the pipe. Clean gravel of 
medium size covered the pipe. Tliis permitted water to enter the 
pipe, through which it flowed to a sump at the lower end of the 
new work. This sump was 18 ins. below the grade of the drain 
pipe, and the water was pumped from the sump by a 6-in. rotary 
pump over a dam into the old portion of the work. 

This drained the bottom of the trench so that the concrete was 
readily laid, and by keeping the pump going continually, allowed 
the concrete to set without being injured by the water rising in 
the trench. This pumping and drainage work is included in the 
cost of excavation but a part of it could properly have been 
charged against the concrete work. 



SEWERS. COXDUITS AND DRAINS. 811 

The wages paid for a 10-hr. day were as follows: 

Engineer on trench macliine $3. 00 

Fireman on trench macliine 1.65 

Engineer for pumping 2.00 

Fireman 2.50 

Carpenter 2.50 

Laborers 1.86 

The cost of the various work per lin. ft. of trench was a? 
follows : 

Pipe for sub-drain $0.33 

Labor laying this pipe 0.35 

Pumping water 0.45 

Excavation and buclitilling 2.80 

Setting and pulling slioring 1.04 

Allowance for tools and gen. ex 25 

Total per lin. ft ?5.22 

With 7 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of trench this makes a cost per cu. 
yd. of excavation for each of tlie above items as follows : 

Pipe for sub-drain ?0.047 

Labor laying this pipe 0.050 

Pumping water 0.065 

Excavation and backfilling 0.400 

Shoring 0.150 

Tools and general expenses 0.035 

Total per cu. yd $0,747 

The drainage, it will be noticed, cost a little more than 20 per 
cent of the total. The cost of excavation and back filling, and oi 
slioring and filling the street piles for a trench as deep as this is 
quite reasonable. 

Cost of Excavating With Potter Trenching IViaciiine for l6-ft. 
Sewer.* — The final section of the conduit work proper for the Law- 
rence avenue sewer at Chicago, 111., includes the construction of 
1,160 lin. ft. of 5-ring, 16 ft. diameter brick conduit from the north 
branch of the Chicago river to the section completed in 1901 oy 
Farley & Green. The sewer will empty in the north branch, which 
is being dredged to a width of 90 ft. • ultimately this width will be 
increased to 180 ft. 

The excavation was done by the open cut method, the width of 
the trench being 21 ft. and the average depth being 30.5 ft. The 
materials encountered in the excavation consist of a top layer of 
black soil, tlien come about 15 ft. of soft blue clay, 6 to 8 ft. of 
stiff blue clay, 1 ft. of sandy loam and about 2 ft. of hard blue 
clay. This latter was so hard in places that its removal was 
facilitated by "shooting." 

The first 16 to 18 ft. of excavatior was done with the aid of skips 
and a derrick of the Kearnes type, having a 5 5 -ft. boom and 
equipped with a 7 x 10 double drum hoisting engine. The derrick 
is so arranged that the boom can swing in a half circle on either 
side of the trench. The framework carrying the turntables span- 
ning the trench rests on shoe timbers, these in turn resting on 
rollers. A runway is built ahead. of these rollers, and the derrick 



*Eng\neering-Contracting, Oct. 9, 1907. 



812 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

is pulled ahead by means of ropes wound round the nigger head 
of the engine and single and double blocks. The skips are of 1 cu. 
j'd. capacity, were filled by hand shoveling, lifted by the derrick 
and swung to one side of the trench, the spoil being used for filling 
low places, or later for completing the backfilling. As the excava- 
tion proceeds, a 2 -in. plank sheeting is placed and carried down to 
a depth of about 14 ft., 8 x 10-ln. timber spaced 20 ft. centers being 
used for bracing. 

A Potter trenching machine followed the derrick and skips, and 
was used in carrying down the excavation to the required depth. 
Six % cu. yd. capacity buckets are used with this machine, there 
always being four buckets in the trench being filled, while the 
remainder are being carried back on the carriage and dumped on 
the completed brick work. The hardest part of the excavation was 
done with this machine, the clay being sticky and tenacious and 
coming away in hard lumps. An average of 175 to 200 cu. yds. 
was excavated each day with this machine. 

The wages per 8-hour day and number of men employed in ex- 
cavating with the Potter trenching machine were about as follows : 

Per day. Total. 

Engineer $6.00 $ 6.00 

Fireman 2.50 2.50 

1 man on carriage 2.50 2.50 

1 man on carriage 3.25 3.25 

20 bottom men 2.75 55.00 

1 man on dump 2.75 2.75 

Foreman 3.50 3.50 

Total $75.50 

One-half ton of coal was consumed each day by the machine, 
allowing $2.50 for this and assuming that the rent of the machine 
was $125 per month ($4.80 per day) the total cost per 8-hour day 
would be $82.80. On the basis that 175 cu. yds. of material was 
excavated each day, the cost would be about 47 cts. per cubic yard. 
The bricklayers follow the trenching machine, six masons work- 
ing to a shift. About 1,700 brick were used per foot of sewer, the 
average rate of progress being 16 ft. of sewer completed per day. 
This means that one bricklayer puts in place 4,500 brick per day, 
at a cost for his labor, in the wages at $6 per 8 hours, of $1.33 per 
thousand of brick, or about $2.65 per cubic yard of masonry. This, 
of course, does not include bricklayers' helpers, cost of materials 
or centers. 

The work, which was completed recently, was done by the 
American Engineering & Construction Co. of Chicago, of which 
Mr. W. A. Shaw is president. 

Cost of Excavating With Trench Machine, — In Engineering Con- 
tracting, April, 1906, the method of excavating a sewer in Chicago 
with a Potter trench machine is illustrated and described. The 
machine was 370 ft. long, and was moved forward 48 ft. at a 
time, only 5 minutes being required to make a move. The crew 
digging and operating the machine was : 



SEIVERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 813 

Per day, 

1 foreman $ 4.00 

2 enginemen at $4.80 9.60 

1 tireman 2.75 

2 currier men at $3.75 7.50 

17 bottom men at $3.25 55.25 

Total labor $78.10 

1 ton coal 2.90 

Total, 190 cu. yds. at 40.2 cts $81.00 

Note that the laborers were paid very high wages. They were 
working for tlie city. 

Cost of Trenching by Cableways. — A cableway consists essentially 
of a main cable suspended between two towers, and serving as a 
track for the trolley carrying the loaded bucket, which is pulled 
back and forth by small cables from a stationary hoisting engine. 
The following data will give a good idea of what can be done with a 
cableway. 

Parallel with a railroad track a trench 14 ft. wide by IS ft. deep 
was dug in eartli slightly more compact than "average." A Lam- 
bert cableway with towers 400 ft. apart was used, and it delivered 
the buckets to a chute that discharged into railroad cars alongside. 
The writer's record of cost was as follows : 

Per day. 

30 men loading buckets, at $1.50 $45.00 

1 sig-nalman (signaling engineman), at 

$1.75 1.75 

1 man hooking buckets to cable's trolley, 

at $1.75 1.75 

1 man dumping buckets, at $1.75 1.75 

4 men driving slieet plank and bracing, 

at $1.50 6.00 

5 men spreading earth in cars and moving 
cars, at $1.50 7.50 

1 engineman . . . . ; 3.00 

1 fireman o 1.75 

1 waterboy 1.00 

1 foreman 4.00 

Total $73.50 

The output was 260 buckets in 10 hrs., each bucket holding 1% cu. 
yds. of loose earth, which was probably not much more than 1 cu. 
yd. measured in cut. The wages and coal amounted to $76 a day. 
Hence, not including the cost of timber sheeting, nor the hauling 
and unloauing of cars, the cost of excavation was about 30 cts. per 
cu. yd. There was no backfilling, as the trench was for a retaining 
wall. When the bucket was traveling 360 ft. from pit to dump, the 
following time was required for each round trip : 

Seconds. 

Raising bucket 15 

Moving bucket 360 ft 35 

Dumping bucket 25 

Returning bucket 35 

Lowering bucket 15 

Changing buckets 15 

Total 140 



814 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Almost 5 sees, could be saved on each of these six items if every- 
thing went well, but with the ordinary slight delays the above is 
a fair average for each round trip — tnat is 2% mins. A cable- 
way may be used to advantage in pulling sheet planking, and one 
2 X 10-in. plank buried 16 ft. in the earth can be pulled in 1 min., 
thus making the cost of timber removal merely nominal. In pull- 
ing the plank use a piece of 1 x 3-in. iron bent into a U-shape and 
with a ring welded to one leg of the U. It clings to the plank 
even though it is not held by a set screw or the like. 

To move one of these cableways takes a gang of 15 men three 
Says if they are "green" at the work, two days if they are used to 
it. The anchorage for the main cable is made by digging a trench 
5 or 6 ft. deep and 16 ft, long, in which a log 16 or 18 ins. in diam- 
eter and 15 ft. long is laid, and the cable carried around its center. 
A short narrow ti'ench leads off from the main trench so as to give 
a clear way for the cable to pass to the top of the tower. The 
main trench is filled with stones carefully laid over the log, and on 
top of the ground over the log is built a pile of stones 6 ft. high x 
12 X 12 ft. To move all this rock for the anchors, to move the 
engine, towers, cables, etc., and set up again will seldom cost less 
than $50, and frequently costs ?75, to say nothing of the lost time. 
If this cost is added to the cost of excavating the earth in a trench 
370 ft. long, it will amount to several cents per cu. yd. Thus if the 
trench is only 6 ft. wide x 9 ft. deep, there will be 740 cu. yds. in 
370 ft. of trench, and if it costs $74 to move the cableway, we have 
10 cents per cu. yd. of trenching chargeable to the cableway mov- 
ing, besides the cost of excavation and backfill. For deeper and 
wider trenches this cost of moving, being distributed over a greater 
yardage, becomes a comparatively small item. Each case must be 
treated as a separate problem, in ascertaining the cost. 

The following data have been obtained from The Carson Trench 
Machine Co., of Charlestown, Boston, Mass., makers of the Carson- 
Lidgerwood cableway much used on the Rapid Transit Subway 
New York City: 

Two A-shaped bents or towers, 20 to 35 ft. high, and 200 to 300 
ft. apart, support the 11/2 -in. cable along which the bucket travels. 
A hoisting engine at one end with two 7 x 10-in. cylinders and 
capable of lifting 5,000 lbs., raises and transports the buckets at a 
speed of 440 ft. a minute, or 5 miles an hour. 

Aside from the men required to fill the buckets, the force re- 
quired consists of an engineman, a fireman, a signalman, and a 
dumpman ; and % to 1/2 -ton of coal is daily consumed. On a sewer 
in Orange, N. J., 44 buckets (1 cu. yd.) were handled per hour 
on an average, 60 being the maximum. The output depends upon 
the number of men digging, and the character of the material, but 
250 cu. yds. a day may be taken as a good output. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 815 

The following coots are given in letters to the Carson Trench 
Machine Co. 

Mr. Franlv P. Davis, C. E., gives the following for a sewer in 
Washington, D. C. : Width of trench, 18 f t. ; depth at which cable- 
Avay began work, 15 ft. ; distance of travel of 1 cu. yd. bucket, 
150 f t. ; number of trips per hour, 35 ; hours per day, 8 ; material, 
cemented gravel. Cost : 

Engineman ? 2.00 

Fireman 1.25 

Signalman 1.00 

2 dumpers, at $1 2.00 

Coal, oil and waste 1.50 

Interest and maintenance (estimated).... 7.00 

$14.75 
30 men picking and shoveling 30.00 

Total for 280 cu. yds $44.75 

Cost of picking, shoveling, hoisting 15 ft. and conveying 150 ft. 
to wagons, 16 cts. cu. yd. (Note that the wages were very low.) 
Bracing and sheeting was going on at the same time ; the men did 
not inow they were being timed. 

James Pilkington, of New York, says: "I have excavated and re- 
filled 250 cu. yds. in 10 hours at an expense of 15 cts. per yard. 
For rock excavation the cableway has no equal. I have taken the 
machine down and moved 250 ft., and put up, and was in working 
order in three hours and fifty minutes." This is unusually fast and 
indicates that Mr. Pilkington. did not raise his towers by "main 
force and awkwardness." 

Cost of Sewer Trench and Back Filling. — The city of Holyoke, 
Mass., built a system of sewers during 1908. The main sewers ai-e 
39 ins. and 54 ins. These are built of concrete blocks, tliere being 
1,233 lin. ft. of them. The sewers were built by contract, but the 
excavation and backfilling was done by day labor, under the direc- 
tion of the city engineer. 

One trench was dug 14 ft. deep and about 4% ft. wide, through 
sand and clay. The material was thrown on the side of the trench 
and used for backfilling. The following wages were paid for an 
8-hr. day : 

Foreman $3.50 

Laborers 2.00 

There were excavated from this trench 2% cu. yds. per lin. ft. 
The cost per cu. yd. was $1.21, giving a cost per lin. ft. of $2.82. 

The second trench was 14 ft. deep and about 6 ft. wide, the ma- 
terial being the same, mainly sand and clay. There were 3.11 cu. 
yds. of excavation per lin. ft. The cost of excavating and back- 
filling this trench was $1.25 per cu. yd., malting a cost per lin. ft. 
of $3.90. All the excavation and backfilling was done by hand. 

These high costs show how inefl!icient is the day laborer when 
working in the employ of a city instead of a contractor. 



816 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Excavating Trench With Orange Peel Bucket.— •In Bn- 
gineeriiig-Contracting, April, 1906, a detailed description is given 
of the plant and methods used in building a large sewer in Chicago 
by city forces. For part of the work a 1 cu. yd. orange peel 
bucket was used. A traveling derrick, on rollers, was used. It 
was designed to swing in a full circle. The crew was : 

Per day. 

1 engineman $ 4.80 

1 fireman 2.50 

1 signal man 3.25 

1 powder man 3.25 

2 laborers at $3.25 6.50 

Total per day $20.30 

Under ordinai'y conditions, the orange-peel bucket excavated 
about 450 cu. yds. a day, all earth being dumped on a spoil bank 
at one side. 

On the assumption that 450 cu. yds. were excavated per day, 
the labor cost was 4.5 cts. per cu. yd. About 50 lbs. of dynamite 
and % ton of coal were used each eight-hour day. The cost of the 
dynamite was $7.50 and the coal cost $3 per ton, making the 
total cost for dynamite and coal $9.75. The total cost per day 
for excavating thus was $30.05 ; and the cost per cubic yard was 
6.6 cts., exclusive of the wear and tear on the machine. 

In this excavation the swinging derrick with the orange-peel 
bucket could be worked to better advantage than a steam shovel, 
inasmuch as it could work between 'the braces, which were 11 ft. 
centers. The bracing was placed as the excavation proceeded, and 
when the trench excavation was completed, the braces were all in 
place. By the use of the derrick the excavated material could be 
deposited far enough from the trench so as not to necessitate 
rehandling. In the case of a steam shovel it would have been 
necessary first to put in a temporary bracing, and a permanent 
bracing afterwards. Also, the boom of a steam shovel would not 
be long enough to deposit the excavated matter the necessary 
distance from the trench. 

Cost of Sewer Trenciiing Using a Derrick.* — The trenching was 
done for a trunk sewer constructed at Big Rapids, Mich. The 
trench was 4 ft. wide and varied from 14 ft. 2 ins. to 17 ft. 3 ins. 
deep. A 15-in. pipe sewer was laid in the trench. A length of 
1,000 ft. of sewer was constructed. The material was gravel and 
boulders. As much as 3 cords of stone in 400 ft. of trench were 
removed, many of the boulders required a 3,000-lb. chain fall to 
handle them. In addition most of the stone lay from 12 to 16 ft. 
deep, which made it very difficult to handle them between the 
braces. The gravel was treacherous and hard to hold, requiring 
two and sometimes thi'ee sections of sheeting and three and four 
stringers to hold it. 



^Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 8, 1909. 



SEirERS. LOXDUJTS .IXD DRAIXS. 817 

The first l to 6 ft. of the trench was excavated by means of a 
slush scrapor fitted with inside ears and bail so tliat it would tut 
vertical sides without the use of shovel or pick. A team and driver 
at $3.75 per day did all this digging and also all filling. The gang 
employed and the wages per day wore as follows : 

Item. Per day. 

1 foreman at '?2 if J.OO 

1 scraper team and driver at .fS.To 3.7.') 

1 man lioldin.i?- scraper at $1.50 1.50 

1 man liumping sciaper at $1.50 1.50 

2 men pulling sheeting and carrying it ahead at 
$1.50 3.00 

1 man setting top section of sheeting -at $1.50... i.5fi 

1 man tending derrick at $1.50 1.50 

1 horse and diiver on haul line at $2.50 2.50 

4 men filling 2 budgets at $1.50 6.00 

1 man laying pipe at $2 2.00 

1 pipelayer's helper at $1.50 1.50 

Total $26.75 

This gang completed from -16 to 54 ft. of sewer per day; this 
gives a labor cost of 58.2 cts. to 49.5 cts. per lin. ft. of sewer. 

The derrick used on this work was a No. 1 Parker derrick made 
by the Parker Hoist & Machine Co.. Chicago, 111. Regarding the 
service of this derrick the contractor, Mr. D. J, Shafer, Big Rapids, 
Mich., says : 

"In speaking of the derrick I can say that it reduced the cost 
of my ditch from 78 cts. per lin. ft. to 59 cts. per lin. ft. As soon 
as I put the derrick on the job I cut my crew from 26 and 28 men 
down to 16 men and dug more trench with much more ease than I 
did with the 2S men. The buckets held about 1/6 cu. yd. and 
with common work and 4 men filling buckets, 1 man dumping 
buckets, 1 man on the machine, with 1 man and horse, would 
handle 61 to 68 buckets of dirt every hour for 10 hours 
each day. In regard to moving the derrick, will say it never 
took us over 7 mins. to pull up stakes, move ahead 16 to 32 ft. and 
stake down and ready to lift dirt from the ditch. We moved the 
derrick two and three times a day." 

Sizes and Prices of Sewer Pipe. — The manufacturers of vitrified 
sewer pipe east of the Illinois-Indiana line adopted, December 19, 
1901, the standard weights and list prices given in Tables I, II 
and III. The western manufacturers use weights and list prices 
shown in Table IV. 

On the Pacific Coast and in parts of the Northwest and South- 
west some strictly local lists are used occasionally. 

The standard length is 2 ft. for pipes up to and including 24-in. 
pipe. The standard length is 2^, ft. for 27-in. to 36-in. pipe. The 
size of the pipe is designated by its inside diameter. It will be 
noted that the list prices vary almost exactly with the weight of 
the pipe. Up. to 18 diam. the Western price list follows closely the 
formula : List price = 0.4d- -|- 15. 



818 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Table I. — Prices and Weights of Standard Sewer Pipe 

Size, inches. 2 & 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. 

Straiglit pipe, per foot $0.16 $0.20 $0.25 $0.30 $0.50 

Blbows and curves, eacli. . 0.50 0.65 0.85 1.10 2.00 
iTs and Ts, inlets smaller 

than 15 ins., each 0.72 0.90 1.13 1.35 2.25 

Traps, each 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.50 6.50 

Weight, per ft., lbs 7 J 12 15 23 

Size, inches. 10. 12. 15. 18. 20. 

Straight pipe, per foot $0.75 $1.00 $1.35 $1.70 $2.25 

Elbows and curves, each.. 3.00 4.00 5.40 6.80 9.00 
Ys or Ts, inlets smaller 

Ihan 15 ins., each 3.40 4.50 6.10 7.65 10.13 

Traps, each 9.00 15.00 22.00 

Weight, per ft, lbs 35 43 60 85 100 

Size, inches. 22. 24. 27. 30. 33. 

Straight pipe, per foot $2.75 $3.25 $4.25 $5.50 $6.25 

Elbows and curves, each. .11.00 13.00 20.00 27.50 30.00 
Ys or Ts, inlets smaller 

than 15 ins., each 12.38 14.63 21.25 27.50 31.25 

Weight, per ft, lbs 130 140 224 252 310 



$0.60 
2.40 

2.70 

7.50 

28 

21. 
$2.50 
10.00 

11.25 

'126 

36. 

$7.00 
32.50 

35.00 
350 



Table II. — Dimensions of Sewer Pipe. 
Standard Pipe. 



Size of 


Thick- 


Depth of 


Cement 


Weight 


Pipe. 


ness. 


Socket. 


Space. 


per ft 


in. 


in. 


in. 


in. 


lbs. 


2 


7/16 


11/2 


Vi 


6 


3 


Va 


iy2 


Vi 


7 


4 


Va 


1% 


% 


9 


5 


% 


1% 


% 


12 


6 


% 


1% 


% 


15 


8 


% 


2 


% 


23 


9 


13/16 


2 


% 


28 


10 


Vs 


21/8 


% 


33 


12 


1 


2^ 


¥2 


45 


15 


1% 


21/2 


1^2 


65 


18 


IVi 


2% 


Va 


75 


20 


1% 


3 


Vo 


95 


21 


11/2 


3 


V2 


110 


22 


1% 


3 


¥2 


125 


24 


1% 


314 


V2 


145 




Special Deep Socket 


Pipe. 




Size of 


Thick- 


Depth of 


Cement 


Weight 


Pipe. 


ness. 


Socket. 


Space. 


per ft. 


in. 


in. 


in. 


in. 


lbs. 


4 


1/2 


2 


V2 


10 


5 


% 


2% 


% 


13 


6 


% 


21/2 


% 


IT 


8 


% 


2% 


% 


25 


10 


% 


2% 


% 


35 


12 


1 


3 


% 


48 


15 


1% 


3 


% 


70 


18 


1% 


3% 




80 


20 


1% 


31/2 


% 


100 


24 


1% 


4 


% 


150 



SEWERS, COXDUITS AND DRAIXS. 



819 



Table III. 


— Dimensions 


OF Dou 


BLE S' 


rRENGTH 


SE^^■ER Pll'E. 






St; 


mUurd Socket. 






Size of 


Thick- 




Depth of 




Cement 


Weight 


Pipe. 


ness. 




Socket. 




Space. 


per ft. 


in. 


in. 




in. 




in. 


lbs. 


15 


1V4 




21/4 




Va 


80 


18 


IM* 




■2V, 




M. 


100 


20 


1% 




2% 




1/2 


125 


21 


1% 




3 




ya 


]:J8 


22 


1';^ 




3 




Ml 


155 


21 


2 




3V4 




% 


:;uo 


27 


2y4 




4 




% 


260 


30 


2% 




4 




% 


300 


33 


2% 




5 




1% 


3411 


36 


2% 




5 




lU 


3S0 



Table IV. — Western Price List of Standard Vitrified Pipe. 



i QJ 




5 


St. sB 

C^ E c 

si .5 



ci 


•r -5 . 
•= - fj^ 


K ri n 

•r, K rt 
1 £ =« ^. 




33 


1 


^^ 




SM 


^Kd 


V- 


^ t- C ^ T* 


1— t 


M 


? 


- 


3 


?0.15 


$0.50 


$0.60 


$1.70 


$0.90 


$0.45 


114 


6 


4,650 


4 


.20 


.60 


.80 


2.10 


1.20 


.60 


1% 


10 


2,800 


5 


.25 


.75 


1.00 


2.5 U 


1.50 


.75 


1% 


12 


2,330 


6 


.30 


1.00 


1.20 


2.90 


1.80 


.90 


1% 


16 


1,750 


7 


.35 


1.25 


1.40 


3.50 


2.10 


1.05 


1% 


18 


1,550 


8 


.45 


1.65 


1.80 


4.50 


2.70 


1.35 


2Va 


24 


1,100 


;> 


.50 


1.75 


2.00 


5.00 


3.00 


1.50 


2y2 


27 


1,040 


10 


.60 


2.10 


2.40 


6.00 


3.60 


l.SO 


2y2 


30 


930 


12 


.75 


2.75 


3.00 


8.50 


4.50 


2.25 


3 


40 


700 


15 


1.00 


3.75 


4.00 


.... 




3.00 


3% 


60 


470 


18 


1.50 


4.75 


6.00 


.... 


.... 


4.50 


•iVi 


85 


330 


20 


1.75 


5.75 


7.00 


.... 


.... 


5.25 


4 


105 


270 


21 


2.00 


6.75 


8.00 


.... 


.... 


6.00 


4 


110 


260 


24 


2.50 


8.00 


10.00 


.... 


.... 


7.50 


4 


13? 


210 


27 


3.25 


16.25 


16.25 


.... 


.... 


16.25 


4y2 


215 


129 


30 


4.00 


20.00 


20.00 






20.00 


4Vs 


270 


108 


33 


5.00 


25.00 


25.00 






25.00 


5 


320 


90 


30 


G.OO 


30.00 


30.00 






30.00 


5% 


365 


81 



Sizes 3-in. to 6-in., inclusive, in 2-ft. lengths. 

Sizes S-in. to 18-in., inclusive, in 2V2-ft. lengths. 

Sizes 27-in. to 36-in., inclusive, in 3-ft. lengths. 

*Both P Traps and Running Traps are made with or without 
hand holes. 

tDouble Branches, both T and Y above 12-in. made only to order. 

Branches, Increasers, Decreasers, Slants, 27 to 3 6-in. are 3 ft. 
long. 



Large discounts from these prices are given. The present 
(August, 1909) discount for Eastern Pennsylvania is as follows: 

Standard Pipe — Per cent off. 

3-in. to 24-in., inc 7!) 

27-in. and 30-in 71 

33-in. and 36-in 66 

Double Strength — 

15-in 74 

18-in 73 

20-in. to 24-in 72 

27-in. and 30-in 63 

33-in. and 36-in oS 



820 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

No. 2 Pipe — 

3-in. to 24-in., inc 81 

27-in. and SO-in 76 

33-in. and 36-in 71 

All pipe and branches in 21/2 ft. or 3 ft. lengths to take 2 per cent 
less discount than above, except 27 in. and over. 

Deep and Wide Sockets on Standard Pipe 4-in. to 24-in., inclusive, 
2 per cent less than schedule discount. No extra charge is made 
for Deep and Wide Sockets on Double Strength Pipe 15 -in. to 24-in. 
inclusive. Sizes 27-in. to 36-in., inclusive, are made only in Deep 
and Wide and no extra charge is made for same. 

On First Quality Pipe, 1 per cent less discount than the above 
for allowing breakage and inspection at railroad point of delivery. 

Freight allowed on car lots to points where the rate on Sewer 
Pipe from Akron, Ohio, is more than 14 cts. and does not exceed 
16 cts. per cwt. 

Terms: 30 days or 2 per cent off net bills, after all deductions 
have been made, for cash in 15 days from date of shipment. Break- 
age (if any) in transit, at risk of purchaser. (Patton Clay Mfg. 
Co., Patton, Pa.) 

Discounts from Western List, St. Louis, delivery (Evens & How- 
ard Fire Brick Co., St. Louis), August, 1909, are: 

Standard Pipe — Per-cent. 

3-in to 6-in 771/2 

8-in. to l:i-in 75 

15-in. and 18-in 70 

20-in. to 24-in -65 

27-in. to 30-in 62% 

33-in. to 36-in 60 

Double Strength — 

12-in 70 

15-in. and IS-in 65 

20-in. to 24-in 60 

27-in. and 30-in 57 14 

33-in. to 36-in 55 

Cement Required for Sewer Pipe Joints. — There are two kinds 

of sewer pipe: (1) The standard pipe with shallow joints; and 
(2) the special deep-socket pipe with wide and deep joints. The 
dimensions of these two kinds of joints are given in Tables II and 
III. Unless otherwise specified, the standard pipe with shallow 
joints is used ; but many engineers prefer the deep-socket pipe, and 
specify it. 

If the mortar is filled in the pipe joint and cut off vertically, 
flush with the face of the bell, the joint is called a "flush joint." If 
the mortar is also plastered on the outside, and beveled on a 1 to 1 
slope from the outer edge of the bell to the body of the entering 
pipe, the joint is called an "overfilled joint" or a "beveled joint." 
The amount of mortar required for each of these kinds of joints is 
given in Tables V and VI. I have made no allowance for the space 
in the joint occupied by gasket or yarn. For discussion of the 
amount of cement per cubic yard of mortar see page 253. 



SEJVERS, COXDUITS AXD DR.ilXS. 821 

Table V. — Cement Required to Lay 100 Ft. of Standard Sewer 

Pipe. 
(2 -ft. Lengths.) 
Size of pipe. ins.... 4. 6. 8. 10. 12. 15. IS. 20. 24. 
Cu. yds. moitar :♦ 

Flush iouTts 009 .013 .014 .018 .025 .040 .050 .055 .066 

Overhlk'd joints.. .020 .036 .058 .072 .087 .116 .160 .260 .310 
Bbls. cement (1 to 

1 mortar) : 

Flush joints 036 .052 .056 .072 .100 .160 .200 .220 .260 

Overtilled joints. . .080 .144 .232 .288 .348 .464 .640 1.04 1.24 
Bbls. cement (1 to 

2 mortar) : 

Plush joints 027 .039 .042 .054 .075 .120 .150 .165 .195 

Overfilled joints. . .060 .108 .174 .216 .261 .348 .480 .780 .930 

Table VI. — Cement Required to Lay 100 Ft. of Special Deep 

Socket Pipe. 
(2-ft. Lengths.) 

Size of pipe, ins 4. 6. 8. 10. 12. 15. IS. 20. 24. 

Cu. yds. mortar :* 

Flush joints 035 .050 .060 .075 .090 .130 .145 .170 .260 

Overfilled joints. . .065 .100 .140 .170 .200 .300 .340 .440 .600 
Bbls. cement (1 to 

1 mortar) : 

Flush joints 140 .200 .240 .300 .360 .520 .580 .680 1.04 

Overfilled joints. . .200 .400 .560 .680 .800 1.20 1.36 1.76 2.40 
Bbls. cement (1 to 

2 mortar) : 

Flush joints 105 .150 .ISO .225 .270 .390 .435 .510 .780 

Overfilled joints. . .195 .300 .420 .510 .600 .900 1.02 1.32 1.80 

*The number of barrels of cement required to make 1 cu. yd. of 
mortar is given on page 25 3. I have assumed 4 bljls. per cu. yd. for 
1 to 1 mortar, and 3 bbls. per cu. yd. for 1 to 2 mortar. 

To calculate the cost of cement per lineal foot of pipe line mul- 
tiply the fraction of a barrel of cement (given in Tables V and VI) 
by the prices of cement in dollars per barrel. Thus, if cement is ■?2 
per bbl., and the mortar is mixed 1 part cement to 1 part sand, and 
deep-socket pipe is to be used with overfilled joints, we find, from 
Table VI, that a 6-in. pipe requires 0.4 bbl. cement, multiplying 
this 0.4 by 2, gives OS ct. per lin. ft. as the cost of cement, when 
cement is ?2 per bbl. LTnder these same conditions the cost of 
cement per lin. ft., for different sizes of pipe, is as follows: 

Size of pipe, ins 4 6 8 10 12 15 18 20 24 

Cement, per ft, cts 0.5 O.S 1.1 1.4 1.6 2.4 2.7 3.5 4.8 

Cost of Hauling Sewer Pipe. — The weight of sewer pipe is given 
in Table I, and if 2 tons (4,000 lbs.) are hauled per wagon load, a 
wagon will carrj' the following amounts of pipe at the costs given : 

Size of pipe, ins 4 6 8 10 12 15 18 20 24 

Lin. ft. per wagon.. 444 26'. 174 114 92 66 46 40 28 
Cost of hauling, cts. 

per lin. ft., per mile 0.10 0.15 0.25 0.40 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.1 1.6 

The cost of hauling is based upon wages of $3.50 a day for team 
and driver, and 16 miles traveled per day. It is assumed that 
enough men are provided at both ends of the haul to load and 
unload the wagon rapidly enough to leave the team time to cover 
its 16 miles, or that extra wagons are provided for each team. The 



822 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cost of hauling 12-in. pipe, it will be seen, is 1/2 -ct. per lin. ft. per 
mile. This does not include the cost of loading- and unloading the 
pipe, which is practically as much more as the cost of hauling it 
one mile. Thus for 12-in. pipe, the cost of loading and unloading is 
%-ct. per lin. ft., and to this must be added the cost of hauling at 
the rate of %-ct. per lin. ft. per mile of distance from the freight 
yard to the sewer. In other words, to calculate the cost of loading 
and hauling pipe, determine the actual number of miles from the 
freight yard to the sewer and add 1 mile (to cover the cost of load- 
ing and unloading), then multiply by tlie cost of hauling given in 
the table. For example, if the actual haul is I1/2 miles, then, by 
the rule, add 1 mile, which makes 21/2 miles. If the pipe is 10-in. 
pipe, the table gives us 0.4 ct. per ft. per mile, which multiplied by 
the 21/4 miles gives 1 ct. per ft. 

Cost of Laying Sewer Pipe. — This will depend largely upon 
whether each pipe layer is provided with one or witli two helpers 
to mix mortar and supply materials. As will be seen from cases 
subsequently given, two helpers to each pipe layer do not ordinarily 
increase the output sufficiently to justify the extra cost. 

Pipe laid in a trench dug in rock, or in quicksand, usually costs 
twice as much for the labor of laying as in ordinary earth. When 
a pipe layer receives $2.25 and his helper receives $1.75 a day, the 
following costs per lineal foot are easily attainable under good 
management, and where no rock or quicksand are encountered : 

Size of pipe, ins 4 6 8 10 12 18 20 24 30 36 

Cts. per lin. ft 1 1 % 2 21/2 3 31/3 4 . 4 1^ 5 6 

As will be seen from records given later on, the costs of pipe 
laying are frequently two or three times the above figures, but any 
contractor wlio finds his costs running higher than the above, had 
better investigate his management. By giving the men a bonus for 
every foot laid in excess of a given number of feet laid each day 
the costs of pipe laying may be reduced considerably below the 
above given figures. Of course the cost of trenching and backfilling 
is not included in the above costs. 

Diagram Giving Contract Prices of Sewers. — The diagram, Fig. 2, 
is one that I have prepared from data given by Mr. G. M. Warren, 
based upon contract prices for about 60 miles of sewer work in 
Newton, Mass., and covering a period of four years, 1891-1895. 
The wages of common laborers were $1.50 for 10 hrs. 

The prices for trenching include excavating, sheeting and back- 
filling in earth ; and do not relate to work in rock or quicksand. 

The price of 1 ct. per inch of diameter of pipe per lin. ft. laid, 
includes hauling of pipe, labor of lajnng, and cement for joints. 

The price of pipe is 70% off the list price given in Table I, plus 
20% to cover the cost of branches which are placed 25 ft. apart. 
For example, the list price of 12-in. pipe is $1.00 ; and with 70% 
discount the price becomes 30 cts. Now, 20% of 30 cts. is 6 cts., 
which approximately covers the extra cost of branches spaced 25 ft. 
apart, so that the total cost of the pipe for a 12-in. pipe line is 
30 cts. plus 6 cts.. or 36 cts. To this is added 12 cts. (1 ct. for 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



S23 




10 15 

Dep+h in 

2. Contract Prices of Pipe Sewers. 



824 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

each 12 ins. of diameter) to cover the price af "laying," making 
a total of 48 cts., exclusive of trenching. The first 8 ft. in depth 
of trench are dug at a price of 50 cts. per cu. yd. The next 6 ft. 
below are dug at a price of 50 cts. per cu. yd., and the price for 
each succeeding 6-ft. lift is 25 cts. higher per cu. yd. than the pre- 
ceding lift. This is based upon the assumption that trench machines 
are not used, and that the earth is raised in 6-ft. lifts. 

To show how to use the diagram, an example will serve. Sup- 
pose it is desired to know the contract price for a 12-in. sewer in 
a trench 15 ft. deep. Start at the bottom of the diagram on the 
line marked 15, and follow the line up until it meets the sloping- 
line marked 12". Then starting from this intersection, follow the 
straight line across the page to the right until the side of the dia- 
gram is reached, when it will be seen that the intersection is just 
one division above $1.50 ; and, as each division is equal to 5 cts., 
the price is $1.55 for a 12-in. pipe in a 15-ft. trench. This price 
includes contractor's profits. 

Cost of Pipe Sewers at Atlantic, la — In Engineering-Contracting , 
May 15, 1907, appeared the first of a series of articles on the cost 
of pipe sewers, the data for which were gathered by Mr. M. A. Hall, 
the engineer in charge of the work. Mr. Hall had the inspectors 
report daily the organization of the forces working under the vari- 
ous contractors, and the amount of work accomplished. With the 
exception of the item of cement used in filling the pipe joints, it is 
believed that these records of cost are very reliable. The first of 
this series of articles related to sewer work at Atlantic, Iowa. The 
data, as originally published in Engineering-Contracting, were so 
voluminous that I have made a great condensation, but I believe 
that, in the condensed form here given, the costs are more avail- 
able for use, and that nothing of great importance has been omitted. 

The excavation was, for the most part, a clay not difficult to 
spade, and requiring little or no bracing and practically no pump- 
ing. The "bottom men" shoveled the earth out of the trench and 
the "top men" shoveled as much of it back from the edge as was 
necessary. The backfilling was done, for the most part, by a team 
and drag scraper, and there was no ramming. 

Table VII gives the costs at Atlantic, la. To the labor costs. 
Mr. Hall thinks 10% should be added for overhead charges and in- 
cidentals, to cover office expenses, hauling tools, moving materials 
from place to place so as to use up odds and ends, etc. 

The contractor was his own foreman and handled his men well. 
The weather was good, the work being done between April and 
October, 1904. A 10-hr. day was worked. Natural cement (Louis- 
ville) was used. 

It will be noted that the excavation for the 20-in. sewer cost less 
not only per lin. ft. but per cu. yd. than for any of the others. This 
is due largely to the fact that the trench was shallow, also to the 
fact that the earth was a heavy, black soil, very easily spaded. 

On a short job of 15-in. sewer, 360 ft. long, where the trench was 
24 ins. wide and 12.6 ft. deep, in clay that was good spading, the 
cost was as follows for excavation : 



SEIVERS. COXDUITS AND DR.IIXS. 825 

Per lin. ft. 

Bottom men $0,299 

Top men 0.104 

Scaffold men 0.045 

Bracing men 0.005 

Total $0,453 

This is equivalent to 34.8 cts. per cu. yd. 
The backflllins cost 2.8 cts. per cu. yd. additional. 
The costs in Table VII are averages of several jobs. The mini- 
mum costs of pipe laying on the best of these jobs were as follows 
per lineal foot : 

S-in. 10-in. 12-in. 15-in. 

Pipe layers, at 22Vi cts $0,009 $0,006 $0,011 $0,015 

Helpers, at- ITVa cts O.OOT 0.007 0.008 0.009 

Total $0,016 $0,013 $0,019 $0,024 

By dividing- the pipe layers' hourly wage (22i^ cts.) by the costs 
per lineal foot, we .find the total number of feet laid per hour per 
pipe layer; thus. 221/. -f- 0.9 = 25 ft. of 8-ln. pipe laid per hr. per 
pipe layer, or 250 ft. per 10-hr. day. In this manner the following 
table was calculated : 

8-in. pipe, 250 ft. per day per pipe layer 
10-in. pipe, 375 ft. per day per pipe layer 
12-in. pipe, 205 ft. per day per pipe layer 
15-in. pipe, 150 ft. per day per pipe layer 
It will be noted that the 10-in. pipe was laid with abnormal ra- 
pidity in this particular case. On another job, 10-in. pipe was laid 
at the rate of 250 ft. per day. 

Table VII. — Cost of Pipe Sewers^ Atlantic, Iowa, 
Wage per hr.. 

cts. S-in. 10-in. 12-in. 15-in. 18-in. 20-in. 

Pipe, vitrified $0,135 SO. 200 $0,250 $0,330 $0,450 $0,550 

Hauling, team and 

driver 30 0.006 0.003 0.010 0.006 0.005 0.023 

Hauling, man help- 
ing 171/. 0.003 0.001 0.004 0.002 0.001 0.011 

Cement and sand.. .. " 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.010 

Pipe layers 221/2 0.012 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.030 0.018 

Pipe layers' helpers. 17 V2 0.010 0.014 0.010 0.010 0.021 0.015 

Trenching : 

Bottom men I71/. 0.150 0.130 0.153 0.125 0.188 0.078 

Top men 17V, 0.013 0.027 0.014 0.023 0.059 0.004 

Scaffolding men.. 17 1/. 0.002 0.001 0.011 0.012 

Bracing men 171/. 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.012 

Backfilling : 

Men shoveling... 171/. 0.013 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.035 0.029 

Team on scraper. SO 0.013 O.OOS 0.010 0.009 0.017 0.005 

Man hold, scraper 17 1/2 O.OOS 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.010 0.003 

Waterboy 10 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.011 0.008 

Foreman 30 0.015 0.022 0.018 0.022 0.046 0.022 

Grand total $0,389 $0,450 $0,517 $0,584 $0,912 $0,776 

Total length sewer, ft... 2,S50 2,560 3,650 1,125 1,850 2,550 

Depth of trench, ft 10.0 8.2 9.3 9.2 9.6 5.4 

Width of trench, ins 26 30 30 34 35 36 

Cu. yd.s. per lin. ft 0.82 0.77 0.87 0.95 1.06 0.6 

Trenching, cts. per cu. yd. 21.0 22.0 19.0 16.8 27.2 13.7 

Backfill, cts. per cu. yd.. 4.0 3.2 2.8 2.7 6.2 6.1 

Ft. of pipe per bbl. cement 275 425 260 160 100 170 



826 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Pipe Sewers at Centerville, Iowa. — In Engineering-Con- 
tracting, June 12, Aug. 21, Sept. 18 and Oct. 16, 1907, voluminous 
tables were published giving the cost of pipe sewers at Centerville, 
Iowa, the data for which were gathered by Mr. M. A. Hall. The 
work was done by contract on 161 different jobs, covering more 
than ten miles of sewer. The average cost of pipe laying, not in- 
eluding trenching, was as follows : 

8-in. pipe, 5.0 cts. per lin. ft. (average of 83 jobs). 

10-in. pipe, 7.3 cts. per lin. ft. (average of 27 jobs). 

12-in. pipe, 7.5 cts. per lin. ft. (average of 41 jobs). 

15-in. pipe, 6.7 cts. per lin. ft. (average of 10 jobs). 

Apparently none of this work was as well handled as that at 
Atlantic, Iowa, the data for which have been previously given. 
Average costs on work so simple as pipe laying, and where no plant 
is required, often indicate nothing but poor management or lazi- 
ness. For this reason the following minimum costs of work done at 
Centerville are of more value, as they show what can readily be 
accomplished : 

8-in. 10-in. 12-in. 15-in. 

Pipe layers, at 30 cts $0,010 $0,017 $0,019 $0,016 

Helpers, at 17% cts 0.012 0.018 0.011 0.020 

Total $0,022 $0,035 $0,030 $0,036 

Even these minimum costs at Centerville are greater than the 
average costs of pipe laying given above for the work at Atlantic, 
Iowa. At Atlantic the contractor usually had only one helper to 
each pipe laj^er, whereas on this woik at Centerville there were 
usually two helpers to each pipe layer. The wages of the pipe 
layers at Centerville were nearly 40% higher than at Atlantic, but 
the helpers received the same wages in both places. 

Based upon the above table of minimum cost, the following is the 

number of lineal feet laid per 10-hr. day by a pipe layer: 

8-in. pipe, 300 lin. ft. per pipe layer. 

10-in. pipe, 177 lin. ft. per pipe layer. 

12-in. pipe, 158 lin. ft. per pipe layer. 

15-in. pipe, 188 lin. ft. per pipe layer. 

A considerable part (15%) of the work done at Centerville in- 
volved trenching in hardpan and hard shale, and there was a little 
quicksand and some wet weather that caused the banks to cave. 
All these increased not only the cost of excavating, but also the 
cost of pipe laying. On the various jobs where the excavation was 
entirely in shale and hardpan, the cost of laying was 50% more 
than the average costs above given; so that for 10 and 12-ir. pipe 
the cost of pipe laying was about 11 cts. per lin. ft. 

Where quicksand, or a trench soaked from rain, was encoim- 
tered the cost of pipe laying was similarly increased, that is about 
60% above the average cost. 

The trenching averaged a cost of 40 cts. per cu. yd. for excava- 
tion and 4 cts. per cu. yd. for backfilling, except in shale and hard- 
pan, where the cost was about 70 cts. per cu. yd. for excavation. 
About 15% of the excavation was shale that could be picked and 
hardpan. The rest was mostly clay and gumbo, requiring prac- 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AXD DRAINS. «27 

tically no sheeting. The trenches averaged about 9 ft. deep. The 
width of tlie trendies was tlie same us at Atlantic, above given. 
Wages averaged 18 cts. per lir. It will be noted that the trenching 
at Centerville cost practically twice as much per cubic yard as at 
Atlantic. In view of the fact that the pipe laying also, cost twice 
as much, it would seem that the workmen at Centerville were 
about half as efficient as those under the contractor at Atlantic. 

p-oreman's and watcrboy's wages are not included in the above 
given costs for labor of trenching and pipe laying. Foreman re- 
ceived 35 cts. per hr., and Waterboys 12 M> cts. per hr. Their com- 
bined wages amounted to about 10% of the labor cost of trenching. 
baclvtiUing and pipe laying. This shows that there were one fore- 
man and one waterboy to 25 workmen. 

Cost of Pipe Sewers at Laurel, Miss. — In Engineering-Contracting, 
July 21, 1907, the cost of 3 miles of pipe sewers on each of 43 sec- 
tions was given. The data were secured by Mr. M. A. Hall in the 
manner previously described under the paragraph relating to sewer 
work at Atlantic, Iowa. 

Negroes were employed and the woik was done under inefficient 
foremen, e.xcept on 6 of the sections. The worlf.ing day was 10 to 
11 hrs. long. Common laborers received .'iJl.25 to $1.50 a day, and 
foremen received ?3 to ?4 per day. 

The excavation was mostly claj", and the average cost of exca- 
vation was 0OY2 cts. per cu. yd., wages being assumed to average 
12i{. cts. per lir. The backfill was largely done b5' hand, although 
teams and scrapers were used on many of the sections. The back- 
fill averaged about 6 cts. per cu. yd. The following were the costs 
on a few of the sections tliat showed the lowest costs : 

Per cu. yd. 

Excavation of trench 6.3 ft. deep, 1.62 hrs., at 121/2 cts 20.2 

Backfill ditto, 0.3 hr. man at 12% cts. plus 0.06 hr. team and 

driver at 30 cts 5.6 

Excav. of trench 7.6 ft. deep, 1.80 hrs.. at 12i/o cts 22.5 

Buclcfill ditto, 0.24 hr. man, at 121/. cts., plus 0.04 team and 

driver, at 30 cts 7.2 

Excav. of trench 7.7 ft. deep, 2.07 hrs., at 12yo cts 26.0 

Backfill ditto, 0.12 hr. man. at 121/. cts., plus 0.03 hr. team, 

and driver, at 30 cts 2.4 

The average costs of pipe laying were as follows per lin. ft., 
wages being assumed to be 20 cts. for pipe layers and 12 1,2 cts. for 
helpers : 

8-in. 10-in. 12-in. 18-in. 20-in. 

Pipe layer, at 20 cts ?0.010 ?0.012 $0,011 $0,015 $0,012 

Helper, at 12% cts 0.013 0.012 0.018 0.026 0.022 

Total $0,023 $0,024 $0,029 $0,041 $0,034 

Number of sections 31 3 2 5 2 

There were, ordinarily, two helpers to each pipe layer. 

For comparison with the above averages, the following minimum 

costs of pipe laying on certain sections are given : 

^ , 8-in. 10-in. 12-in. 18-in. 20-in. 

Pipelayer, at 20 cts $0,005 $0,010 $0,009 $0,008 $0,012 

Helper, at 121/2 cts 0.008 0.012 0.015 0.018 0.022 

Total $0,013 $0,022 $0,024 $0,026 $0,034 



828 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

That these minimum costs vary so slightly from the average costs 
on sections otlier tlian for tlie 8-in. pipe is due to the fact that there 
were so few sections wliere sizes larger than 8-in. were laid. 

Estimated Cost of Pipe Sewers. — In Engineering-Contracting) 
April 1, 1908, the Table VII A was published. The estimated 
costs given in this table are said to be based upon the actual costs 
of 51 miles of sewers built in five cities where the physical condi- 
tions were similar to those at Clinton, Iowa, as compiled by Mr. 
Charles P. Chase, city engineer of Clinton. The table gives the 
estimated cost pei lin. ft., not including the cost of excavation, nor 
foremanship and incidentals. 

I have omitted the item of "foreman" from the above table. 
Foreman's salary usually amounts to 5 to 10% of the labor — not 5 
to 10% of the labor and materials. 

I have also omitted an item of "interest and incidentals," which 
Mr. Chase estimates at 10% of the total cost of labor and materials. 
Interest on money invested is a very small item where the con- 
tractor receives monthly payments, and a percentage for "inci- 
dentals" should apply only to the labor. 

Mr. Chase calls the total of the above items a "constant," and to 
this "constant" he adds the cost of trenching, which is the 
"variable." 

There is an error in the item of laying 36-in. pipe, as will be 
seen by comparison with the corresponding item for 30-in. pipe. 
The item of "shipping loss and haul" appears to be much over- 
estimated ; so also is the item of "lights and watchman." 

Cost of a Pipe Sewer in Quicksand. — The following data were 
published in Engineering-Contracting, June 3, 1908. 

Wildwood is a new summer resort town, built a few years ago 
on the southern end of an island called Five Mile Beach, on the 
New Jersey coast. Prior to the building of the town the site was 
covered at high tide by 3 ft. of water. The soil was black mud 
covered with thick meadow sod, with, here and there, piles of sand 
which were shifted by the tide. The first work done was to build 
a bulkhead and by means of dredges to raise the land above the 
high tide. Then the building of the town and resorts began. 

To serve the buildings, a system of terra cotta pipe sewers was 
built. The trench for the entire distance, 12 miles, was through 
quicksand, from which water bubbled, and known locally as "boil- 
ing sand." This makes both expensive and difficult work, adding 
to the cost of laying the pipe, as it is difficult to keep the pipes at 
the proper grade and in good alignment, and the joints are hard to 
caulk, owing to the water in the ditch. 

The greatest cutting was 6% ft. deep and the entire trench was 
double sheeted throughout, great trouble being experienced in keep- 
ing the trench even partially dry. Sumps or wells could not be 
made, as the pumps pulled out so much sand under the sheeting as 
to cause either the ditch to fill or the sheeting to cave in. 

The sheeting was put down to a depth of 10 ft. with a water 
jet in advance of the excavation, this being the only way the con- 
tractor could make any headway. Owing to the numerous "salt 



SEiyURS, COXDUITS AXD DRAINS. 



829 



_; ooooooOTi<if5 

,5 €»• O I— lO O O t— C-l M O 

1 C-Cli-liHi-IOOOO 

55 Moooo'oooo 



ooocoooiraoura 



V&- o Lro -^ 



00 lO 1-1 CO o 



USrHiHOrHOOOO 

i-Joooooooo 



OOO^OOOOOLO 

«»■ o in cj CO lo -* i-H (M o 
LraTHi-iOT-iooc>o 

r-<00000000 



inc^ioooooiiDio 



ooooooooo 





c 




05 


C-l 


o 


o 


o 


uo 


00 


■* 


m 


CO 




*v 


e«- 


tH 


(M 


^- 


CO 


(C3 


C^l 


o 


C^l 


o 


CI 




CI 




00 


»-l 


o 


o 


rH 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CM 




C-3 




o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


^ 




c 




CO 


M 


t^ 


CI 


O 


(M 


r- 


C^l 


in 


1 o 


1 


ws- 


00 


t~- 


liO 


C^l 


o 


Ol 


o 


CI 


o 


C3> 


cc 


Ol 




to 


o 


o 


o 


>-; 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o> 


a 


d 




o 


CO 


to 


o 


lO 


o 


r~- 


o 


uo 


1 O 


o 




&9- 


tH 


KO 


-^ 


(M 


oo 


CM 


o 


CI 


o 


to 




LO 


O 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


l>- 


H 


c 




o 


O 


rtl 


CO 


o 


r^ 


to 


00 


1(0 


1 CO 


O 




(SO- 


■^ 


•^ 


CO 


rH 


CO 


i-( 


o 


1— i 


o 


1 ^ 


lO 




CO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


no 



OOOOrttOUOlOintOlo 

^iHCMC-liHt-rHOlHO 

C-IOOOOOOOO 



_; Tt< CO 

.t! V9- C^ C5 CM 



CT) O O uO ■<*^ LO I O 
<0 LCO tH o tH O I *— < 



iHOOOOOOOO 



tOUOC^ltOUOOrt^CClio 
r^T-Ji-HO'^i-IC-^O 
tHOOOOOoOo 



fH o 00 uo CO uo 

.S W- 00 



o CO '^ uo [ '^ 

tH C '-' O to 



0000000*^0 



a 6? 



d 



c3 
« bo ^ 



™ d o 
t. K ^ 



M 'V 

o c 
o o 



rt o 
^o 

liO 

0) o ^'5- 



O ^ <!' 






(xsSojj>^.i;o 



o 



830 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



holes" encountered, through which the line at time ran, it was nec- 
essary to make a foundation for the manholes and pipe. This was 
done by piling spaced 7 ft. apart and 6 in. c. to c. On the piles 
4x4 yellow pine, 8 ft. long, was spiked, and to this was spiked 
hemlock planks 2 x 8 — 12 ft. long. The pipe was laid on this and 
the hole filled with sand and salt hay. 

If a manhole was located at one of these "salt holes," 4 piles, 10 
to 15 ft. long were driven 4% ft. c. to c. Four railroad ties were 
then spiked together with two pieces of batten, and the whole bolted 
securely to the piles. On this foundation was placed a box 5 ft. 
square and 10 ins. deep, the bottom being covered with tongue and 
grooved floor boards, and in some cases lined with canvas and the 
inside covered with coal tar pitch. The concrete was placed in the 
box, the pipe line run through, and the brick work completed. 

As a general rule, water was struck in excavating the trench 
about 18 ins. below the surface. The pipe laid was 8 and 12 in. 




Fig. 3. — (1) Centrifugal Pump; (2) Boiler; (3) 
Piston Pump; (4) Pipe in Trench; (5) Trench Be- 
ing Excavated; (6) Suction Pipe; (7) Discharge 
Pipe; (8) and (9) Steam Pipes; (10) Pipe to 
Water Supply. 

terra cotta, hence the ditch was made only wide enough for a man 
to work in it easily, this width being 2 ft. for a ditch 6 to 7 ft. in 
depth. 

The method of excavating was as follows: By using the piston 
pump the sheathing was put down for a distance of 150 ft. along 
the trench, and a closure made at each end. Then 10 laborers were 
put in the trench and excavation made to the water line, when, 
rangers and braces were set. 

The piston pump was then started pumping water into this "land 
coffer dam." A centrifugal pump was moved into position, and 
the discharge pipe placed midway in the last section, where the 
sewer pipe had already been laid. Thus the centrifugal pump ex- 
cavated the material from the forward section and backfilled the 
last section at the same time. See Fig. 3. 

When grade was reached, the foundation piles were jetted down 
and the cradle constructed. The pipe was then laid, the joints being 
made with cement and tar. The next section was then done in the 
same manner. 

The sand excavated was quite coarse, and but little agitation was 
necessary with shovels, in order to allow the pump to pick up the 
sand. When the sand is fine grained, much more water is needed. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AXD DRAINS. 831 

and likewise the sand must be agitated with shovels. With ex- 
tremely tine sand, tlie men must be relieved frequently, as the work 
is liard, and, as the pumps take up a much smaller percentage of 
tlie sand, the ditch must be kept with a larger amount of water in 
it. and the men, being compelled to stand in the water, feel the 
effect of it quickly. 

At times when the contractor got as deep in the trench as the 
original ground surface, he encountered a considerable number of 
roots that had to be cut out, but this was seldom necessary. 

Fig. 3 shows the layout of the plant to do the work in the manner 
described. In this way an average of 300 lin. ft. of trench was dug 
and pipe laid per day, while another contractor doing similar work 
by anothor method averaged only from 35 to 50 ft. per day. 

The cost of driving the sheeting and pulling it for the 300 lin. ft. 

of trench done per day was : 

Boss tiniberman $ 2.50 

Fireman on .let pump 1.50 

One man setting sheeting 2.00 

Two helpers, at $1.50 3.00 

Three men pulling sheeting, at ?1.50 4.50 

One man carrying sheeting 1.50 

Two men bracing trench, at $2.00 4.00 

One man pumping 1.75 

Coal and oil 1.00 

Total $21.75 

This gives a cost per lin. ft. of trench of 7 cts. for driving and 
pulling sheeting, and as there was 6,080 lin ft, of sheeting driven 
and pulled a day, it makes a cost per lin. ft. of sheeting i^-ct. 
With 2-in. sheeting used, the amount of timber was 6,000 ft. B. M.. 
which cost $26 per M. This timber, being driven with a water 
.iet, was used time and time again. The sound piles, which were 
from 10 to 15 ft. long, cost 25 cts. apiece, and the cost of driving 
them was 1.5 cts. per lin. ft. 

The cradle for the pipe was built by two men, each at $2 per day. 
They built 200 lin. ft. per day, which meant a cost per ft. of trench 
of 2 cts. The amount of lumber in 200 ft. of cradle was 866 ft. 
B. M., which meant a labor cost for framing of about $5 per M. 
The lumber cost $26 per M. 

The daily cost of digging the trench and backfilling, and of lay- 
ing the pipe was : 

Foreman, 10 hrs $ 4.00 

Bight men digging, at $1.50 12.00 

Two men trimming, at $1.50 3.00 

One engineman 3.00 

One pumper 2.50 

Two pipemen, at $2.00 4.00 

Coal, at $5.00 per ton 1.25 

Rent of boiler 2.00 

Rent of pumps 2.50 

Rent of engine 2.00 

Two pipelayers, at $2.00 4.00 

Two pipe carriers, at $1.50 3.00 

One man on mortar and jute 1.50 

Total $44.75 



832 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The excavation and backfilling done by the pumper can be listed 
as follows : 

Cost per lin. ft. of trench : 

Labor •. $0,032 

Coal 0.004 

Plant rental 0.022 

Total $0,058 

Each day this plant excavated about 200 cu. yds., hence the cost 
per cvi. yd. was : 

Labor $0,047 

Coal 0.006 

Plant rental 0.032 

Total $0,085 

Tliis is a very low cost for excavating earth from a trench and 
backfilling it. 

The terra cotta pipe cost 16 cts. per lin. ft. and the hauling of it 
cost 2 cts. 

Tlie total cost per lin. ft. of pipe laid was as follows, exclusive 
of manholes : 

Foreman $0,013 

Excavating and backtilling by liand 0.050 

Excavating and backfilling by pump : 

Labor $0,032 

Coal 0.004 

Plant rental 0.022 0.058 

Driving slieeting 0.040 

Bracing trench 0.013 

Pulling and carrying sheeting 0.020 

Piles in place 0.105 

Cradle, lumber and labor 0.132 

Pipe 0.160 

Hauling pipe 0.020 

Laying pipe 0.028 

Materials for joints 0.013 

Total $0,652 

Tliis cost does not include any allowance for general expense nor 
for the materials used in shoring tlie sides of the trenches. The 
sheeting was used many times, as driving the planks with a water 
.let did not injure tlie planks or break them up. 
The cost of a manhole was as follows : 

Cover and frame $ 9.00 

Bricklayer 2.00 

Bricks, 1,500, at $10 per M 15.00 

Stone, % cu. yd., at $1.00 75 

Cement, 3 bags, at 50 cts 1.50 

Pumping 1.12 

Labor, excavating 3.1 S 

Sheeting, etc ' 2.17 



Total $34.72 

The cost of this work in a ground difficult to excavate is exceed- 
ingly low, and can be attributed to the methods used in carrying 
on the work. 

Mr. George L. Watson, M. Can. Soc. C. E., was chief engineer of 
the Wildwood Sewer Co., and designed the entire improvement made, 
including the sewers. He afterwards associated himself witli the 



,j«^« 

" 



SHIVERS, CONDUITS .L\D DRAIXS. 833 

contractor for the sewers, Mr. Alexander Murdock : and, as engi- 
neer in charge, decided upon and put into operation the method 
used. 

Cost of Two Pipe Sewers and Manholes at Oskaloosa, la.* — The 
following cost data relate to the construction of a 12-in. sanitary 
sewer in Sixth avenue, and an 8-in. sewer in South Market strei't, 
Oskaloosa, la. 

The Sixth avenue sewer consisted of 1,004 lin. ft. of 12-in. pipe 
(tile), five manholes and one lamphole. The work required the ex- 
cavation of 1,063.8 cu. yds. of material, the average depth being 
11.4 ft. and the maximum depth 16 ft. On this sewer there were 
about 250 ft. of trench in which the depth was from 13 to 15 ft. 
This necessitated handling part of the earth three times before it 
was removed from the trench, which added considerably to the cost 
of excavation. The cost of the 1,004 lin. ft. of 12-in. sewer was as 
follows : 

Cost of 12-in Sewer. 

Per lin. ft. 
Labor : Total. Sewer. 

Trenching ? 543.90 $0,541 

Sheeting 72.00 .072 

Laying pipe 46.38 .046 

Backfilling 93.65 .093 

Miscellaneous expense, laying 

pavement, hauling, etc 45.00 .045 

Total, labor ? 800.93 ?0.797 

MtitGri3,ls ' 

Lumber for' sheeting ? 32.30 $0,032 

Cement for joints, 15 sacks. . . . 5.40 .005 

Sand for joints, 30 bu 1.80 .002 

Jute calking, 50 lbs 3.50 .003 

Pipe, 958 lin. ft 249.08 .248 

Specials, 14, at $0.72 10.08 .010 

Total, materials ? 302.16 $0,301 

One lamp hole, 13 ft. deep 4.20 .004 

Five manholes 274.82 .274 

Grand total $1,382.11 $1,377 

In the above work there was 980 lin. ft. of trenching, the cost 
per lin. ft. being $0,555. The cost of sheeting the 980 lin. ft. of 
trench was : 

Per lin. ft. 
Total. Trench. 

Labor $ 72.00 $0,073 

Lumber 32.30 .033 

Total $104.30 $0,106 

There were 400 joints, requiring 15 sacks of cement and 30 bush- 
els of sand, the cost per joint being $0,018. The calking for the 
400 joints took 50 lbs. of jute, or .125 lb. per joint, and cost $0,009 
per joint. 

The South Market street sewer consisted of 816.8 lin. ft. of 8-ln. 
tile, two manholes and one lamphole. There were 365.9 cu. yds. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 23, 1908. 



834 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of excavation, the avei-age depth being 6.6 ft., and the maximum 
depth 10.6 ft. Tlie cost of this sewer was as follows: 

Cost of 8-in. Sewer. 

Per lin ft. 

Total. Sewer. 

Trenching $113.40 ?0.139 

Sheeting trench and miscel- 
laneous 15.00 .018 

Laying pipe 21.25 .026 

Backfilling 15.25 .019 

Cement for joints, 6 sacks 2.16 .002 

Sand for joints, 20 bu 1.20 .001 

Pipe, 780 lin. ft 121.60 .149 

Specials, IS, at $0.72 12.96 .016 

Total $302.90 $0,369 

One lamp hole, 10 ft. deep 4.30 .005 

Two manholes 64.89 .081 

Grand total $372.09 $0,455 

There was 805.6 lin. ft. of trenching, the cost per lin. ft. being 
$0.14. There were 327 joints, requiring six sacks of cement and 
20 bushels of sand, the cost per joint being $0,011. 

In the above work the cost of laying tile includes taking out the 
last spading from the bottom of tlie trench, and tamping same about 
tile previously laid. Each tile was laid to line and grade from a 
grade cord supported over trench, the supports consisting of two 
upright 2x4 pieces, and cross board, spaced 25 ft. apart. Joints 
were calked and cemented, bevel pattern, with 1 : 1 Portland cement 
mortar. 

The backfilling was done with team and scraper and two men. 
Earth was first put in the trench to within about 1 ft. of the top, 
and the trench then flooded with the fire hose. The balance of the 
earth was then scraped onto the trench. This has proven a very 
satisfactory method, as practically all of the earth goes back into 
the trench in a short time. 

The soil consists of from 1 to 3 ft. of black loam on the surface, 
under which is tough cla.v. As the ground this summer contained 
very little water, only skeleton bracing was used. 

Prices and Wages. 
The prices of materials delivered on the work were as follows: 
Cast-iron manhole and lamphole covers, $0,025 per lb. 
Wrought-iron manhole steps, $0.24 each. 
No. 1 vitrified paving brick, $11.00 per M. 
Cement, $0.36 per sack. 
Sand, $0.06 per bu., 100 lbs. per bu. 
Jute calking, $0.07 per lb. 

8-in. tile, $0,156 per lin. ft. 
lO-in. tile, $0.26 per lin. ft. 
Oak lumber. $38.50 per M. 



SEIFERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 835 

The wages paid were as follows : 

Brick masons, $0.55 per hour for S hours. 

Tile layer, $2.50 per day. 

Common labor, ip0.20 per hour for 9 hours. 

Team and driver for backfilling, $0.40 per hour. 

Cost of Manholes. 

Tlie manholes were built of No. 1 vitrified pa\ing brick on a 
foundation of 1:4:8 concrete from 8 in. to 1 ft. thick under the 
walls. Portland cement mortar mi.Ked 1 : 2 was used in building 
walls, all joints being .slushed full. The walls were 1I> in. thick at 
depths greatei- than about 12 ft. and !) in. thick above this deprii. 

Below is given cost of two manholes of different depths : 

Manhole 16.5 ft. deep, requiring 20.4 cu. yds. ex- 
cavation. 

Excavation : 
Labor, at $0.20 per hour ? 9.40 

Foundation : 

Labor, at $0.20 per hour 2.40 

3 sacks cement, at $0.36 per sack 1.08 

0.4 cu. yd. sand, at $1.40 per yd 0.56' 

1 cu. yd. crushed brick, at $2.30 per cu. j^d.. 2.30 

Superstructure Manhole : 

2,400 brick, at $11.00 per M 26.40 

16 sacks cement, at $0.36 per sack 5.76 

26 bu. sand, at $0.06 per bu 1.56 

1 C. I. cover, 307 lbs., at $0,025 per lb 7.6S 

1 dust pan, 50 lbs., at $0,025 per lb 1.25 

8 steps, at $0.24 each 1.92 

2 pieces split tile in bottom 0.65 

Brick mason. 10 hrs., at $0.55 per hr 5.50 

Hod carriers, at $0.20 per hr 6.00 

Total cost of manhole $72.46 

Manhole 8.4 ft. deep, requiring 8.2 cu. yds. ex- 
cavation. 

Excavation : 

1 man 13 hrs.. at $0.20 per hr $ 2.60 

Foundation : 

Labor, at $0.20 per hr 0.80 

2 sacks cement, at $0.36 per sack 0.72 

.25 cu. yd. sand, at $1.40 per cu. vd 0.35 

.5 cu. yd. crushed brick, at $2.30 per cu. yd. 1.15 

Superstructure Manhole : 

1,100 brick, at $11.00 per M 12.10 

6 sacks cement, at $0.36 per sack 2 16 

10 bu. sand, at $0.06 per bu 60 

1 C. I. cover, 307 ft., at $0,025 per lb 7 68 

1 dust pan, 50 lbs., at $0,025 per lb 125 

3 steps, at $0.24 each 0.72 

2 pieces split tile in bottom 40 

Brick mason, 8 hrs.. at $0.55 per hr 4 40 

Hod carriers, at $0.20 per hr 1.60 

Total cost of manhole $36.53 



830 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

All of the above work was done this summer by lay labor under 
the supervision of Mr. E. F. Bridges, City Engineer, to wliom we 
are Indebted for the information from which this article was pre- 
pared. 

Cost of Two Pipe Sewers.* — The following costs relate to two 
small jobs of 8-in. pipe sewer constructed during 190S at Frederic- 
ton, N. B. The work was done by day labor and the wages paid 
were: 

Cents. 

Foreman, per hour 30 

Laborers, per hour 18 

Single team, per hour 27 

Double team, per hour 50 

A 9-hour day was worked. The 8-in. terra cotta pipe cost 22% 
cts. per foot, and Gillingham cement cost $2.10 per barrel delivered 
on the work. Lumber for studding cost $16.50 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 
The manholes were elliptical 4 ft. x 3 ft. in diameter with 8-in. 
brick walls and 12-in. tube. 

Waterloo Road Sewer. — This job comprised 495 ft. of 8-in. pipe 

sewer with 2 manholes. The average depth of trench was 9.7 ft. 

It cost as follows: 

Item. Total. Per unit. 

5.98 cu. yds. brick work $ 83.10 $13.85 

533.5 cu. yds. excavation 274.97 0.515 

Laying 8-in. pipe (495 lin. ft.) 20.72 0.04 

The cost of the sewer, including sheeting, which is lumped with 
excavation in the above costs, was $0.93 per lin. ft. The trench 
had to be close sheeted every foot of its length, the material being 
sand and the bottom 4 ft. wide. 

Phoenix Square Sewer. — This job comprised Sll ft. of 8-in. pipe 
sewer, with 3 manholes. The average depth of trench was 5.8 ft. 
in sand and loam, which had to be braced about every 4 to 6 ft. 
The trench was dry. The cost of the work was as follows: 
Item. Total. Per unit. 

4.32 cu. yds. brick work $ 54.00 $12.50 

522.5 cu. yds. excavation 195.30 0.374 

Pipe laying (811 ft.) 27.70 0,034 

The total cost of the sewer was $425.15 or $0.52 per lin. ft. 
We are indebted for the above information to A. K. Grimmer, city 
engineer, Fredericton, N. B. 

Cost of 8-in. to 18-in. Sewers at Cardele, Ga. — ^In Engineering 

News, March 30, 1893, Mr. Geo. G. Earl, C. E., gives the cost of 
some pipe sewer work at Cardele, Ga. Wages were 80 cts. to $1 per 
day for labor (presumably negroes) and the foreman received $70 
a month. 



*Engineerinff-Contracting, Aug. 25, 1909. 





Cost of 


Cost of 


Lengtli 


labor, 


foreman, 


in ft. 


cts. per< t. 


cts. 


per ft. 


1,185 


14.1 




1.0 


3,090 


22.8 




1.9 


900 


33.8 




1.9 


487 


35.2 




5.8 


225 


26.7 




■ 


298 


35.5 




1.6 


1,044 


27.0 




1.1 


963 


33.5 




1.7 


867 


79.2 




4.0 



SEirERS, COXDUirs AXD DRAIXS. 

Depth 

of cut 

Size of pipe. in ft. 

8 inches 5.11 

S inches 7.0 

S inches S.O 

8 inches 11.2 

10 inclies 7.0 

1 niches 7.1 

12 inches 5.4 

1 8 inches 6.7 

IS inches 10.6 

The "Cost of Lril)or" given in the fourth column includes trench- 
ing, pipe laying and backfilling. 

In building 2.6 miles of sewer (2 miles of which were S-in.) and 
35 manholes, the total cost was: 

Labor $3,867 

Masons and helpers 462 

Sundries 17 

Foreman 266 

Supervision 1,000 

Pipe 2,635 

Brick 252 

Cement 166 

Hauling 82 

Manhole covers 289 

Tools and incidentals 561 

Total ?9,596 

It will be noted that the foreman's wages amounted to about 6% 
of the total wages paid to laborers and masons. 

Cost of a 12-in. Pipe Sewer, Menasha, Wis. — In 1903, some pipe 
sewers were built in Menasha, Wis., by day labor. I am indebted 
to Mr. S. S. Little for the following data: There were 2,200 ft. of 
trench, about half of which was for 12-ln. pipe and half for 15-in. 
pipe. The depth of trench ranged from 7% to 10 ft., averaging 
9 ft., and the width was 2 ft. The material was solid red clay. 
Wages paid were ?1.75 per 10-hr. day. Some team work, at $3.50 a 
day, was used in scraping in the backfill. The labor of trenching, 
laying pipe, and backfilling averaged 37 cts. per lin. ft. of trench. 
If the pipe laying cost 4 cts. per ft., the cost of trenching and back- 
filling was 33 cts. per ft., or 50 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of 8-in. Sewer at Ithaca, N. Y. — In £?ngineering News, Aug. 
20, 1896. Mr. H. N. Ogden, C. E., gives the following costs of trench- 
ing and laying 8-in. sewer pipe in Ithaca, N. T. : The column of 
labor cost is based on daily wages of $1.35 for laborers, $1.50 for 
pipe layers, and $2 for foreman. Mr. Ogden has kindly informed 
the writer that the working day was 10 hours long. Teams were 
paid $3.50, masons on manholes, $3.50, and masons' helpers, $1.50 ; 
8-in. sewer pipe cost 12% cts. per ft. Natural cement, at 95 cts. 
per bbl., laid 120 to 243 ft. of pipe per bbl. (Doubtless neat cement 
mortar was used.) The work was by contract, and not all under 



838 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the same foreman ; hence the variation in cost shown in the table. 

Deptli of No. of 

Length trench Mate- day's — Cost of labor. — 

Name of street. laid. in ft. rial. work. Total. Per ft. 

Wheat 1,134 5.3 i 4 $126.50 $0.11 

Corn 1,504 5.8 25 200.70 .12 

Washington 398 4.9 » 11/2 49.50 .12 

Titus 1,391 6.8 * 41/2 318.90 .23 

Plain 1,332 5.9 ^ 7 209.00 .li> 

Buffalo 597 6.7 " 4 108.25 .18 

Payette 984 5.6 ' 4 195.05 .20 

Centre 1,334 6.8 » 7 347.00 .26 

Green 1,919 5.7 » 11 418.85 .22 

Clinton 2,403 5.4 i" 11 519.85 .22 

Albany 1,431 5.0 " 9 319.50 .22 

Geneva 1,323 5.3 ^2 7 373.47 .28 

Cayuga 1,413 6.3 i^ 10 468.25 .33 

1 Wet clay ; water 3 ft. down, bailed out. 

2 Wet clay ; water 3 ft. down, bailed out, occasional bracing. 

3 Wet clay. 

* Loam over wet clay ; water 6 ft. down ; occasional bracing. 

^ Wet clay ; water 5 ft. down ; diaphragm pump ; occasional 

bracing. 
' Clay and gravel ; much water in places ; pump ; braced. 
'' Wet clay ; water 4 ft. down ; occasional bracing and pumping. 
^ Wet clay ; water 3 ft. down ; 1 diaphragm ; occasional bracing. 
8 Half clay, half gravel ; half close .sheeted ; imderdrain pumps. 
1" Wet clay, some gravel pockets ; 1 pump ; some bracing. 
" Gravel containing water at 5 ft. ; pump ; half sheeted. 
12 Sheeting and pumping entire ; water at 5 ft. 
IS Loose gravel ; brick pavement removed ; half braced and half 

sheeted. 

Cost of 12-in. Sewers in Toronto, Canada. — A large number of 

12-in. pipe sewers were built by day labor for the city of Toronto 

in 1891, at the following costs: 

Average Length, Man- Catch- Connec- Cost per 

depth. Soil. feet. holes, basins, tions. foot. 

10' 10" Quicksand 1,041 5 6 15 $1.95 

11' 2" Clay 4,427 19 21 240 1.27 

18' 0" Blue clay 650 3 .. .. 2.11 

12' 1" " 180 1 .. 15 2.20 

11' 6" " 251 . .. 4 2.41 

8' 1" " 800 3 4 29 1.33 

9' 9" " 483 4 2 24 1.78 

11' 2" Clay loam 430 2 2 13 0.96 

10' 8" " 357 3 . . 17 1.90 

11' 0" Hardpan 320 2 2 18 1.28 

11' 3" Sand 535 3 2 5 1.50 

11' 4" Av. of above 9,474 45 39 380 ifl.51 

The cost per ft. includes all materials, labor and inspection of 
work. It also includes the manholes and catch-basins, and the 
Y-connections. The 12-in. pipe cost 22 cts. per ft. ; brick was |8.50 
per M. Laborers were paid 15 cts. per hr., and a few special 
inen were paid 18 cts. per hr. ; bricklayers were paid 40 cts. per hr. 

Contract Labor Costs at Providence, R. I. — During 1906 there 
were 2.263 miles of regular sewers built at Providence, R. L, of 
which 1.751 miles were of pipe and .512 miles were of brick. The 
average depth of cut, nature of excavation and contract cost of 



SEWERS, COXDUITS AND DRAINS. 



8;3!) 



labor per foot on the different sizes of sewers built during 1906 are 
siven in the annual report of the city engineer as being as 
follows : 

Average depth 
Nature of Excavation. of cut, ft. 



8- 
8- 
12- 
12- 
12- 
12- 
12- 
15- 
15- 
20- 

22- 

24- 
30 
36- 
70- 

70- 

84- 
84- 



n. pipe' — Fine sand, dry 10.50 

n. pipe' — Fine sand, wet 10.50 

n. pipe! — Sand and gravel, dry 10.50 

n. pipe' — Hard pan, wet 10.50 

n. pipe' — Hard pan and rock 10.50 

n. pipe=^ — Fine sand, dry 8.00 

n. pipe^^ — Fine sand, wet 8.00 

n. pipe" — Sand and gravel, dry 8.00 

n. pipe^ — Hard pan, wet 8.00 

n. sewer — Fine sand, dry 11.67 

n. sewer — Sand and gravel 11.67 

n. sewer — Filling, dry 11.67 

n. sewer — Fine sand, dry 12.00 

n. sewer — Fine sand, wet 12.00 

n. sewer — Sand and gravel, dry 12.00 

n. sewer — Hard pan, wet 12.00 

n. sewer — Hard pan and rock 12.00 

n. sewer — Sand and gravel, dry 12.25 

n. sewer^Hard pan, wet 12.25 

n. brick sewer — Hard pan and rock, 

wet 12.67 

n. brick sewer — Hard pan, sand and 

rock, dry 12.83 

n. brick sewer — Sand and gravel, wet. 13.00 
n. brick sewer — Sand and gravel, wet. 

n. iron pipe — Mud, wet 

n. brick and concrete — Sand and grav- 
el, wet 

n. brick and concrete — Sand and grav- 
el, wet 

n. brick and concrete — Mud, wet 

n. brick and concrete — Sand and grav- 
el, wet 20.00 



13.50 
14.00 

18.00 



14.00 



Average cost 
per ift. 
$0.45 
.49 
.41 
.60 
.35 
.40 
.45 
.40 
.45 
.30 
.70 
.60 
.60 
.85 
.62 
.60 
.35 
.75 
1.00 

2.00 

.65 
3.00 
4.00 
6.50 

8.00 

30.00 
8,00 

20.00 



1 In drains to curb line. ^ in basin connections. ^ In tunnel. 

The average labor cost of building each manhole was $10.65, each 
catch-basin $11.07, and each extra inlet $9.00. 

Brick Sewer Data. — Brick sewers are either "circular" or "egg- 
shape." In either case the upper part of the sewer is called the 
"arch," and the U)wer part is called the "invert." The depth 
of a brick sewer, as given on profiles, is the depth from the sur- 
face of the street to the inside of the bottom of the sewer, so that 
the thickness of the sewer invert should be added to secure the 
full depth of the trench. The thickness of a brick sewer is usu- 
ally expressed in "rings." A "one-ring" sewer is made one brick 
thick ; that is, 4 ins. thick plus the cement plaster which is u.sually 
%-in. thick; so that a one-ring sew^er is 4% ins. thick. A two-ring 
sewer is two bricks, or 9 ins. thick. A three-ring sewer is three 
bricks, or 13% ins. thick. 

The size of a sewer is denoted by its inside diameter. 

Brick sewers, like pipe sewers, are usually paid for by the 
lineal foot of sewer including trenching ; but it is desirable always 
to calculate the brickwork in cubic yards. Table VIII gives the 



840 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

number of cubic yards of brick masonry per lineal foot of circular 
sewer. 

For intermediate sizes interpolate between the values given in 
the table. 

To calculate the number of cubic yards per lineal foot of any 
circular sewer, proceed as follows : Add the inside diameter in feet 
to the thickness of the sewer in feet ; this gives the "average 
diameter." Multiply this "average diameter" by 3 1/7, or 3.14 ; 
then multiply the quotient by the thickness of the sewer in feet 
and divide bj^ 27. 

For example, a 5-ft. sewer has walls 9 ins. thick (it is a "two- 
ring" sewer) ; and, as 9 ins. = %, ft., we have by the rule: 
5 + % = 5% as the "average diameter" ; then 5% X 3 1/7 X % -^ 27 
=r % cu. yd. per lin. ft. 

Sewer bricks are of a better quality than common building 
bricks, and usually cost $1 per M more than common bricks. 
Ordinarily about 500 bricks are required per cubic yard, but the 
variation may be 15% greater or less, due to the fact that the 
sizes of bricks differ in different localities. About 2% is usually 
added to cover the wastage. 

Since the joints are V-shaped, and since the inside of the sewer 
Is usually plastered, more mortar is required than in plain brick- 
work. About 0.35 to 0.4 cu. yd. of mortar is required per cu. yd. 
of brick masonry. The number of barrels of cement required to 
make 1 cu. yd. of mortar is given on page 253. 

In building 5-ft. circular sewers at Lawrence, Mass., in 1S86. 1 
part natural cement to 1 % parts sand was used ; and it required 
2% bbls. of cement per thousand bricks. 

At Newton, Mass., a 24 x 36-in. egg-shaped sewer required 1.5 
bbls. of cement per cu. yd., the mortar being mixed 1:11/;. There 
were 509 bricks per cu. yd. of sewer masonry, not including the 
waste; and 520 bricks including waste. 

At Los Angeles, two-ring 40-in. circular sewers required 0.4 bbl. 
Portland cement per lineal foot of sewer, which is equivalent to 1.12 
bbls. cement per cu. yd. of brick masonry. The mortar was 1 part 
cement to 2 parts sand. 

Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald gives the following as averages of cost 
of brick sewer work done by certain contractof-s at Boston, prior 
to 1894 : 

— - — Per cu. 3''d. 

Labor ?2.89 ?3.40 

Brick (560 to 580 per cu. yd.), at $9.50 per M. 5.48 5.30 

Sand 0.30 0.40 

Natural cement, 1.27 bbls., at 11.13 1.35 1.50 

Centers 0.23 .20 

Miscellaneous 0.19 .20 

Total per cu. yd 110.44 ?11-00 

The first example is the cost of a well-handled job of 1,300 
cu. yds. of brick masonry. The second example is the average of 
several jobs. Brick cost $9.50 per M; and natural cement $1.13 
per bbl. The mortar was probably mixed 1:1%, that is 1 part 



SEJVERS. COX DU ITS AND DRAINS. 



841 



cement to l'^ parts sand. Wages of bricklaj-ers were probably 
50 cts. per hr., and helpers 15 to 20 cts. per hr. 

Table VIII. — Brick Masonbt in Circular Sewebs, Cu. Yds. pef. 

Lineal Ft. 



Diameter 


Ft. 


Ins. 


o 





2 


3 


2 


tj 


2 


<) 


3 





3 


3 


3 


6 


3 


9 


4 





4 


3 


4 


6 


4 


9 


5 





5 


3 





6 


5 


9 


C 





6 


3 


6 


6 


6 


9 


1 





7 


6 


8 





8 


6 


9 





9 


6 


10 






One-Ring 
( 4 Vli ins. ) 

103 

114 

125 

136 

147 

158 

169 

180 

191 

202 

213 

223 

234 

245 

256 

267 

21 



Two-Ring 
(9 ins.) 
0.240 
.261 
.280 
.305 
.327 
.349 
.371 
.393 
.415 
.436 
.458 
.480 
.501 
.523 
.545 
.567 
.589 
.611 
.633 
.655 
.677 
.720 
.763 
.807 
.851 
.895 
.938 



Three-Ring 
(laya ins.) 



.802 

.834 

.867 

.900 

.933 

.966 

1.000 

1.031 

1.063 

1.128 

1.193 

1.260 

1.325 

1.390 

1.456 



Table IX. — BniCK Masonry in Bgg-Shaped Sewers^ Cu. Yds. per 



.Lineal Ft. 



Dimensions 




Ins. 


12 


X 18 


14 


X 21 


16 


x24 


18 


X 27 


20 


x30 


22 


x3,3 


24 


X 36 


26 


X 39 


. 28 


x42 


30 


X 45 


32 


x48 


34 


x51 


36 


x54 


38 


x57 


40 


X 60 


42 


X 63 


44 


X 66 


46 


X 69 


48 


x72 


50 


x75 


52 


x78 


54 


X 81 


56 


x84 


58 


X 87 


60 


X 90 



One-Ring 
(4Va ins.) 
0.071 
.081 
.090 
.099 
.108 
.117 
.126 
.136 
.145 
.154 
.163 
.172 
.182 
.191 
.200 



Two-Ring 
(.9 ins.) 
0.176 
.194 
.212 
.231 
.249 
.267 
.286 
.304 
.322 
.341 
.359 
.374 
.396 
.414 
.433 
.451 
.469 
.488 
.506 
.524 
.543 
.561 
.579 
.598 
.616 



Three-Ring 
(ISi/a ins.) 



698 
725 
753 
781 

808 
836 
863 
891 
918 
946 
97.-? 



842 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Bricklayers on sewer work often receive abnormally high wages. 
In some cities the labor unions have forced up the price to $1 per 
hour. In such cases a bricklayer is usually required to lay not 
less than 3,000 or 4,000 bricks a day; and I have known as high 
as 5,000 bricks to be laid by skilful and rapid layers. 

The dimensions of egg-shaped sewers are given in terms of the 
inside diameter of the upper arcli, and the inside height of the 
sewer; thus a 30 x 45-in. sewer, is one having an upper arch 30 ins. 
inside diameter and an inside height of 45 ins. The Phillips Metro- 
politan Standard (English) egg-shaped sewer has an inside height 
which is IV, times the diameter of the arch. Calling the diameter 
of the arch d, the other dimensions are : 

Radius of invert 14 d 

Radius of side l^d 

Height 11/2 d 

Area of waterway 1.15 d* 

Perimeter ., 3.96 d 

The first dimension given in the first column of Table VIII Is d. 
The table gives the number of cubic yards of masonry per lin. ft. 
of egg-shaped sewer. 

Cost of Large Brick Sewers, Denver, Colo. — Mr. W. W. Follett 
gives the following data on brick and concrete sewers built by day 
labor in Denver, Colo. : Work was begun August, 1894, and fin- 
ished June, 1895. Work was carried on in the winter, which 
added somewhat to the cost. The wages paid were high and the 
hours of labor short. The men were considered to be efficient. 
The following were the number of day's work performed and the 
wages per 8-hr. day: 

726 days, foremen, at ?3. 331/3 to $5. 

1,398 daj's, stone masons, at $3.60. 

1,491 days, brick masons, at $4.00. 
385 days, watchmen, blacksmiths, and timbermen, at $2.50. 

8,115 days, labor, at $2.00. 

7,628 days, labor, at $1.75. 
363 days, Waterboys, at $1.00 to $1.25. 

2,150 days, team with driver, at $3.50. 
252 days, enginemen and pumpers, at $3.00. 

See Table X. 

Note. — Sec. 1 was built in filled ground containing city refuse. 
The original ground was about level with the invert, and had been 
filled with 2 to 5 ft. of refuse. The bottom of the trench was 2 to 4 
ft. below the level of a river near by, so that there was much 
pumping. The backfill was largely hauled in with wagons, as the 
material from the trench was not a siiitable backfill. The sewer 
had a concrete base 8 ins. thick and 16 ft. wide, on top of which 
was a stone cradle. The invert was a single ring of brick, and the 
arch was three rings. 

Sec. 3 was nearly all in good ground, but there was water all 
along it. The cross-section of the sewer was the same as in Sec. 1, 
except with less diameter, giving about 80% as much material. 

Sec. 6 contained rock for its full length, but the rock was very 
soft, being in places hardly more than indurated clay. The trench 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



843 



> 

O 



fa 
xn 

& 
t< 
& 
a 
u 
S: 
o 
O 

Q 

<; 

m 

o 



o 
O 



Eh 



o 00 



y ooo 



i-l-9<t- .t- 



^ 00 r-Tcq'io 






m 



oco 



• 5-5 IC t- iH 

I T-! 1-5 N o 









; 1-i '. CO o 



•Tt4CO 



P. 0,01 OJ X 
■1-5 J ^ ^ "^ W 

*w ra > S a; ci 

S bx)5 >. >> >> >> >• 
dca 



t- 00 • • O M O M r-{ to 

ooo • .OOOCCrHCO 00 

c^co • •coTf^f-tT-tju:' 

i-i o' '. ; 05 O O O o' m" 



&0- 






ClOO 



CJ 0:1 O O ■n'Tf . 


a; 


0000 • 

00 • 


^ - -— : 





(M . 



•CDiMOOO 
■ 05 (M iM ■**< CO 
• COOC^i-li-H 

: oi O O O O 



. CO f-H C'? C r-< I (M 
, O O "X- O C^•I I Ci 
• G^l CO ■* 1-* 1— I I (M 



• (M i>. o t^ in I t- 

. CO L^ O Ot- '+■ ! <D 

• CQ CO 1^5 O T-t 10 

; CI o o o o c^i 



Tf c-:) (M o "^ 

Cvl C<) C— LO CO 
CO C<1 li^ t— I T— 1 

0600 00 



.(Mt-tOT^CO I O 

. C^ Tf 1— I 00 t- I 1-H 

. tr- 0:1 Ci CO »-< I -^ 

Iinoooo I crj 



t^UOlTi-^iHiMCOOOO 
D-Oi'^COCD'^CCJC^t- 
COlrtCO^-Ht-OOOCOi-H 
OOrHCOlOOOOO 



CO 1-H CO in 00 CO 
Lfl OS ■«*< C<J CI -n* 

t- 00 t- Ci iH Tt* 



COi— iCv] CT5 
00 t— ''^ O 



OOt-HC0C£!OOOO 



2 11) — 
o- • a, 

O O^j 



5 fcJ3 C • C 



3PQHE 






*9- 



Ot-i 



cf-l « — 

J^.5a) fe? « 5 "5 ^ 

HPuOmM 



grid 



o 

0; O^ 

<4-( 0) 
OJ ^ 

r? -2 

ra o 3 

OtM 

02 

(D g^ 

*^ «j 

;t; c . 

";: *- >i 
^^■= 

d d (B 
ts^c 

C IK 

o ce > 

01 . b 



o „ 



844 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

averaged 11 ft. deep, and was timbered all along. No water was 
encountered. The sewer was three-ring brick. 

Sec. 7 was similar in every way to Sec. 6, except that a loose 
sand overlaid the rock. 

Sec. 8 was in gravel containing much water. The cut averaged 
121/2 ft. deep. 

Sec. 9 was in fine, loose sand, heavily charged with water. The 
average cut was 14 ft. deep. 

The concrete foundations were made 1:3:6 Portland cement and 
crushed, unscreened sandstone. The stone was estimated on a 
basis of 2,500 lbs. per cu. yd. Concrete was hand mixed and de- 
livered in wheelbarrows. The average cost of 1,545 cu. yds. of 
concrete was as follows : 

0.732 bbl. cement $2,543 

0.754 cu. yd. stone 1.409 

0.424 cu. yd. sand 0.148 

Water 0.007 

Labor ($1.75 an 8-hr. day) 0.703 

Total per cu. yd $4,810 

The stone cradle was built of a soft sandstone which broke out 
square in the quarry so that little hammering was required in the 
trench. It was bought by the ton. Louisville (natural) cement, 
weighing 265 lbs. per bbl., was used in a 1 : 2 mortar. The average 
cost (not including engineering) of 6,438 cu. yds. of this stone 
cradle was as follows : 

1.297 cu. yds. of rubble $1,975 

0.875 bbl. natural cement 1.261 

0.305 cu. yd. sand 0.130 

Water 0.005 

Labor (masons, $3.60 ; laborers, $2.00, for 

8 hrs.) 1.284 

Total per cu. yd $4,655 

The invert brick ring of Sec. 3 was laid in 1 : 3 Portland mortar, 
and the same mortar was used in plastering. On Sees. 1, 3 and 5 a 
1:2% Louisville mortar was used ; and on Sees. 6, 7, 8 and 9, a 
1 : 3 Louisville throughout. 

The amount of cement per cubic yard of brickwork, by sections, 
was as follows: Sec. 10, 0.835 bbl. ; Sec. 3, 1 bbl. ; Sec. 5, 1.07 bbls. ; 
Sec. 6, 0.87 bbl. ; Sec. 7, 0.937 bbl. ; Sec. 8, 0.99 bbl. ; Sec. 9, 
0.976 bbl. Assuming that the 1:2% mortar required 2% bbls. 
cement per cu. yd. of mortar, it would require 0.4 cu. yd. of m.ortar 
per cu. yd. of brick masonry when it took 1 bbl. of cement per 
cu. yd. of brick masonry. 

The number of brick per cubic yard ranged from 431 on' Sec. 3 
to 450 on Sec. 6. The average cost of 6,702 cu.' yds. of brick- 
Work on all sections was as follows, per cu. yd. : 

439 brick $4,584 

0.92 bbl. cement 1.953 

0.41 cu. yd. sand 0.198 

Miscellaneous 0.229 

Labor 2.384 

Total per cu. yd $9,348 



SHIVERS . COXDUITS AND DRAINS. 



t<-io 



Tlie labor cost ranged from ?2 per cu. yd. on Sees. 1 and 3 to 
$2.95 on Sec. £>. 

One foreman handled IS bricklayers, divided into three gangs, the 
total number of his force, including helpers and laborers, being 
80 men. 

A neat form of steel centering was designed and used as fol- 



lows: 

rings ; 



Light, 8-1 
the lower 



)., dump-car rails were bent so as to form half- 
half-ring (or semi-circle) being bent with the 



© 



© 






View of Joint 
Looking across 
the Sewer from 
its Center. 




(Shoff Piece 
\ of ffaU bolfeel 
\ to Lower Rail 



View of Joinf 

Looking along 

the Side of the 

Sewer. 



Fig. 4. Centers for Concrete Sewer. 



head of the rail facing out, and the upper half-ring with its head 
facing in, as shown in Fig. 4. A short piece of rail was laid with 
its flange against the flange of the lower half-ring and riveted. 
One of these short pieces of rail was thus riveted at each end of 
the lower half-ring. Thus it was possible to butt tile ends of the 
upper half-ring against these short pieces of rail riveted to the 
lower half-ring, and connect the two with flsh-plates and boles. In 
order to be able to "strike" (remove) these steel centers, a bevel- 
joint was made, as shown in the figure. This was done by sawing 
one end of the upper half-ring across on a bevel, and sawing a 



Si6 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

similar bevel on the end of the short piece of rail against which it 
butted. After the fish-plate bolts were removed, a blow of a 
hammer would readily knock the two half-rings apart at the bevel- 
joint. It will be noted that the 2-in. lagging was laid upon tha 
flange of the upper half-ring, no lagging being used on the lower 
half-ring, as the invert was built of brick. 

To hold the lagging to the upper half-ring, it was found best to 
make little iron clips, three of which were fastened to the under- 
side of each 12-ft. stick of lagging, using two wood screws for 
each clip. The end of the clip slipped over the flange of the steel 
rail, but was not screwed or bolted to the rail, so that each stick of 
lagging was quickly removed by shoving it endwise. These steel 
centers or rings were placed 2 ft. 5 ins. apart, c. to c, so that 40 
rings sufficed to set up centers for 96 ft. of sewer. Two men 
would take down, clean and set up 96 ft. of this centering in a day, 
making the cost of moving centers about 4 cts. per ft. of sewer. 
In building 8,290 ft. of sewers, three sets of steel centers and two 
sets of lagging were used, costing $775 for materials and labor 
of making, or 9.3 cts. per ft. of sewer, making a total cost of a 
little over 13 cts. per ft. of sewer for inaking and moving lagging 
and material. There were only three sets of rings because there 
were only three sizes of sewers, 70, 77 and 94-in, 

Cost of an Egg Shaped Sewer, Springfield, Mass.* — The Worces- 
ter St. sewer, for which cost data are given below, was built at 
Springfield, Mass., during December, 1904, and January, 1905. It 
consists of 670 ft. of 1 ft. 10 in. by 2 ft. 9 in., egg-shaped brick 
sewer and two manholes. The sewer was laid in a gravel trench at 
an average depth of 9.8 ft., the grade being 6 in. per 100 ft. 
The loose character of the gravel necessitated tight sheeting of the 
trench all of the way. 

The invert of the sewer was constructed of 8-in. brickwork, but 
the arch was of a single ring or 4-in. brick, plastered outside with 
1 in. of cement mortar, Portland cement being used throughout. 

At the time the work was done there was about 2% ft. of frost 
in the ground, and consequently coke fires were built along the 
line of excavation in advance of the work. These fires required 
about $45 worth of wood and 536 bushels of coke at 11 cts. per 
bushel. 

The excavation was done by pick and shovel, and the trench 
was backfilled as fast as the mason work was completed. The 
work was done by the city by day labor. 

The wages paid per 8-hour day were as follows : 

Foreman $3.00 

Bracers 2.00 

Laborei's 1.75 

Teams 4.50 

Masons 5.60 

Mason tenders 2.40 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 16, 1907. 



SEIFERS; CONDUITS AND DRAINS. SA: 

The cost of the work is shown in tlio following tabulation : 

Labor. Per lin ft. 

Excavating and refilling $].40 

Sheeting 23 

Masons 36 

Tenders 20 

Total labor $2.19 

Material. 

Brick. $:).20 per M $ .79 

Cement, at $1.60 36 

Manhole castings and steps 02 

Sheeting lumber, at $22.50 05 

Wood 07 

Coke (536 bu.) 09 

Profiles and centers 01 

Total materials $1.39 

Grand total $3.58 

The labor cost of constructing the brickwork was as follows: 

Per lin. ft. Per cu. yd. 

Masons, 42% days $0.36 $2.14 

Tenders, 57=^ days 20 1.19 

Total $0.56 $3.33 

On the work there were usually two masons and three tenders. 

Cost of a 7- Ft. Brick Sewer, Gary, Ind.* — In trenching for a 7-ft. 
sewer through water soaked sand at Gary, Ind., the sand is being 
unwatered by driving well points and pumping. The method has 
enabled what promised to be a difficult task to be accomplished 
with comparative ease. Only a moderate amount of sheeting has 
been necessary and practically no caving has resulted. 

The sand through which the work passes is very fine, such a 
sand as forms the dunes of Michigan and other states bordering 
Lake Michigan. "When water soaked it takes a slope of about 1 
on 15. At Gary this fine sand is water soaked to within a few feet 
of the surface ; in places water covers the surface. So far as 
excavation work goes the material is to all Intents and purposes 
a quicksand. 

In brief, the method of work adopted is as follows : A wide 
shallow trench is excavated by a drag, scraper bucket excavator 
of the Page & Shnable type to about water level, say to a depth 
of 6 to 8 ft. Bleeding is then begun. A 4-in. pipe 132 ft. long in 
six 22-ft. sections it stretched along the .center line of the sewer. 
On each side of this pipe about 3 ft. away is sunk a row of well 
points 2 ft. apart. These well points are 3 ft. long and are attached 
to 13-ft. pipes. The tops of the driven pipes are connected by hose 
to the 4-in. pipe line which has cross-valves for the purposes. A pump 
connects with the 4-in. pipe line and also with a 4-in. well point 
sunk vertically underneath. An extension of the 4-in, pipe line 
"With strainer end also takes the surface water from a sump. 

This battery of well points lowers the water so that a further 
excavation of 6 to 8 ft. can be made between sheet piling. A second 

*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 5, 1908. 



84-8 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



battery of well points is then sunk at this new level. In this 
battery, however, the points are sunk close to the sheeting and each 
row feeds into a separate 2-in. pipe along the trench. This 
battery lowers the water level enough to permit excavation to 
sub-grade, which is some 6-ft. below the bottom of the sheeting. 
The brick sewer is then built in the usual manner and the back- 
filling done by means of a derrick and Hayward clam shell bucket. 

The diagram Fig. 4A shows the general plan of procedure 
described. In this description details have been neglected to 
prevent confusion ; some of these details, however, require 
description. 

Scraper Bucket Excavator Work. — Tlie bucket is of 2 cu. yds. 
capacity and is operated on a 5 8-ft. boom witli the usual cable and 
chain attachments. The sand being excavated is wet ; that is, the 
voids are filled with water. The amount of excavation is 10 cu, yds. 
per running foot of trench, and the machine makes 60 ft. per day. 
This 60 ft. is not its capacity, but is the distance made daily by 




Cn^rCP.ttr 



JZ''"J_ niiii[iiiiM'"ni —j^^^ 



Fig. 4 A. 



all the work and the excavator is worked just enough to keep 
pace. - The depth being excavated is also limited by water level. 

The machine is mounted on rollers traveling on a track of 
timbers. One merit of the niachine is that some of the excavated 
thaterial can be dumped straight ahead in the path of the work so 
that it builds its own roadbed over the swamps in front. The 
machine is pulled ahead by simply lowering the bucket and letting 
it get a good bite in tlie ground ahead, then pulling on the digging 
cable. 

The excavator is taking out about 400 cu. yds. per 9-hour day, 
with a gang of 1 engineer, 1 fireman and 4 laborers. 

First Battery of WeU Points.- — Referring to Fig. 4A it will be seen 
that the fi.rst battery of well points occupies a narrow space along 
the center of the trench ; this permits the slieeting to be driven 
outside of the well points. The well points are 2 ins. x 3 ft., 
and they are attached to 2-in. x 13-ft. pipes with ells at their tops. 
A 4-ft. length of wire lined hose is attached to each ell. These 
points are svmk vertically by jetting. Two men were timed in 
jetting. They used 1-in. jetting pipes with about 100 lbs. water 
pressure and sunk four points in one minute. This time did not 



SEirERS. COXDUITS AXD DRAINS. 849 

include making connections. In addition to the two rows of 2-in. 
points, a 4-in. point is sunlv directly under the pump. 

The well points are connected by the short hose lengths to a 
t-in. horizontal suction pipe. Six 22-ft. sections of suction pipe are 
used with hanged joints. Each section has 11 cross-valves with 
double bushings for the hose connections. A gate valve near the 
end of each section permits tlie rear-sections to be removed and 
placed ahead as fast as the work progresses. An extension of the 
4-in. suction pipe forward to a sump in the excavation being made 
by the scraper bucket handles the surface water. 

The water is drawn from the suction pipe by an Emerson No. 3 
pump with 5-in. suction and 4-in. discharge. The pump is hung to 
a chain fall from an A-frame mounted on rollers. It discharges 
into a tile drain alongside the trench ; this drain leads back to the 
completed sewer discharging behind a temporary dam of bags of 
sand inside the sewer. Summarized, tlie first battery of well points 
is composed as follows : 

1 No. 3 Emerson pump. 

1 4-in. well point sunk below pump. 

132 2-in. well points sunk in two rows. 

1 4-in. suction pipe with extension to surface water sump. 

Sheeting Trench. — The trench is sheeted 10 ft. wide, the sheeting 
being carried along so as to embrace about one section (the 
rearmost) of the first battery of well points. Tlie sheeting is 
2 X 8-in. X 12-ft. planks and is driven by mauls. Waling pieces 
and trench braces are placed as tlie excavation proceeds. This 
excavation is carried down about 6 ft. by shovelers and at this 
level the second battery of well points is placed. The sheeting is 
pulled as the back filling proceeds. 

Second Battery of Wei! Points. — The second battery of well 
points consists of two rows like the first, but the rows are placed 
wide apart (close inside the sheeting on both sides) and each has 
a separate suction pipe. The suction pipes are 2 ins. in diameter 
and the well points are 1 Vi ins. in diameter ; the well points and 
pipes are 16 ft. long and when sunk they penetrate a couple feet 
or so below sub-grade and 6 ft. below the bottom of the sheeting. 
The suction points are made in sections with hose connections every 
two feet and gate valves at the ends. 

Two pumps operate the second battery of well points ; they are 
of the same size and make as that for the first battery and are 
suspended similarly. Each pump draws water from both rows of 
well points and also from a 4-in. well point sunk directly under 
tlie pump. This is accomplished by means of a four-way connection 
in the suction of each pump, about 1 ft. below the pump. From 
this connection 2-in. pipes branch right and left to connections witli 
the 2-in. suction pipes and a third connection is made with the 
4-in. well point. Operating in parallel the two pumps can, by means 
of the gate valves, concentrate their work on those portions of the 
battery of well points where especially large quantities of water 
are encountered or can pump from the whole system, also either 



850 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

one of the pumps can be cut out. These pumps discharge into the 
same tile drain as the first pump. 

Tiie methods of advancing tlie second battery of well points is 
substantially the same as for the first ; that is, the rear sections of 
suction pipe and well points are detached and placed in front. 
Generally the forward end of the second battery is kept far enough 
ahead to overlap the rear section of the first battery. 

Excavation and Sewer Construct ion.^The deepening of the trench 
at the rear end of the second battery of well points is done by hand. 
So perfect is the drainage that it is found possible to excavate some 
6 ft. deeper than the bottom of the sheeting, and to construct the 
brick sewer in the trench bottom with no more seepage than can 
be handled by a fourth Emerson pump, which takes water from a 
sump and discharges behind the temporary sand bag dam mentioned 
previously. 

Backfilling. — The backfilling is done from the spoil bank. As fast 
as the sewer is completed, shovelers cover it with a layer of sand. 
The remainder of the backfilling is done by an 8 14 x 10-in. Lidger- 
wood engine and derrick operating a 1 cu. yd. Hayward clam 
shell. This machine puts in about 500 cu. yds. of backfill in 9 hours 
at a labor cost of about 4 cts. per cu. yd. figured as follows : 

1 engineman at $5 !f 5.00 

1 fireman at $3 3.00 

3 laborers at $2 6.00 

Fuel at $3.60 per ton 6.25 

Total 500 cu. yds. at 4 cts $20.25 

Sheeting and Bracing. — Two rows of 2 x 8-in. x 12-ft. sheeting 
60 ft. long are driven, braced and pulled per 9-hour day with the 
following gang: 

4 men setting braces at $2.25 $ 9.00 

3 men driving sheeting at $2.50 7.50 

4 men pulling sheeting at $2.50 10.00 

1 carpenter at $3 3.00 

Total $29.50 

This gives a cost of 24% cts. per lineal foot of 12-ft. sheeting 
driven, braced and pulled, not including materials and superintend- 
ence, etc. 

Pumping and Changing Piping. — The pumping is continuous day 
and night, but the jetting of well points and changing of piping is 
confined to the regular shift of 9 hours. The gang worked is as 
follows : 

14 pipe line men at $2.25 $31.50 

10 firemen (two shifts) at $3 ,... 30.00 

2 foremen at $3 6.00 

6 laborers at $2 12.00 

Coal for 24 hours (estimated) ' 15.00 

Total $94.50 

This gives a cost of $1.57 per lin. ft. of trench, not including 

superintendence, interest, depreciation, etc. 

Trench Excavation. — The trench excavation, excluding scraper 

bucket works, runs about 300 cu. yds. per day, assuming 60 ft. 



SEjyERS, COXDUITS AND DR.IIXS. 851 

of 10.5 X 13 ft. trench per 9 hours. This work is done by 85 
shovelers at $2 per clay, and costs $170 -;- 300 cu. yds. = 56.6 cts. 
per cu. yd. 

Miscellaneous. — Tlio cost of clearing- tlie riglii uf way amounts 
to .?4 per day, 2 men at $2 being- employed. There are 3 Water- 
boys at .fl, or a charge of $3 per day for Waterboys. 

Hunimurij. — Summarizing we liave the following costs for trench 
Work complete and ready for sower construction : 

Per 

Per dav. lin. ft. 

Scraper excavator work (400 cu. yds.)....? 22.L'."i if 0.370 

Shovel excavation (300 cu. yds.) 170.00 i:.833 

Slieeting and bracing (300 <.-u. yds.) 29. .'lO 0.4f'l 

Pumping and pipe svstem (300 cu. yds.)... (M.50 1.575 

Backfilling (500 cu.'yds.) 20.25 0.337 

Miscellaneous (300 cu. yds.) 7.0n 0.116 

Total .?343.50 S5.722 

Figured on a cubic yard basis tliese costs may be arranged as 
follows : 

Per cu. jd. 
Scraper work, including dealing- (4 00 cu. yds.) . ..$0.05.^, 
Trenching, pumning and sheeting (300 cu. yds.) O.iigo 
Backfilling (500" cu. yds.) 0.040 

Brick Seiver Construction. — About 60 ft. of sewer are completed 
per i)-hour day. The labor and materials cost of this worlv runs 
aiiout as follows : 

Materials. Per day. 

30.000 brick at $6.50 $195.00 

30 bbls. Portland cement at $1.75 52.50 

30 bbls. Utica natural cement at $1 30.00 

Total materials .•?277.50 

Labor. 

5 men mixing mortar $2 50 $ 12.50 

5 men carrying cement mortar 2.50 12.50 

3 men lowering cement mortar 2.25 6.75 

6 brick masons (5.000 brick each daily) 10.00 60.00 
3 brick tenders 3.75 11.25 

15 brick liandlers (av. ) 2J10 37.50 

26 men on industrial railwaj^ 2.00 52.00 

3 teamsters . 2.50 7.50 

3 teams 9.00 27.00 

3 form SPtters 3.25 9.75 

3 water boys 1.00 3.00 

Total labor $249.75 

Total labor and materials 517.25 

Assuming 500 brick per ctibic yard of masonry, these figures give 
a cost of : 

Per cvi yd. 

Materials $4.62 

Labor 3.99 

Total ■?8.62 

About 2 bbls. of cement were required per 1.000 brick laid, and 

tlie cost per 1,000 brick laid was $17.24. 

The cost of superintendence on the work runs about $50 per day, 

and repairs, waste and dppreciation aggregate about $40 per day. 



852 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In reviewing these figures it must be kept in mind that they omit 
a number of costs. For example, tlie cost of lumber for sheeting, 
runways, etc., and the cost of lumber and construction for certers 
are not included. Other lacking items will be noted by those 
familiar with such work. Though incomplete as noted the figures 
will, we believe, prove decidedly interesting in connection with the 
novel methods of work adopted. 

[The costs are given in greater detail in the following paragraphs.] 

Cost of a Brick Sewer in Water-Soaked Sand at Gary, Ind.* — 
In our issue of Aug. 5, 1908, we described in some detail the con- 
struction of a sewer in water soaked sand at Gary, Ind. The 
method adopted was to unwater the sand by bleeding — by sinking 
well points in the sand along the line of the sewer and drawing 
out the water with pumps. At the time this description was pub- 
lished the construction had not been completed nor the costs fully 
analyzed, so that the costs then published were only approximate. 
Since then the cost of the work has been worked out in considerable 
detail by City Engineer A. P. Melton and his assistant, Mr. E. M. 
Scheflow, and has been placed at our disposal by Mr. Melton. 

The costs were conrpiled by keeping a force and time account of 
the work. The inspector kept the records on blanks prepared for 
the purpose and checked them with the books of the contractor's 
timel<eeper. While some items of cost familiar to the contractor 
were not thus included, yet the figures given may be considered 
very close approximations. 

The work comprised 4,258 ft. of brick sewer, ranging from 7 ft. 
circular section to 6 ft. 4 in. by 8 ft. 11 in. oval section, all with 
shells consisting of 2% rings of brick. The soil was fine sand water 
soaked below a level about 22 ft. above subgrade ; the water- 
soaked sand ran on a slope of about 1 on 15. The trench ranged 
from 18 to 30 ft. in depth. The method of excavation was fully 
described in our issue of Aug. 5. Briefly a preliminary wide cut 
was made some 5 to 15 ft. deep with machines, then well points 
were sunk and the ground drained, after which excavation pro- 
ceeded by hand between sheeting. The masonry work and back- 
filling followed. The cost of construction was divided into the 
following items : Machine excavation, sheeting, pumping, hauling 
materials, sewer building, backfilling, materials and organization. 

Machine Excavation. — The preliminary wide shallow cut only was 
excavated by machine. A % cu. yd. Hayward orange peel bucket 
operated by a 25-hp. engine was used for the first 1,900 ft. and 
took out 21,250 cu. yds. at the following cost: 

Item. Total. Per cu yd. 

Engineer, 56 days, at ?6 $ 336.00 $0.0153 

Fireman, 56 days, at $3.50... 196.00 0.0092 

Laborers, 255 days, at $1.75. 446.25 0.0210 

Coal, 56 shifts, at $5 280.00 0.0131 



Total ?1,258.25 $0.0586 

At this point the orange peel was removed to the rear to work 
on backfilling and a Page & Schnable drag scraper excavator was 



^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAIXS. 853 

substituted. This macliine liad a 2 cu. yd. bucket and a tO-lip. 
engine ; tiiis engine was found to be too wealv and was used only 
until a larger one could be secured. Another objection to the 
lirst arrangement was tliat two men were required to operate the 
bucket, one at tlio hoist and one at the swing engine. With tlie 
machine as first equipped and operated 15,300 cu. yds. of material 
were excavated at tlie following cost: 

Item. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Engineer, 31 days, at $6 .$186.00 $0.0122 

Fireman, 31 days, at |3.50.... 108.50 0.0071 

Engineer, 31 days, at $3 93.00 0.0060 " 

Laborers, 118 days, at $1.75... 206.50 0.0138 

Coal, 31 shifts, at $5 155.00 0.0101 

Total $749.00 $0.0492 

The 40-hp. engine was replaced by one of 60 hp., so arranged 
that one man operated both hoist and swinging engine. Witli the 
remodeled outfit 11,000 cu. yds. of material were excavated at the 
following cost : 

Item. Total. "Percu. yd. 

Engineer, 21 days, at $6 $126.00 $0.0li4 

Fireman, 21 days, at $3.50... 73.50 0.0067 

Laborers, 84 days, at $1.75.... 147.00 0.0133 

Coal, 21 shifts, at $5 105.00 0.0095 

Total $451.50 $0.0409 

It will be seen that the change of the engines reduced the cost 
per cubic yard by the amount of the wages of one engineer ; the 
saving was 0.83 cts. per cu. yd. Summarizing we have a cost of 
$2,488.75 for excavating 47,550 cu. yds., or of $0.0523 per cu. yd. 
For the 4,258 ft. of sewer the cost was 57.9 cts. per lin. ft. 

Hand Rxcavation. — The bottom 13 ft. in depth of the trench was 
excavated by hand between slieeting ; the width of the excavation 
was approximately 10 ft. The cost of the work was as follows: 
Item. Total. Percu* yd. 

Laborers, 6,441 days, at $2 . .$12,882.50 $0.5413 

Foreman, S4 days, at $3 522.00 0.0232 

Total $13,434.00 $0.5645 

The total amount of hand excavation was 23.800 cu. yds. 
Sheeting. — The sheeting consisted of vertical 2 x 8-in. by 12-ft. 
planks lield by two pairs of 6 x 8-in. waling pieces and 9-ft. cross 
braces spaced 8 ft. apart. In cases of very wet trench a third 
row of waling and braces was put in ; occasionally, also, hori- 
zontal sheeting was used in the bottom. The cost of driving the 
sheeting and placing the bracing and also of pulling it was as 
follows : 

Placing. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers. 882 days, at $2 $1,764 $0.4142 

P'oreman, 80 days, at $3.50 280 0.0658 

Carpenters, 50 days, at $3 150 0.0351 

Total $2,194 $0.5151 

Pulling : 
Laborers, 242 days, at $2 $ 484 $0.1136 

Grand total $2,678 $0.6287 



854 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Pumping. — The item of pumping, comprises all the work of sink- 
ing and shifting the well points and pipe line and the removal 
of the backwater in the finished part of the sewer. Three Emerson 
pumps took water from the well points, a fourth handled the back- 
water and a duplex pump furnished water for boilers, mixing 
mortar, jetting, etc. The cost was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers, 542 days, at $1.75..? 948.50 §0.2227 

Pipe line men, 958 days, at 

?2.50 2,395.00 0.5625 

Total for pipe work $3,343.50 $0.7852 

Coal, 100 days, at $15 ,.$1,500.00 $0.3499 

Firemen, 855 days, at $3.50.. 2,992.50 0.7025 

Total for pumping. $4,492.50 $1.0524 

Grand total $7,836.00 $1.8376 

Pumping costs and pipe line costs have been separated, since 
the first is a continuous expense which does not vary from day to 
day, and the second cost is operative only when construction is 
actually going on. 

Hauling Brick and Other Materials. — The materials were hauled 
1,500 ft. in steel dump cars running on portable track; the cars 
were pushed by hand. Coal, lumber, supplies, etc., purchased from 
local dealers, were hauled by team. The cost of hauling was as 
follows : 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers, 1,219 days, at $2 $2,438 $0.5725 

Foreman, 80 days, at $3.50 280 0.0657 

Teams and drivers, ISO days, at 

$5.50 990 0.2322 

Total $3,708 $0.8704 

Sewer Construction. — The construction of the 4,258 ft. brick 
sewer was as follows: 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers, 1,506 days, at $2..$ 3,012.00 $0.7073 

Carpenters. 50 days, at $3.. 150.00 0.0351 

Form setters, 2^5 days, at 

$3.75 843.75 0.1981 

Bricklayers, 471 days, at $10 4,710.00 1.1061 

Scaffold men, 236 days, at 

$2.75 649.00 0.1524 

Brick tenders, 236 days, at 

$3.75 885.00 0.2076 

Mortar mixers, 387 days, at 

$2.25 860.75 0.2021 

Total $11,110.50 $2.6087 

As noted further on, the cost of brick and cement for the job 
was $14,436.50, or $2,384 per foot of sewer, making the total cost 
for labor and materials $4,993 per lin. ft. Since there were 520 
bricks per lin. ft. of sewer, the cost per cubic yard of the brick- 
work was approximately the same as the cost per lineal foot. The 
bricklayers averaged 4,710 bricks per man per 9-hr. day. Two 
barrels of cement were used per 1,000 bricks. 



SEJJ-ERS. COX DU ITS .iXD DRAINS. 855 

Backfilling. — Enough backfilling was done by band to cover the 
sewer and to permit tlie sheeting to be pulled ; the remainder was 
done with the clam-shell excavator first used for preliminary 
trenching. The cost of backfilling by hand was as follows: 
Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 
Laborers, 378 days, at $2 $756 $0.18 

The cost of backfilling by machine was as follows : 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Laborers. 307 days, at $1.75 . . ..?537.25 $0.1261 

Engineers, 93 days, at $6 558.00 0.1287 

Firemen, 93 days, at $3.50 325.50 0.0764 

Coal, 93 shifts, at $5 465.00 0.1092 



Total $1,885.75 $0.4404 

Materials. — The cost of the materials used in the job was as 
follows : 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

2.221,000 brick, at $5 $11,105.00 $2.6080 

Utica cement, 6,663 sacks, at 

20 cts 1,332.60 0.3106 

LTniversal cement, 6,663 

sacks, at 30 cts 1,998.90 0.4694 

30 M ft. B. M. lumber, at $20 600.00 0.1409 



Total $15,036.50 $3.5289 

Superintendence and General Expenses. — The costs of superin- 
tendence and general expenses were as follows : 

Superintendence. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Superintendent, 4 mos., at $150..$ 600 $0.1409 

Genl foreman, 4 mos., at $125.. 500 0.1174 

Master mechanic, 4 mos., at $200 800 0.1855 

Timekeeper, 3 mos., at $60 180 0.0422 

Team, 100 days, at $4 400 0.0927 



Total $2,480 $0.5787 

General expenses. 
Waterboys, 220 days, at $1.5C..$ 330 $0.0775 

Clearing right of way, 60 days at 

$150 90 0.0211 



Total $ 420 $0.0986 

Summarizing we have the cost per lineal foot of sewer as 
follows : 

Item. Per lin ft. 

Excavation by machine $ 0.58 

Excavation by hand 3.15 

Sheeting 0.63 

Hauling brick and other materials 0.S7 

Pumping 1.84 

Laying brick sewer 2.61 

Backfilling by hand 0.18 

Backfilling by machine 0.44 

Materials 3.53 

Superintendence and general 0.68 

Depreciation, repairs, setting up machines 1.50 

Making 3 railway crossings ($2,500).... 0.58 

Total $16.59 

The work was begun on April 2 and was completed on Aug. 5, 



856 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

1908, during which time only 11 days were lost by the brick- 
layers. 

Cost of a 66- in. Brick Sewer at Gary, Ind.* — The methods and 
cost of constructing a bricli sewer of oval section, 6 ft. 2 ins. x 8 ft. 
11 ins. in size, at Gary, Ind., were published in our issues of Aug. 
5 and Oct. 7, 1908. This oval section changes to a circular section 
66 ins. in diameter and then to a circular section 60 ins. in diam- 
eter, which continue the sewer inland. The costs of the circular sec- 
tions, 4,062 ft. long, have recently been compiled from inspectors' 
and timekeepers' reports by City Engineer A. P. Melton and As- 
sistant Engineer E. M. Schefiow and are given us for publication. 

The land through which the sewer passes consists of alternating 
ridges and marshes differing in elevation about 10 ft. The trench, 
therefore, varied in depth between a maximum of 24 ft. and a 
minimum of 14 ft., and averaged 17 ft. in depth. The material 
trenched was a fine sand saturated with water to a height of 13 to 
14 ft. above the bottom of the trench. The water-soaked sand was 
very unstable, taking a slope of about 1 on 15 when unconflned. 

The method of excavation was to take out a wide cut between 
natural banks to about waterline level, then to drive sheeting and 
excavate between it to subgrade. To permit excavation between 
sheeting the sand was freed of its water to below sub-grade level 
by sinking batteries of well points and pumping. Full details of the 
bleeding plant were given in our issue of Aug. 5, 1908. The wide 
surface cut was made with a drag bucket excavator, with two 
objects, to get a wide working space, and to reduce the depth of 
sheeting. 

Construction was begun Aug. 1 and finished Oct. 1, 1908. Labor- 
ers on excavation sheeting, pumping, etc., worked a 10-hour day; 
tenders, cement mixers and helpers to bricklayers worked a 9-hour 
day ; bricklayers worked an 8-hour day ; firemen on pumps worked 
in 12-hour shifts, and excavating machine crews worked a 9-hour 
day. The costs of the various items of the work were as follows : 

Drag Bucket Excavator Worlc. — The preliminary cut was about 
30 ft. wide and from 4 to 10 ft. deep; there were 33,350 cu. yds. 
• of excavation for the 4,062 ft. of sewer or about 8.21 cu. yds. per 
lin. ft. The excavator worked 83.5 shifts and so averaged nearly 
400 cu. yds. per shift of 9 hours. The cost of operating the ex- 
cavator was as follows : 

Item. Per fl-hr. shift. 

1 engineman, at $6 $ 6.00 

1 fireman, at $3.50 ,. 3.50 

4 laborers, at $2 8.00 

Coal (estimated) 5.00 

Oil, repairs, etc 2.00 

Total $24.50 

This gives a cost of 6.1 cts. per cu. yd. of excavation and of 50.3 
cts. per lin. ft. of sewer. 

*Engineerhig-Contracting, Jan. 27, 1909. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAIA'S. SoT 

Excavation by Hand. — The excavation between sheeting, approx- 
imately SVaxlO ft., was done by hand, scaffolding the material from 
3 to 5 times and an average of 4 times. The cost of the work was 
as follows : 

Item. Total. 

Foreman, 51 days, at .|3.25 $ 16.5.75 

Laborers. 2.184 days, at $2.25 4,914.00 



Total ?5,079.75 

This gives a cost of 39.4 cts. per cu. yd., and of $1.25 per lin. ft. 
of sewer. 

Pumping. — The pumping plant consisted of 3 No. 3 Emerson 
pumps drawing from the well points ; 1 No. 2 Emerson pump tak- 
ing water from the pools formed behind the drag bucket ex- 
cavator ; 1 duplex pump for boiler feed, jetting points, wetting brick, 
etc., and 4 30-hp. horizontal boilers mounted on wheels. This plant 
worked continuously. The cost of operation was as follows : 
Item. Total. 

Laborers, 464 days, at .?2 $ 92S.00 



Fireman, 439 days, at $3.50 

Pipe linemen, 1,238 days, at $2.50 

Foreman, 27 days, at $3.50 

Coal, 60 days, at $15 (estimated) 



1,536.50 

3,094.00 

94.50 

900.00 



Total $6,553.00 

This gives a cost per lineal foot of sewer of $1.61 for pumping. 
Charged entirely against the excavation between slieeting wliicli 
was closely 12,893 cu. yds., the cost of pumping per cubic yard of 
excavation was 50.8 cts. 

Sheeting. — The sheeting consisted of 2x8 in. x. 12 ft. plank driven 
close on each side of the trencli. This slieeting was braced apart 
by two 6x8 in. walling pieces set 3 ft. apart vertically and 6x8 in. 
X S1-! ft. cross-braces spaced 8 ft. apart along trench. The cost for 
sinking, bracing, pulling and bringing forward was as follows : 
Item. Total. 

Labor, placing and driving, 392 'days, at 

$2.25 $ 882.00 

Labor, pulling and bringing ahead, 182 

days, at $2.25 409.50 

Foreman, 27 days, at $3.50 94.50 

Carpenter, 36 days, at $3 108.00 



Total $1,494.00 

This gives a cost for sheeting of 36.S cts. per lin. ft. of trench 
and of 11.6 cts. per cu. yd. of excavation between sheeting. There 
were about 73 ft. B. M. of sheeting and bracing per lineal foot of 
trench, so that the cost per M. ft. B. M. was practically $5 for 
labor placing, pulling, etc. 

Laying Brick Sewer. — The sewer was built of two rings of brick. 
The invert was built in 24-ft. sections. Wooden centers with lag- 
ging 16 ft. long were used in laying the arch and 2 men knocked the 



858 ■ HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

centers down, brought them forward and re-erected them as fast as 
6 bricklayers could work. The cost of laying was as follows : 
Item. Total. 

Bricklayers, 223 days, at $10 $2,230.00 

Tenders, 112 days, at $3.75 420.00 

Scaffoldmen, 111 days, at $2.75 305.25 

Mortar mixers, 225 days, at $2.50 562.50 

Form setters, 100 days, at $3.75 375.00 

Laborers, 715 days, at $2 1,430.00 

Carpenter, 18 days, at $3. 54.00 

Total $5,376.75 

This gives a cost of $1.32 per lin. ft. of sewer and of $5.28 per 
1,000 bricks laid. 

Backfilling. — The backfilling to a height of 2 ft. above the brick- 
work was done by hand, and for the remainder of the height by a 
1-cu. yd. Haj^ward clam shell excavator. The backfilling by hand 
called for 277 days' labor at $2 and cost, therefore, $554 or 13.6 cts. 
per lin. ft. of sewer. The cost of the clam-shell excavator work was 
as follows : 

Item. Per shift. 

1 engineer, at $6 ' $ 6.00 

1 fireman, at $3 3.00 

3 laborers, at $2 6.00 

Coal (estimated) 5.00 

Oil, repairs, etc 2.00 

Total $22.00 

There were 55 shifts worked giving a total cost of $1,210. In ad- 
dition the drag bucket excavator was worked backfilling for 18 
shifts at $24.50 making a total of $441. Lumping the work of both 
machines, the cost of backfilling was 40.6 cts. per lin. ft. of sewer 
and 6.8 cts. per cu. yd. 

Materials. — The cost of materials was as follows : 

Item. Total. 

1,018,000 brick, at $5 per M $5,090.00 

3,054 bags Utica cement, at 20 cts 610.80 

3,054 bags Universal cement, at 35 cts... 1,065.90 
Lumber (estimated) 600.00 

Total .$7,369.70 

This is a cost of $1.81 per lin. ft. of sewer. 

Hauling Materials. — For about 3,000 ft. of the work all materials 
were liauled from the railway siding in 2 cu. yd. steel dump cars 
running on narrow gage track. The average haul was 1,700 ft. For 
the remainder of tlie work the hauling was done witli teams ; brick 
were hauled by subcontract for 70 cts. per M. Two teams were also 
employed throughout the work to haul supplies from local dealers 
and to haul coal to the excavators when they were beyond reach of 
the contractors' railway. The cost of hauling was as follows : 
Item. Total. 

Laborers, 767 days, at $2 $1,534.00 

Foreman, 52 days, at $3.50 182.00 

Brick, hauled by team at 70 cts. per M. . 194.60 
Teams, 100 days, at $5.50 550.00 

Total $2,460.00 



SEJVERS, COXDUITS JXD DRAIXS. i<'^\) 

Tlie cost of hauling was thus 60.7 cts. per lin. ft. of sewer. 

Superintendence mid General Expenses. — The costs under these 
items comprised the following: 

Item. Total. 

Superintendent, 2 months, at $150 $ 300.00 

General foreman, 2 months, at $15m.... 300.00 

Master mechanic, 1 month, at $200 200.00 , 

Clearing right of way SO. 00 

Waterbovs. 160 davs. at $1.50 240.00 ' 

Handy teams, 52 days, at $3 156.00 

Total $1,226.00 

This gives a cost of 30 cts. per lin. ft. of sewer. 

Summary. — Summarizing the costs of the work per lineal foot of 
sewer we have : 

Item. Per lin. ft. 

Drag bucket excavation $0,503 

Hand excavation 1.250 

Pumping 1.61 

Sheeting 0.36S 

Laying sewer 1.320 

Backfilling by hand 0.136 

Backfilling by machine 0.406 

Materials 1.810 

Hauling materials 0.607 

Superintendence and general 0.300 

Depreciation of plant, repairs, etc. (esti- 
mated) 1.500 

Total $9,810 

Cost of Rock Excavation for Sewer Trenches in St. Louis. — The 

following data were published in Engineering-Contracting, May 30, 
1906 : The excavation of sewer trenches In South Benton street. 
Sewer District No. 6, St. Louis, was mostly in solid rock, of a lime- 
stone formation usual to the vicinity. The work was done by con- 
tract, and the actual cost of the work is given below. 

The rock is a limestone lying in horizontal ledges or strata, 1 ft. 
to 3 ft. thick. The top 4 ft. or 5 ft. of rock is more or less rotten 
and seamj'. easily shot and sledged to pieces. Below this top rock 
it is hard and difficult to break up. 

Dirt seams run through it all, at times causing the ledge to break 
out back under the sides of the trench, requiring considerably more 
excavation than is estimated and paid for under the specifications. 
An estimate of this extra excavation is about 20% more than is 
paid for. The specifications stated that when solid rock was en- 
countered in laying pipe sewers, the solid rock was to be excavated 
6 ins. below the flow line for all pipes of 18 ins. or less in diameter, 
and 9 ins. below the flow line for pipes of greater diameter than 
18 ins. The trench was then to be filled with sufficient earth, well 
rammed, to form a foundation upon which the pipe should be laid. 
Payment for the work was made as follows: Class "A," (Earth), 
Class "B" (Loose Rock), Class "C" (Solid Rock), and quicksand 
excavation for pipe sewers was paid for at the prices bid for Class 
"A," Class "B," Class "C" and quicksand excavation, respectively, 
and was estimated for a width 12 ins. greater than the inside di^ 



860 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ameter of the pipe, for all pipe 18 in. or less in diameter and 15 
in. for pipes of greater inside diameter than 18 ins. 

To quarry the top rock, the drill holes were staggered, spaced 
about 4 ft. apart along the trench and about 6 ins. from the sides 
of the required width of trench. See Fig. 5. In the lower and hard- 
er rock, the spacing of drill roles was 2% ft. but similarly stag- 
gered. If any rock projected too far out, it was sledged or shot ofl: 
by light shots. ' 

To break up a ledge or strata, the drill holes in the top rock were 
driven about half way through the ledge while for the lower rock 
they were driven % to % the thickness of ledge. Hand drills, 1%- 
in. bit, were used, one man to a drill, and about 10 lin. ft. of hole 
was drilled per 8 hours' work. The shots were about one stick of 
60% dynamite per foot in depth of drill hole. 

The costs given here do not include insurance, collection of spe- 
cial tax bills, tools, and offlce expenses. The blacksmith bill was 
$355, or 20 cts. per cu. yd. ; the powder bill $689.76, for about 4,300 
lbs. of dynamite; the wages of foremen were $5.00, quarrymen $3.00, 



U-^'^"—>k-4'(p"->'^ 

I ! I 

I I 

« EN6.-C0NTf^. • 






Fig. 5. Spacing of Drill Holes. 

and a few laborers $2.00 per S-hour day. The total amount of rock 
paid for was 1.683 cu. yds. Tlie cost of dynamite was, therefore, 
$0.40 per cu. yd., and amount was 2^4 lbs. per cu. yd. On the sup- 
position of 1-5 more rock actually handled than allowed in the esti- 
mates, the dj-namite is $0.34 per cu. yd., or 2 lbs. per cu. yd. The 
average amount of rock for an 8-hour day per quarryman was 0.96 
cu. yd. 

The following tables are based upon measurements and quantities 
estimated and paid for under the specifications. The average costs 
are derived from this estimate and the expense account on the 
whole or actual excavation. 

370 lin. ft., 21-in. sewer; average depth in solid rock, 14 ft: 

Foreman, 67 days, at $5 % 335 

Quarryman. 700 days, at $3 2,100 

Laborer, 73 days, at $2 146 

Total, 600 cu. yds., at $4.30 $2,581 

2S7 lin. ft, IS-in. sewer; average depth in solid rock,12 ft: 

Foreman, 54 days, at $5 $ 270 

Quarryman, 343 days, at $3 1,029 

Laborer, 53 days, at $2 106 

Total, 317 cu. yds., at $4.43 $1,405 



SEWERS. COXDLITS AXD DR.UXS. tiOl 

314 lin. ft., 18-in. sewer; average depth in solid rock, 13 ft.; 

Foreman, 65 days, at $5 ,f 320 

Quarryman, 350 days, at .f 3 1,050 

Laborer, 80 Va days, at $2 161 

Total, 380 cu. yds., at $4.01 $1,536 

222 lin. ft, 15-in. sewer; average depth in solid rock, 11 ft.: 

Foreman, 36 days, at $5 $1}>0 . 

Quarryman, 215 days, at .f 3 645 

Laborer, 40 days, at $2 80 

Total, 206 cu. yds., at $4.39 $905 

2§1 lin. ft., 15-in. sewer; average depth in solid rock, 8 ft.: 

Foreman, 32 days, at $5 .$100 

Quarryman, 129 days, at $3 387 

Laborer, 60 days, at $2 120 

Total, 180 cu. yds., at $3.70 $667 

The average cost of the rock excavation was as follows; 

Per cu. J d. 

Foreman and labor $4.20 

Dynamite 0.40 

Blacksmith U.20 

Total $4.80 

On the estimate of 1-5 more actually excavated than allowed 
for the average cost of rock excavation was as follows ; 

Per cu. yd. 

Foreman and laboi' $3.50 

Dynamite 0.34 

Blacksmith 0.1 6 

Total (actual excavation) $4.00 

The cost of excavation of earth and loose rock was $0.50 and 
$1.40 per cu. yd., respectively. The cost of backfilling was $0.15 
per cu. yd. of excavation. 

For the information in this article we are indebted to Mr. 
Curtis Hill, Civil Engineer of the Sewer Department, St. Louis, Mo. 

Cost of Pipe and Brick Sew/ers, St. Louis. — Mr. Curtis Hill gives 
the following data, which are averages of work done by contract 
during three years, April, 1901, to April, 1904. The work con- 
sisted in building 40 miles of vitrified pipe sewers, 12 to 24 ins. 
diam., and 13 miles of egg-shaped (lSx27-in. to 48x60-in. ) and 
circular (60 to 108-in. ) sewers. The egg-shaped sewers were 9 ins. 
thick; the circular sewers were 13 ins. thick. The excavation was, 
for the most part, in stiff clay, only a small amount of quicksand 
occurring. Trench excavators were not very successful, because the 
"joint clay" caved in if not well braced as fast as excavated. The 
Chicago Sewer Excavator, however, made the best records made 
with trench excavators. Potter trench machines were largely used 
for the smaller trenches, and cableways for the larger trenches. 
The Potter machine consists of a movable trestle, and a bucket car 
that rides on tracks on top of the trestle bents. This car is moved 
back and forth by a stationary hoisting engine, which also hoists 
the buckets. The legs of the trestle span the trench and are pro- 
vided with wheels that rest on rails. 



862 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following table gives the actual average cost to the con- 
tractors, including foremen and superintendence, but not including 
Interest and depreciation of plant, insurance of men, and office 
expenses. 

Cost of Pipe and Brick Sewers, St. Louis. 

Earth Excavation. Brick Masonry. 







d 3 


'C 


173 t. 


0) 


T,^ 






• 


— ' 


>> 


c 


XI a 


P, 




*j » 


^■^ 




d 








01 TJ 


dj 


3 


t,.c 


— ' a 


t^ rA 




Briclt 
Sewers. 


.s . 


>.4J 




!-i 
0) 
P. 


-da 

>3 



73 




CD 

->> 




^■fi 


U 


^-> 


lU 


^j'O , 


^.j 


oi . 






F^ 





^ 


m C 3 

o3o 


0^ 


P 






















Eh 


121/2' X 15'*. . . 


30 


. . . 





1.18 


$1.71 


$6.13 


$7.84 


9' circulart. . . . 


26 


1.0 


$0.36 


1.00 


1.87 


6.13 


8.00 


6' circulart . . . . 


17 


0.8 


0.40 


0.97 


1.75 


6.30 


8.05 


5' circulart. . . . 


16 


0.8 


0.40 


0.95 


1.80 


6.30 


8.10 


2' X 3'J 


11 






0.80 


2.40 


6.10 


8.50 



* Method of excavation was steam shovel followed by a cable- 
way. The lumber bracing cost $3.60 per running foot of sewer. 
t Potter trench machine used. 
t No trench machine used. 

The "cu. yds. per laborer per hr." means the number of cubic 
yards excavated and loaded into buckets by each laborer actually 
engaged in digging. The average of all the work, including pipe 
sewers, was about 9 cu. yds. excavated per man per 10-hr. day. 

On pipe sewer trenches, where no machinery was used, the cost 
of earth excavating was as follows : 

Size of pipe, ins. Depth in ft. Cost per cu. yd. 

24 15 $0.50 

21 16 0.50 

21 7 0.35 

18 8 0.35 

15 16 0.55 

It cost 90 cts. per cu. yd. to excavate loose rock in the trenches 
15 and 16 ft. deep; and $3.80 per cu. yd. to excavate solid rock. 

"Four men, the bottomman and his helper, with two men hand- 
ling and lowering the pipe, laid 21-in. and 24-in. pipe at the rate 
of sixteen lineal feet per hour, at a cost of 6 cts. per lin. ft. Three 
men will lay the same amount of 15-in. or 18-in. pipe in the same 
time. Including the material for jointing, the cost of laying pipe is 
10 cts. per lin. ft. 

"A good sewer brick mason will lay from 400 to 500 bricks per 
hr. There is one case where four masons, working on a 6i/^-ft. 
brick sewer, each averaged 600 bricks per hr., and kept it up for 
several days, but this is far above the average." 

The average contract prices for the three years (1901-4) was as 
follows : 

• 12-in. pipe, per lineal foot $ 0.45 

15-in. pipe, per lineal foot 0.55 

18-in. pipe, per lineal foot 0.80 

21-in. pipe, per lineal foot 1.00 

24-in. pipe, per lineal foot 1.60 



SEirERS, cox DU ITS AXD DRAINS. 6ULi 

Pipe junctions, extra, each 1.50 

Slants for brick sewers, each 0.65 

Earth excavation, per cubic yard 0.55 

Lioose rocli excavation, per cubic yard 1.60 

Solid rock excavation, per cubic yard 4.00 

Concrete, per cubic yard 6.50 

Briclv ma.sonry, per cubic yard 9.40 

Viti'ified brick masonry, per cubic yard 12.20 

It will be noted that the excavation was paid for as a separate 
item, and not included with the pipe or brick. 

JMr. Hill informs me that on a recently completed brick sewer, 
requiring 287 days to build, two Potter machines and a cableway 
were used. There were 49,918 cu. yds. of Class "A" excavation 
(earth), 6,629 cu. yds. of Class "B" (loose rock), and 33 cu. yds. 
of Class "C" (solid rock). There were 2,303 lin. ft. of 9-ft. sewer, 
3,240 lin. ft. of 8-ft. sewer, 254 lin. ft. of 7-ft. sewer, 1,607 lin. ft. 
of SVa-ft. sewer, and 1,203 lin. ft. of 4 x 5-ft. sewer. These re- 
quired 8,177 cu. yds. of hard brick masonry and 723 cu. yds. of 
vitrified brick masonry. The excavation ("A," "B" and "C") cost 
68 cts. per cu. yd., of which 11% cts. was the cost of the trench 
machines. The total cost of this trench excavation (56,580 cu. 
yds.), including labor of bracing and backfilling, was as follows: 

Foreman, 6,400 hours, at 50 cts ? 3,200.00 

Laborer, 87,000 hours, at 221/2 cts 19.575.00 

Bottom-man (pipe layer), 6,360 hours, at 

30 cts 1,908.00 

Waterboy, 3,800 hours, at 15 cts 570.00 

Team, 10,450 hours, at 50 cts 5,225.00 

Watchman, 4,800 hours, at 25 cts 1,200.00 

Machine, 4,400 hours, at ?1.50 6,600.00 

Total, 56,580 cu. yds., at $0.68 $38,278.00 

Most of the trenches require bracing, the timber for which costs 
2 cts. to 10 cts. per cu. yd. of excavation, which is not included 
in the above. Yellow pine costs $18 per M. 

The wages of foremen, Waterboys and watchmen are all charged 
against excavation, and no part against masonry. 

The cost of laying the brick masonry was as follows : 

Masons, 9.400 hrs., at 75 cts % 7.050.00 

Helpers. 1,400 hrs., at 25 cts 3,500.00 

Mortarmen, 10,750 hrs., at 271/0 cts 2,956.25 

Total for 8,900 cu. yds., at $1.52 $13,506.25 

The masons averaged 422 bricks per hr., or 3,376 bricks per 8-hr. 
day. 

Cost of a Brick Sewer at St. Louis, Including Tunneling In Earth 
and in Rock. — The following data were published in Engineering- 
Contracting, July 10, 1907. 

The 13th street sewer in St. Louis, Mo., was designed to give 
deep drainage in a down town district, where the street is narroti', 
the traffic heavy, and the ground well filled with pipes and con- 
duits. Owing to these conditions, the plans were made and con- 
tract let for tunneling the entire sewer. The sewer is brick, 30-in. 
x 4 2 -in. diameter and 1,458 ft. in lengtlik w 



8G4 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Taking a mean 'length of earth and rock, there were 630 ft. of 
earth and 828 ft. of solid rock tunnel. Five shafts were used in 
the earth section and ten in the rock. 

The work was done by the Myers Construction Co. of St. Louis 
during the winter of 1906-1907, in 190 days, including Sundays and 
holidays. 

The contract included the excavation of 1,156 cu. yds. of earth 



COST OF A WEEK'S SEWER WORK ON FOUR JOBS. 
(Two Brick and Two Pipe Sewers) 



Kind of 
Trench Mach. 



Foreman . . . . 

Laborer 

Bottom man. 
Water boy. . . 

Team 

Watchman . . 
♦Machine. . . . 



Potter 



Wages 

per 

hour 

$0.50 

.22i 

.30 

.15 

.50 

.25 

1.50 



Total for excavation 
Total cu. yds. " 
Cubic yards per hour 

per man 

Cost per cubic yard 
Depth of trench, ft 

Kind of soil 



Size of sewer 

Length of sewer, ft. 



Brick Mason. 

Helper 

Mortarman . . 



D.75 
.25 

.27* 



Job No. 1 



Hrs. 
54 

1,089 
50 
54 
54 
63 
64 



Wages 

$27.00 

245.02 

15.00 

8.10 

27.00 

15.75 

81.00 



8418.87 
980 

0.9 

$0.43 
19i 

Sandy 

3x4 ft. 
300 



104 
104 
104 



$78.00 
26.00 
28.60 



Total $132.60 



Cu. yds. brick masonry 

Cu. yds. per mason, per hr. . 
Cost of labor per cubic yard 

masonry 

450 brick at $8.25 M 

0.7 bbl. cement (1-3 mort.) at 

$1.50. 
0.2 cu. yds. sand, at $1.10 . . . 

Total per cubic yard brick 
masonry 



112 
1.08 

$1.20 
3.71 

1.05 

0.22 

$6.18 



Potter 



Job No. 2 



Hrs. 
54 

1,000 
47 
54 



Wages 

$27.00 

225.00 

14.10 

8.10 



54 81.00 



$355.20 
600 

0.6 

$0.60 
23 

Stifl earth 
and clay 

2Jx3Jft. 
154 



68 
84 
84 



$51.00 
21.00 
23.10 



$95.10 



61 
0.90 

$1.56 
3.71 

1.05 
0.22 



$6.54 



Carson 



Job No. 3 



Hrs. 

54 

640 

54 

54 



Wages 

$27.00 

144.00 

16.20 

8.10 



13.50 
81.00 



$289.20 
407 

0.64 

$0.71 

18 

Stiff earth, 

fire clay and 

30% loose rk. 

18-in. pipe 

244 



4i lin. ft. of 
pipe (double 

strength) 
laid per hour 
per bottom 

man (or 

pipe layer), 

whose wages 

are 30 cents 

per hour 



None 



Job No. 4 



Hrs. 

9 

126 



Wages 

$4.50 

28.35 

2.70 

1.35 



$36.90 
120 

0.95 

$0.31 
Shallow 

Black loam 

21-in. pipe 
108 



12 Hn. ft. of 
pipe per hour 
per bottom 
man. 
Trench 
shallow, 
no scaffold- 
ing or 
bracing 



*A trench machine is rented for $125 per month, and burns 15 bushels of 
coal per 9-hour day. When the rental and fuel costs are added to the wages of 
engineman and fireman, the total cost is $1.50 per hour. 

and 880 cu. yds. of rock, and the construction of 770 cu. yds. of 
brick masonry. The work was paid for on the unit basis and all 
work done was measured up and paid for. 

The earth was a plastic clay, which would drop out in the arch 
following the shovel. In this way extra work over the arch (over 
and above the regular 9-in. brick work) averaged 8 i-ns. In the 



SHIVERS. COXDUJTS .IXD DRAJNS. Wo 

rock tunnel, the average was V ins. over ilie arcli and G iiis. on 
the lower quarter haunches of the invert. Tliese spaces were lilled 
solid with brick masonrj-. 

In the earth section, a small opening was driven 4 ft. to 6 ft. 
in length, and braced with a crown' piank and sliort upright sup- 
ports. As this was enlaigeJ, other crown planks were inserted, re- 
placing the shorter suppuiis witn longvr ones. The masonry was 
then built in the section, removing the umber supports as the 
masonry progressed. Material for the ne.\t section was passed 
through the finished one. 

The rock was a stratified limestone, irregular and gnarly. It 
varied in hardness, in some places to a llinty appearance. Tlie 
blasting was done in batteries of three sliots, the first in the upper, 
or arch, portion of the heading. When this broken rock had been 
removed, the same process was repeated on the lower, or invert, 
section. Holes were driven to a deptli of about 2 ft. and loaded 
with from %. to 1% sticks of 50 per cent dynamite, the size of 
stick depending upon the indicated hardness and position of the 
rock. 

The cost of the work was as follows : 

Earth excavation : Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, 520 hrs., at $0.50 $0,225 

Bottommen, 1,320 hrs., at $0.50 571 

Laborers, 7,500 hrs., at $0.30 1.946 

Carpenter, 830 hrs., at $0.50 359 

Labor, timbering, 620 hrs., at $0.30 161 

Timber, 22 M ft., at $20 381 

Watchman, 520 hrs., at .0171/2 079 

Waste, 585 loads, at $1 506 

Total $4,228 

The earth excavation amounted to 1,156 cu. yds. and each labor- 
er averaged .154 cu. yd. per hour. 

Rock excavation : Per cu. yd. 

Foreman, 1,000 hrs., at $0.50 $0,568 

Bottommen, 2,G90 hrs., at $0.50 1.477 

Laborers,' 9,980 hrs., at $0.30 3.402 

Engineer. 1,600 hrs., at $0.50 909 

Blacksmith 070 

Watchman, 1,600 hrs., at $0.17 M; 318 

Dynamite, 4,000 lbs., at $0.15 682 

Caps and fuse 030 

Waste, 445 loads, at $1 500 

Total $7,956 

Tlie rock excavation amounted to 880 cu. yds. and each laborer 
averaged .088 cu. yd. per hour. In the figures given above for 
earth excavation and rock excavation, by the item "waste" is meant 
the excavated material that it was necessary to take away , in other 



866 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

words the surplus excavation. The length of the haul was about 2% 
miles, and, where the contractor hired teams for the purpose, they 
were paid by the load at tlie rate of ?1 per load. The figures given 
for "wa^te" are what the contractor actually hired teams to re- 
move; but, in addition, he used some of his own teams, of which he 
kept no close record. 

Brick masonry : Per cu. yd. 

Bricklayer, 1,180 hrs., at ?1 $1,532 

Helpers, 2,400 hrs., at $0.30 935 

Watchman, 480 hrs., at $0.171/2 109 

Brick, 340 M, at $9 3.974 

Cement, 460 bbls., at $1.80 1.075 

Sand, 190 cu. yds., at $1 247 

Total $7.8Y2 

A total of 770 cu. yds. of brick work were constructed; of this 
amount 73 cu. yds. were constructed of vitrified brick, costing 
$12.00 per M. Allowing for the extra cost of this . vitrified brick 
brings the total cost of the brick masonry per cubic yard to $7.99. 
The vitrified brick masonry alone cost $8.12 per cu. yd. Bach 
bricklayer averaged .652 cu. yd. per hour. 

The plant used in the work and its cost were as follows : 

Dynamo, 20 hp., and electricity for 4 months $800 

Compressor 250 

Receiver 25 

Air drills (Ingersoll-Rand, N. Y.), 3, at $110 330 

Pumps, two 2-in. at $60, and one 1-in. at $30.... 150 

Hand windlasses 100 

Tools, boots, lights, gasoline, etc 200 

With the exception of the last two items, all of the plant was 
used in rock excavation alone. The earth section of the tunnel 
was worked from the outlet and there was little pumping required. 

In the costs given above no charge has been made for plant, 
nor do the costs include office expenses of the contractor nor in- 
surance of the men. For the information from which this article 
was prepared we are indebted to Mr. Curtis Hill, C. E., of St. 
Louis, Mo. 

Cost Of Pipe and Brick Sewers and Manholes in St. Louis. — This 
sewer, which was known as the Tam Avenue public sewer, was con- 
structed in St. Louis, Mo., and consisted of 262.5 ft. of 24-in. pipe 
sewer and 154 ft. of 2 2 -in. x 33-in. brick sewer and one manhole. 

The brick portion of this sewer is under the Missouri Pacific 
Railroad tracks and the street railway tracks on the adjoining 
street. The tracks consist of five railroad and two street car 
tracks. The work here was done in open cut, the railway com- 
panies supporting their own tracks. The difficulty of working 
through and under these tracks somewhat increased the cost of the 



SLlfLRS, COXDUITS .IXD DR.IIXS. 



807 



brick sewer. Even with this, the cost of roclc excavation is low, 
since the rock belonged to ii class easily handled, being horizontally 
stra titled limestone, more or less rotten on top, while the rest 
shattered well when blasted. 

The drill lioles were vertical (drilled with hand, or churn drills), 
spaced about 3 ft. along the center of the trench, driven about 2 Va 
ft. deep and loaded with 1 Vi sticks, about 1 lb.) of 40% dynamite. 
The driller held his own drill, one man drilling, 1. e., only one drill 
with one man to a hole. Limestone was ordinarily found in one 
to three foot strata, and the drill holes were driven to sucli a depth 
that the shot would tear out the strata. The layers of stone were 
of a depth at this place that holes about li^ ft- deep loosened up 
tlie stone to the layer beneath. The top 4 or 5 ft. (and sometimes 
more) of the rock were rotten, and all that was necessary in the 
way of blasting was to loosen up the ledge, then sledge and pick 
it out. The shots were in the center of the trench, which would 



J0M 




°2S S 



(U to 1010 Kl to (O lO It 



Fig. 6. Profile of Tam Avenue Sewer. 



leave the sides of the trench ragged, but the same rotten rock can 
be sledged and dressed off to required width. 

The trench was 314 ft. wide. The width of rock excavation paid 
for is estimated to the extreme width of the brick work down to 
sub-grade. The railroad ballast is included in the earth excava- 
tion. All excavation costs include the labor of backfilling, disposal 
of surplus, bracing, etc., but no allowance is made for lumber for 
bracing, nor for the incidentals, such as care of tools, insurance, 
contractor's office expense, etc. No machinery was used. 



868 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ZJi-In. Pipe Sevjrr. 
Earth Excavation CSy^ ft. cut; 150 cu. yds.). 

Total. Per cu. yd. Per lln. ft 

Foreman, 27 hrs., at $0.50 $13.50 $0.09 $0.05 

Labor, 15.3 hrs., at $0.25 38.25 0.26 0.15 

Total $51.75 $0.35 $0.20 

Pipe and Pipe Laying (262.5 lin. ft). 

Total. Per lin. ft 

Foreman, 10 hrs., at $0.50 $ 5.00 $0.02 

Labor, 120 hrs., at $0.25 30.00 0.11 

Bottomman, 63 hrs., at $0.30 18.90 0.07 

Cement, 1-150 bbl., at $1.50 0.01 

Pipe, per ft 1.25 

Total $1.16 

Excavation per lin. ft 0.20 

Grand total per lln. ft. pipe sewer.... $1.66 

22-In. X 33-In Brick Sewer. 

(154 lin. ft.) 

Earth Excavation (9.2 ft cut; 190 cu. yds.). 

Total. Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

Foreman, 53 hrs., at $0.50 $ 26.50 $0.14 $0.16 

Labor, 630 hrs., at $0.25 162.50 0.S5 1.05 

Total $189.00 .^0.99 $1.21 

Solid Rock Excavation (7 ft. cut; 135 cu. yds.). 

Total. Per cu. yd Per lin. ft. 

Foreman. 100 hrs.. at $0.50 $ 50.00 $0.37 $0.32 

♦Drillers, 570 hrs., at $0.30 171.00 1.26 1.11 

Labor, 460 hrs., at $0.25 115.00 0.85 0.75 

Dynamite, 70 lbs., at $0.15. 10.50 0.08 0.07 

Total $346.50 $2.56 $2.25 

Brick Masonrj' (41 cu. yds.). 

Total. Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft 

Foreman, 54 hrs., at $0.50 $ 27.00 $0.66 $0.17 

tMason, 61 hrs., at $1.00 61.00 1.49 0.39 

Helper, 61 hrs., at $0.25 15.25 0.37 0.10 

Mortarman, 62 hrs., at $0.30 18.60 0.45 0.12 

Brick, 18,200, at $8.50 per M 155.55 3.79 1.01 

Cement, 25 bbls., at $1.50 37.50 0.91 0.24 

Sand, 12 cu. yds., at $1.00 12.00 0.29 0.08 

Total $326. 9u $7.96 $2.11 

Earth excavation 1.21 

Rock excavation 2.25 

Total cost of brick sewer $5.57 



* At rate of \i cu. yd. per hour per driller. 
t At rate of % cu. yd. per hour per mason. 



SHIVERS, COXDUJTS AXD DK.UXS. 8li9 

Brick Manhole. 
( 4 cu. yds. > 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Mason. 9 hrs., at $1.00 ? "J. 00 $2.25 

Helper, U hrs.. at $0.25 2.25 0.56 

Mortarman, 9 hrs. at $0.30 2.70 0.67 

Brkk. l.SOO, at $8.50 per M 15.30 3.82 

Cement. 2.5 bbls.. at $1.50 3.75 .94 

Sand. 1 cu. yd., at $1.00 1.00 .«5 

Total $34.00 $9.48 

Casf-iron (head). 490 lbs., at $0.021/^ 12.25 

Wrought-iron bands and steps, 102 lbs., at $0.04 4.08 

Total cost of manhole $50.33' 

The information given above was furnished by Mr. Curtis Hill, 
Chief Engineer of tlie Sewer Department of St. Louis, Mo., and 
published in Engineering-Contracting, March, 1906. 

Cost of a Brick Sewer at Syracuse, Built by Tunneling. — The fol- 
lowing data were published in Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 14, 
1906. 

The so-called tunnel line sewer of Syracuse, N. Y., was construct- 
ed for the purpose of draining some 600 acres of land. The area 
to be di-ained lies in a valley, surrounded entirely by a ridge of 
nlUs, so that the excavation for the sewer had to be done partly by 
the open cut method and partly by the tunnel method. The cost 
figures that follow are for a section of tlie sewer constructed by 
the latter method. The sewer has a total length of 4,717 ft. and, 
starting at Grumbacli avenue (see Fig. 7), the first section of 
470 ft. was constructed by the open cut method; then came 1,135 
ft. of tunnel, 495 ft. of open cut, 670 ft. of tunnel, 1,240 ft. of 
open cut, 280 ft. of tunnel, and finally 431 ft. of open cut. The 
sewer is circular, 33 ins. inside diameter, constructed of two rings 
of brick laid in cement mortar, and was designed to flow one- 
half full. As originally planned it was proposed to have cuts under 
30 ft. made by the open cut method ; the contractor, however, 
decfded to build the sewer for the distance of 495 ft. between the 
two longest tunnels in tunnel constiniction. All tunnel openings are 
pei'manent, manholes being built at these points, and also at places 
where the tunnel line intersects streets, a distance of about 600 ft. 
apart. 

Oi)€n Cut Method. — Work on the first open cut section of the 
sewer was commenced at Grumbach avenue on Dec. 2, 1905. The 
cut ran from 13 ft. at Station O to 32 ft. to sub-grade at the first 
section of tlie tunnel (Station 4 + 70). The first 6 ft. of the cut 
was cast out by hand, but from this point to sub-grade a trench- 
ing machine was used to handle the material. The first material 
encountered was 7 ft. of loam clay and gravel, and underlying this 
was a stiff red clay containing stone and gravel, varying in size 
from pebbles to 12-in. boulders. 

The trenching machine was built by the contractor. It consists 
of a bucket car mounted on wheels, and had a device at the top for 
use in hoisting tlie buckets. The latter were of iron, revolving type. 



870 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Irljl 

w 




Oioqiiujv .^"l E 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 871 

% cUr yd. capacity, of the kind ordinarily used on trenching ma- 
chines. The car ran on a traclc extending over the trench, spiked 
to cross ties laid on the ground, the rails being laid so that the 
car cleared the line of sheeting. A double drum stationary engine 
in an engine house, mounted on wheels, was used to operate the 
car and the hoisting apparatus. One drum of the engine 
was attached to the cable for moving the car ; the other drum 
operates the cable for raising and lowering the buckets. The cable 
runs from the engine house to an A frame, and a working distance 
of 200 ft. can be made advantageously. 

The operator, standing on the car in view of the trench and 
buckets, gave the signals to the engineer to raise or lower the 
buckets or to move the car forward or backward on the track. 
Buckets were distributed along the trench and when filled the op- 
erator dropped an empty one, picked up a filled bucket and carried 
it backward, dumping the material over the completed sewer. In 
this way the completed sewer was backfilled as rapidly as the work 
was finished. When it was necessary to move the machine ahead, 
rails were laid and the engine house moved forward under its own 
power, carrying the A frame along .with it. 

By Jan. 4, 404 ft. of the first 470 ft. of open cut sewer had been 
completed, the remaining distance being left open to allow the engi- 
neers distance for a backsight to project the line into the tunnel. 
This section was afterwards built to within a few feet of the tun- 
nel opening, only enough room being allowed in which to raise and 
lower the buckets. 

The sewer constructed in the open cut excavation was circular, 
33 ins. in diameter, the invert being of second quality paving brick 
and the arch of ordinary sewer brick. The brickwork was laid on 
a cradle of 1-in. hemlock nailed to 2-in. square forms, the cradle 
being backed with concrete for 3 ins. underneath and 6 ins. at the 
spring line. The space below the spring line v/as also filled with 
concrete. 

Tunnel Method — Work on the tunnel section was first com- 
menced at the western end (Station 4 + 70). It was planned 
originally, however, to start the shaft at Oak street and the shaft 
at De Witt street about the same time that the open cut excava- 
tion was commenced, and in this way start the tunnel excavation 
simultaneously in four headings. Later on the work was carried 
on in four headings. 

The dimensions of the tunnel excavation were 7 ft. 9 ins. x 5 ft. 
10 ins., and the materials encountered were a clay rock and in 
some instances slate rock. In the first section small pockets of clay 
and sand were encountered, which necessitated very close side 
-sheeting. All of the drilling was done by hand, four holes, spaced 
about a foot from the side, being drilled in the face. The two 
upper holes were drilled about 18 ins. from the roof, the lower ones 
being from 18 ins. to 2 ft. from the floor. At first each hole was 
loaded with one stick of 40% dynamite, and all four holes blown at 
once. This threw down the whole face and was very effective. 
It was found, however, that the charge was too heavy for the tim- 



872 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



bering to stand safely, and accordingly the two upper holes were 
loaded with 1% sticks of dynamite and fired. After the muck had 
been cleared away the two lower noles were loaded with the same 
sized charge and fired. The result proved satisfactory. The holes 
were drilled from 2 ft. to 2% ft., and the face thrown out by the 
blast had a depth of 18 ins. to 2 ft. Before a blast was fired a plat- 
form was laid at the foot of the face, and the material or muck was 
blasted out upon it. In this way the material was more easily 
handled. 

The method of timbering the tunnel is shown in Fig. 8. All tim- 
ber used in the tunnel was beech, which on account of its toughness 
did not splinter or brush. The timber consisted of 6-in. x 6-in. 
frames, spaced about 5 ft. centers. The cap and sill were 5% ft. 
long and uprights were 6% ft. long, with corners temporarily 
strapped with angle iron, which was withdrawn after overhead 

/S/xKe fir cf miner overhead Sh eef/ner 





3^ 



^ 



ENQ--CPNTtl- 



Fig. 8. Sewer in a Tunnel. 

and sidebridging had advanced two frames. On top of the frames 
at each corner were blocks, on which was placed 2 -in. plank, leav- 
ing a space for driving overhead sheeting. On account of this 
overhead sheeting causing a pressure on the plank placed on the 
blocks, the edge of the plank was beveled and the overhead sheeting 
pointed to allow it to enter the space. 

The excavated matter was removed in buckets, similar to those 
described under open cut work. These buckets were placed on a 
platform car which ran on a 2-ft. gage track carried along as the 
tunnel progressed. The car was pushed to the mouth of the tun- 
nel by one of the men, where it was raised by trenching machine 
previously described, and conveyed to the dumping ground. The 
excess of material was used in filling low land near the tunnel 
opening, the haul consequently being very short. The platform 
car was also used in carrying lumber and other materials into the 
tunnel, and in carrying out boulde-s, etc. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 873 

The foul air caused by the dynamite fumes, also from working 
so far in the tunnel without ventilation, was overcome by pump- 
ing fresli air into tlie tunnel through a 9-in. galvanized pipe by 
means of a rotary steam fan. In this manner tlie air was kept 
very pure, and within a short time after a blast was fired the 
fumes liad passed away and the workmen were able to return to 
the breast of the heading to clear away the muck. 

Some water was encountered, and this was pumped from the 
tunnel at the low points, as Station 4 + 70 and sliaft at Oak street, 
by means of a steam siphon into the completed sewer. At the 
DeWitt street shaft the water was pumped out by a pulsometer, 
and in this way the tunnel was kept comparatively dry. In the 
section of the tunnel from Oak street to DeWitt street a very hard 
clay rock, bearing gypsum, was encountered, which proved not 
only hard to drill, but could not be blasted out satisfactorily. In 
addition water ran continually from the breast of the heading and 
also from the sides of the tunnel, making constant pumping neces- 
sary. Tlie drillers were obliged to wear rubber suits. The rate 
of progress was about one-half as great as in the section from 
4 + 70 to Oak street. 

Cost Data on Tunnel Sewer Construction. — Cost data on the con- 
struction of a greater portion of the first section of the sewer 
built by the tunnel method are given below. These costs are for 
a total length of sewer of 1,047 ft., that is, for the sewer starting 
at Station 4 + 70 to within about 100 ft. of DeWitt street (see 
Fig. 7). In these data the cost of drilling per foot of hole could 
not well be separated from picking and shoveling into buckets, 
as some men worked on both. The drilling was all done by hand, 
and after a shot was fired the drillers shoveled the muck and 
trimmed up witli picks. Water was, in general, taken care of with 
a steam siphon at one shaft and pulsometer at other. Hand bail- 
ing was occasionally resorted to. 

From Jan. 15 to Feb. 22, in 35 days of actual work, 173 lin. ft. 
of tunnel was excavated, or an average of 4.94 ft. per day of ten 
hours. The allowed excavation was 45. IS cu. ft. per lineal foot of 
tunnel; consequently an average of 8.26 cu. yds. was excavated 
each day. The material was hard red clay, which worked well. 
The work was done by one gang working ten hours per day. The 
labor cost per day was as follows : 

Per dav. Total. Per lin. ft. 

6 men in tunnel $2.00 ?12.00 $2.43 

1 sheeter 3.00 3.00 .60 

1 foreman 2.50 2.50 .50 

1 engineer 1.75 1.75 .35 

4 men on top 1.75 7.00 1.42 

1 waterboy 1.00 1.00 .20 

Total $27.25 $5.50 

From Feb. 22 to March 23, three shifts of eight hours each per 
day were worked by the men in the tunnel. The actual number of 
days worked was 30, and in this time 115 lin. ft. of tunnel was 
excavated, an average of 3.83 lin. ft. per 24 hours, or 1.28 lin. ft. 



'er day. 


Per lin. ft. 


?36.00 


?9.40 


6.00 


1.57 


7.00 


1.82 


3.50 


0.91 


2.00 


0.52 



874 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

per 8-hr. shift. The material was clay rock with from 12 ins. to 
20 ins. of gypsum in the bottom. This material was very hard 
and progress was consequently slow. The labor cost per day was 
as follows: 

Per shift. 
6 men In tunnel $2.00 

1 sheeter 3.00 

2 men on top 1.75 

1 engineer 1.75 

1 waterboy 1.00 

Total ?54.50 $14.22 

The 6 men in the tunnel worked an 8-hr. shift; all others 
worked 12 hours. 

From March 23 to April 4, two headings were worked, the men 
in the tunnel working in three shifts of eight hours each. The 
actual number of days worked was 13, and in this time the tunnel 
was advanced 216 ft., or 8.31 ft. per heading per 24 hours. At 
the shaft heading at Oak street the material was a soft clay rock 
which worked easily. In the west heading the gypsum continued 
until March 14, when it disappeared entirely. 

The labor cost per day was as follows: 

Per shift. 

12 men in tunnel $2.00 

2 sheeters 2.00 

6 men on top 1.75 

2 engineers 1.75 

1 team 4.00 

1 tag line boy 1.25 

Total $122.50 $7.36 

The materials used in the work from Jan. 15 to April 4, when 
the first section of the tunnel was completed, were as follows; 

Rate. 

2,255 lbs. dynamite $0.14 

32 tons coal 3.50 

110 gals, olive oil 45 

50 gals, engine oil 34% 

860 electrical exploders... .03% 
55,000 ft. B. M. lumber 16.00 

Total $1,404.55 $2.78 

The total cost of the tunnel work from Jan. 15 to April 4, a 
total progress of 504 ft. having been made, was as follows: 

Per day. Total. 

Labor, 35 days $ 27.25 $ 953.75 

Labor, 30 days 54.50 1,635.00 

Labor, 13 days 122.50 1,592.50 



Total 




per day. 


Per lin. ft. 


$72.00 


$4.33 


12.00 


0.72 


21.00 


1.26 


7.00 


0.48 


8.00 


0.48 


2.50 


0.15 



Total. 


Per lin. ft. 


$315.70 


$0.63 


112.00 


.22 


49.50 


.10 


17.25 


.03 


30.10 


.06 


880.00 


1.74 



Total $4,081.25 

Blacksmith, 156 hrs., at 25 cts 39.00 

Materials 1,405.55 

Repairs 100.00 



Grand total, 504 ft, at $11.16 $5,624.80 

Part of blacksmith work, sharpening picks, etc., was done by one 



SEIVERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 875 

of the men on top and Is not separated from cost of labor of men 
on top. Men on top also made wedges and assisted the sheeter 
in cutting frames, etc. One man on top acted as conductor on the 
bucket car. 

The above costs include not only the excavation, but also the 
sheeting of the tunnel, and in addition a small amount of concrete 
work. The cost of sheeting the tunnel was approximately as 
follows : 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Labor $ 546 ?1.08 

Timber 880 1.74 

Total $1,426 $2.82 

The labor cost on concrete amounted to about $110 ; deducting 
this and the cost of sheeting from the total cost ($5,624.80), we 
have $4,088.80 as the cost of excavating the tunnel. The average 
cost per lineal foot of excavation would then be $8.11. At the 
allowed excavation, 45.18 cu. ft. per lineal foot, the average cost 
of e.xcavation per cubic yard for tlie 504 ft. was $4.87. Tlie labor 
referred to in the foregoing tables as "men on top" included man 
tending dump, conductor on bucket car, cutting wedges and all 
incidental work. 

Brickwork in First Section of Tunnel. — The sewer construction 
In the tunnel is the same as in the open cut, or 33-in. circular, 
2-ring brick, laid on a cradle. The allowed thickness was 9 ins., or 
8.25 cu. ft. per foot of sewer. All space below the spring line 
is filled with second-class natural cement, mixed in a 1:3:7 pro- 
portion. From the spring line of the sewer to the roof tunnel the 
space is backfilled with carefully rammed earth. The brickwork 
was carried 4 ft. from the opening of the tunnel, making 500 ft. 
of completed sewer for the first section. 

The brickwork, backfilling, etc., for the 500 ft. of sewer were 
completed in 18 days of 12 hours each, the cost being as follows: 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

1 mason $4.50 $4.50 $0.16 

1 mason 3.00 3.00 .11 

5 men 2.00 10.00 .36 

Total $17.50 $0.64 

The materials used were as follows: 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

75,000 brick $7.50 $ 562.50 $1.12 

115 bbls. cement 1.20 138.00 .27 

105 cu. yds. gravel 1.25 131.25 .26 

Total $ 831.75 $1.66 

18 days labor, at $17.50 315.00 .64 

Grand total $1,146.75 $2.30 

The above work included 153 cu. yds. of brickwork, 110 cu. yds. 
of concrete and 310 cu. yds. of backfilling. The latter was done 
by the men who assisted the bricklayers, each 5 -ft. section taking 
four men about ly^ hours. The labor cost of the backfilling was 
$113.40. The labor on concrete consisted of about 550 hours' work 



876 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

at 20 cts. per hour, or $110. Deducting these amounts from the 
total of $1,146.75, we get $923.35 as the cost of the brickwork for 
the first section of sewer. 

On this basis the cost per lineal foot was $1.85, and the cost per 
cubic yard of brickwork was $6.03. 

The cost of the forms or cradles used in construction of brick- 
work could not be separated from lumber cost. The cost was very 
slight. 

Shaft at Oak Street- — The dimensions of the shaft at Oak street 
were 10 ft. x 16 ft. on top ; the bottom measured 9 ft. x 15 ft. 
The shaft was sunk to a depth of 58 ft. The materials encountered 
followed very closely those shown by the test borings as sliown 
in Fig. 7. The shaft was divided into three compartments, the 
middle compartment, used for hoisting buckets, being 6 ft. in clear 
and the end compartments being 3% ft. in clear. One end com- 
partment was used for a ladderway, the other end compartment 
being used for a pumpway. Beech timber was used and sets or 
frames were all 6-in. x 8-in. timber; the sidewalls were 16 ft. 
long, braces 6% ft. long. The lagging was 2-in. beech. All of the 
drilling on shafts and tunnel was done by hand. 

A machine was used at this shaft for hoisting and disposing of 
excavated matter from the tunnel. It consisted of a platform car, 
13 ft. long by 8 ft. wide, mounted on standard gage steel trucks. 
Buckets were hoisted througli a hole 4 ft. 10 ins. by 6 ft. in the 
platform. Over this hole was an iron angle frame, at the top of 
Which was the hoisting device for raising and lowering the buckets. 
The mechanism is similar to that of the trenching machine, pre- 
viously described. A 4-cylinder, 4-cycle gasoline engine of 30 hp. 
furnished the power to operate the hoisting apparatus and to move 
the car. The engine acts through a two-way friction clutcli ; one 
way throws in a single drum and operates the cable wliich hoists 
or lowers the buckets ; the other way throws gears connected to a 
sprocket on the car wheel, causing the car to move forward or 
backward, the direction being controlled by a marine reversing 
device. The bucket operator stands between the bucket opening 
and one end of the car. The engine and drum are at the other 
end of the car and the engineer is stationed near the opening, 
where he can operate levers and at the same time have a clear view 
of the shaft below. The machine was designed and built by the 
contractor for the work. 

In sinking the shaft, red clay was encountered to within 15 ft. 
of the bottom, when some boulders were reached, and in the 
bottom was 3 ft. of clay rock. The shaft was sunk in 14 days of 
10 hours each, the cost being as follows: 

Labor. 

Rate. Total. Per lin ft. 

7 men in shaft ...$2.00 $14.00 $3.38 

4 men on top 1.75 7.00 1.69 

2 teams 4.00 8.00 1.93 

1 engineer 1.75 1.75 .42 

1 tag line boy 1.25 1.25 .30 

Total $32.00 $7.72 



SEIVERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



877 



Material. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

250 lbs. dynamite $0.14 $35.00 ?0.60 

100 electrical exploders 3.50 3.50 .06 

4 tons coal 3.50 14.00 .24 

Total $52.50 $0.90 

Summary. 

Rate. Total. Per lln. ft. 

Material $52.50 $0.90 

30 hrs., blacksmith $0.25 7.50 .13 

14 days, labor 32.00 448.00 7.72 

19,300 ft B. M. lumber 16.00 308.80 5.32 

Total, 58 ft, at ?14.07 $816.80 $14.07 

The manhole in the Oak street shaft was 5 ft. inside diameter 
with a 1-ft. wall of brickwork to within 20 ft. of the surface, where 
it was reduced to a 9 -in. wall, and 5 ft. from the surface was 
drawn in from 5 ft. diameter to 2 ft. to allow for an iron cover. 
Around the sewer the size of the manhole and as far up as the 
springline was solid brickwork to insure a solid foundation for the 
manhole. 

First-class Portland cement concrete was used as backfilling 
around the manhole for the full dimensions of the shaft from the 
springline of the sewer to the top of the normal tunnel excavation ; 
from this point to the surface the backfilling in the shaft was earth. 
The timbering in both shaft and tunnel was allowed to remain 
in place permanently. 

The cost, including labor on brickwork, backfilling, tending 
masons and all incidental work, was as follows : 

Labor. 

Rate. Total. 

1 mason $4.50 $ 4.50 

1 mason 3.00 3.00 

5 men 1.75 8.75 

Per day of ten hours $16.25 

Rate. Total. 

5 men $1.75 $8.75 

Rate. Total. 

4 2/5 days $16.25 $71.50 

IVa days 8.75 13.13 

Total labor , $84.63 

Material. 

Rate. Total. 

19,500 brick $ 7.50 $146.25 

70 iron steps 08 5.60 

1 iron cover 10.00 10.00 

24 bbls. cement 1.70 40.80 

19 cu. yds. gravel 1.25 23.75 

Total material $226.40 

Summary. 

Labor $ 84.63 

Material 226.40 

Total $311.03 



878 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The measured work complete was 37 cu. yds. brickwork, 10 cu. 
yds. concrete, 65 cu. yds. backfilling. 

Shaft at De Witt Street. — Tlie dimensions of the shaft at De Witt 
street were 9 ft. by 15 ft. The shaft was sunk to a depth of 36% 
ft, through red clay mixed with a few boulders, and 4 ft. of clay 
rock at the bottom. The shaft was sunk in seven days of ten hours 
each, the cost being as follows : 

Labor. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

6 men in shaft ?2.00 $12.00 $2.31 

2 men on top 1.75 3.50 .67 

1 foreman 2.00 2.00 .38 

$17.50 $3.36 

7 days $17.50 $122:50 $3.36 

Engineer, 5 days 1.75 8.75 .24 

Sheeter, 5 days 3.00 15.00 .41 

21 hours, blacksmith .25 5.25 .14 

Total $151.50 $4.15 

Material. 

110 lbs. dynamite $0.12 $13.20 $0.36 

50 electric exploders 3.50 1.75 .04 

2 tons coal 3.50 7.00 .20 

10,500 ft. B. M. lumber 16.00 168.00 4.60 

$189.95 $5.20 

Summary. 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Labor $151.50 $4.15 

Material 189.95 5.20 

Total, 36 y2 ft, at $9.35 $341.45 $9.35 

Cost Data on Second Section of Tunnel. — The second section of 
the tunnel, from Oak street to De Witt street, 543 ft., was driven 
in 139 days' labor of 24 hours each. The average progress was 
about 3.9 ft. per day, or 1.3 ft. per shift of eight hours. 

The material from entrance (Station 9 + 88) to Station 10 + 12 
was clay rock, which broke up easily, but from this point to Sta- 
tion 15 the material was a hard clay rock bearing gypsum, much 
of which was of a flinty nature and very difficult to handle. An- 
other disagreeable feature of this section was the large amount of 
water encountered, which was continuous from Station 10 + 50 to 
Station 15. Men were obliged to wear rubber suits and pumping 
and bailing were constantly necessary. 

The cost of the work was as follows: 

Lahor^ 

Per shift. Per day. Per lin. ft 

4 men in tunnel ...$2.00 $24.00 $6.15 

1 sheeter 3.00 6.00 1.54 

3 men on top 1.75 10.50 2.69 

1 engineer 1.75 3.50 .90 

Total $44.00 $11.28 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 879 

Labor (Continued). 

139 days $44.00 $6,116.00 ?11.28 

77 days extra rnen bailing. . 2.00 154.00 .28 

62 days blacksmitii 1.75 108.50 .20 

62 days waterboy 1.00 62.00 .11 

Grand total for labor $6,440.50 $11.87 

Materials. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft 

400 lbs. dynamite ? 0.14 $ 56.00 $0.10 

945 lbs. dynamite 12.00 113.40 .21 

843 e.Kploders 3.50 29.50 .05 

280 gals, olive oil 45 126.00 .23 

51 gals, engine oil (bbl.).. .Zi^ 17.60 .03 

35 tons coal 3.50 122.50 .22 

$466.00 $0.84 

37,400 ft. B. M. lumber $16.00 $598.40 $1.10 

Summary. 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Labor $6,440.50 $11.87 

Material 466.00 .84 

Lumber 598.40 1.10 

Total, 543 ft. of tunnel at $13.82 .. $7,504.90 $13.81 

As in the case of the first section the above figures include the 
cost of sheeting and a small amount of concrete. 

The cost of the material for the sheeting was $598.40, and the 
labor cost was approximately as follows : 

695 hours, at 25 cts $173.75 

1,300 hours, at 171/2 cts 243.25 

Total $417.00 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Lumber $ 598.40 $1.10 

Labor 417.00 .77 

Total $1,015.40 $1.87 

The cost of the labor on concrete was approximately $149.50; 
deducting this sum and the cost of sheeting from the total of 
$7,504.90, and we get $6,340 as the cost of excavating the second 
section of the sewer. As the second section of the tunnel was 543 
ft. long, the actual average cost per lineal foot was $11.67 ; the 
average cost per cubic yard of excavation Was $7.00. 

Cost of Third Section of Tunnel. 
Section 3 of the tunnel, from Station 15 + 45.50 to 21 + 50, or 
605 ft., was driven in 95 days of 24 hours each, or 6.36 ft. per 24 
hours. Work on Section 3 began on Aug. 22, with gang working 
east. On Oct. 8, another shaft was opened and gang started west 
from shaft No. 3. The two headings met on Nov. 2. The -laborers 
in tunnel, and sheeters, worked in 8-hr. shifts, and engineers and 
men on top were on duty 12 hours. The material was clay rock, 
not hard, and therefore easily handled. In this section the engi- 



880 . HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

neer attended to blacksmithing, so there was no charge against 
this item. 

Labor Cost. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft 

855 days, labor in tunnel 12.00 $1,710.00 $2.84 

285 days, sheeters in tunnel 3.00 855.00 1.41 

190 days, engineers 2.00 380.00 .63 

285 days, labor on top. 1.75 495.75 .82 

Total $3,440.75 $5.70 

From allowed excavation, the cost is $3.41 per cu. yd. 

Material. 

21 tons coal, at $3.25 ton $ 68.25 $0.11 

1,665 lbs. dynamite, at $11.50 cwt 191.48 .S^ 

762 caps, at $3.50 26.67 .04 

190 gals, olive oil, at $0.38 72.20 .llVa 

20 gals, engine oil, at $0.48 9.60 .01 1/2 

3 mos. telephone, at $2.00 6.00 .01 

38,682 ft. B. M. lumber, at $14.00 M. . . 441.54 .73 

Total $815.74 $1.33 

From allowed excavation, cost is $0.80 per cu. yd. 

Labor $3,440.75* $5.70 

Material 815.74 1.33 

Total $4,256.49 $7.03 

Setting Cradle and Placing Concrete. 
Labor. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

96 days, labor in tunnel $2.00 $192.00 $0.31 

24 days, engineer 2.00 48.00 .08 

48 days, labor on top 1.75 84.00 .14 

$324.00 $0.53 
Material. 

240 cu. yds. gravel'. $1.10 $264.00 $0.43 

204 bbls. cement 98 200.90 .33 

2,828 ft. B. M. lumber for 

cradles 20.00 56.56 .09 

$521.46 $0.85 

Grand total $845.66 $1.37 

Brickwork and Backfilling Over Sewer. 
Labor. 

Rate. Total. Per lin. ft. 

22 days, mason in tunnel. . .$3.50 $ 77.00 $0.12 

22 days, mason in tunnel... 3.00 66.00 .11 

132 days, labor in tunnel 2.00 264.00 .43 

24 days, engineer on top 2.00 48.00 ' .08 

72 days, labor on top 1.75 126.00 .21 

$581.00 $0.95 
Material. 

92,000 brick $7.50 $690.00 $1.12 

110 yds. sand 1.10 121.00 .20 

180 bbls. cement 98 176.40 .29 

Total $987.40 $1.61 

Grand total $1,568.40 $2.56 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 881 

The labor on top under "setting cradles and placing concrete" 
was for lowering cradles, mixing concrete and lowering same. 

Tlie labor on top under "brickwork" was for lowering brick and 
mixing and lowering mortar. 

The work is being done by contract under the direction of 
Henry B. Brewster, Assistant City Engineer, to whom we are in- 
debted for the above information. 

Cost of a Sewer Tunnel at Chicago, Using a Hydraulic Shield. — 

The following data were published in Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 
6, 1907.. 

The Lawrence avenue conduit of the new intercepting sewer sys- 
tem of Chicago, 111., is tunnel work througli clay. The completed 
conduit will be 16 ft. inside diameter, lined with 162 ins. of brick- 
work in four rings, backed by a ring of solid timbering 8 ins. thick. 
The bore being made by the shields is, thus, 20 ft in diameter, 
From Lake Michigan to the Chicago River the conduit is 8,220 ft. 
long and tliere is, in addition, an intake tunnel for flusliing water 
extending out under the lake. This article refers only to the land 
portion of tlie conduit, which is being built by M. H. McGovern, 
Contractor, at a contract price of $79.50 per lineal foot. 

The conduit is being constructed by driving two shields in oppo- 
site directions from a central shaft, about the top of which are 
located the contractor's power hou.se, shops, sawmill, storage yards 
and the spoil bank. The shield work is unusual in the fact that a 
close lining of timber segments is used to keep the clay in place 
and to take the thrust of the jacks used to advance the shields. 
This timbering is described fully in a succeeding paragraph, but 
it is important to note here that it serves its purpose admirably, 
being neither crushed nor distorted by the pressure of the jacks. 

Shield Construction and Operation. — Fig. 9 is a diagram longi- 
tudinal section of the shield and tunnel lining and Fig. 10 is an en- 
larged detail of the cutting edge of the shield. The structural 
features and the principal dimensions of the shields are given 
clearly by these illustrations. Each shield is operated by 24 
hydraulic jacks of 60 tons capacity and good for 6,000 lbs. pres- 
sure. These jacks are of the Watson- Stillman type with 8-in. 
barrels and 5.75-in. plungers. They are operated with 3,500 lbs. 
per sq. in. working pressure and 2,000 lbs. per sq. in. release pres- 
sure. Each shield weighs about 8 tons and cost $8,000. 

Excavation. — The tunnel is through clay which holds a nearly 
vertical working face and becomes quite hard in places. This clay 
is excavated principally by means of draw knives of the form illus- 
trated by the sketches in Fig. 11 and the photographic view. Fig. 
12. The knives are operated like a draw shave for working wood. 
When the clay is soft, two men operate the knife, one grasping 
each handle, but, when the clay is hard, a third man is employed, 
who also takes hold and bears down. A strip of clay nearly 5 ft. 
long is shaved off with each stroke of the knife and is passed to a 



882 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



third man, who rolls it up and casts it over his shoulder to the 
muckers behind. 

The draw knives, made by the contractor's blacksmith, are of 
7/32 X 134 -in. spring steel self -annealed in air. Two forms of knife 
are used, one for soft and one for hard clay; the difference in 
form is in the angle which the cutting edge makes with the 
handle, this angle being 45° for soft clay and 20° for hard clay. 
The blades wear down to a width of about %-in. and then break 
at the center. Other details and dimensions are given by the 
Sketches, Fig. 11. 

Work is carried on continuously in 8-hr. shifts, the usual ar- 
rangement being to operate three shifts of miners in one drift and 

^ ..^,.^^.7if.'i ^...^yi...^ 



' XJE . ^^"i^^'^^ ^g 






^TT 







Plaffornn 



* 



I — 1 






P/crffarm 



4^ 



V t- 






I 

I 




Fig. 9. — Tunnel Shield. 



two shifts of miners and one shift of masons in the other drift, the 
masons' shift working the two drifts alternately. Each shift of 
miners is made up as follows : 

Per shift. 



1 foreman, at ?5 $ 5.00 

14 miners, at $3.75 52.50 

12 muckers, at $3.25 39.00 

2 valvemen, at $3.50 . 7.00 

4 timbermen, at $3.50 14.00 

2 switchmen, at $2 4.00 

3 drivers, at $2.25 6.75 



Per 24 hrs. 
$ 15.00 
157.50 
117.00 

21.00 

42.00 

12.00 

20.25 



Totals $128.25 $384.75 

This crew is divided between the two drifts and has averaged 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



883 



7 lin. ft. of excavation per shift in each drift, or 14 ft. per shift in 
both drifts. The bore being 20 ft. in diameter, there are 11.63 
cu. yds. of excavation per lineal foot of tunnel. Therefore, 
14 X 11. 63 = 163 cu. yds. of material are taken out every 8 hours at 
a labor cost for mining, mucking, timbering and haulage in tunnel 
of ?128.25, or 79 cts. per cu. yd. 

Timbering. — The timbering consists of a solid lining 8 ins. thick 
composed of rings of 4-ft. segments laid close. This timbering is 
placed by the mining gangs inside the tail of the shield, and as fast 
as the shield advances. The segments are prepared in the con- 
tractor's sawmill by a separate gang working one 8-hr. shift per 
day. Since about 495 ft. B. M. of lumber is required for timbering 
each lineal foot of tunnel, the millwork is an important detail. 

The timber used for the lining is rough hemlock, costing ?18 per 
M. ft. B. M. It is delivered to the work in 6 x 8-in. pieces about 
12 ft. long and is then sawed into segments 4 ft. long, 6 ins. wide 
and 8 ins. deep ; each segment has its ends cut to true radial planes 
and its back to a true circular arc. The machines for this work 
are installed in a building at the contractor's plant, and consist of 



Y/eb of CasHng 

fof/ta^a/nsf 

C/janne/s\ 




■Jl. 



Fig. 10. — Cutting Edge of Shield. 



a circular saw, a band saw, a band saw sharpener and minor tools. 
The circular saw is fitted with a table which swings with just the 
proper angle with respect to the saw to give the ends of the seg- 
ments the correct bevel. The band saw cuts the back of the seg- 
ment to the true circular arc and is fitted with a table which swings 
on the proper curve to effect this. In operation the 6 x S-in. pieces 
are brought to the rear of the building and slid endwise through a 
window directly onto the table of the cutting-off saw. 

The sawyer first takes off a crop end to get the proper bevel ; 
he then turns the stick half-way over, shoves it along the table 
until the end comes against the stop and cuts it off. The stick is 
then turned again, pushed ahead against the stop and cut off. 
These operations are repeated for the third segment. As the seg- 
ments are sawed off they are piled up by the side of the band saw. 
The band sawyer takes the pieces one at a time, adjusts them on 
the swinging table and cuts their backs to the desired arcs, and 
they are ready to go to the work. Each sawyer has one helper, 
and there are two other laborers to bring the sticks to the mill 



884 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



and pass them to the cutting-off saw. The sawmill force works one 

8-hr. shift per day, and is organized as follows: 

Per shift. 
1 fireman, at ?5 $ 5.00 

1 engineer, at $5 . . . i 5.00 

2 sawyers, at $3.50 7.00 

4 laborers, at ?3.00 12.00 

Total $29.00 

Thig sawmill gang turns out all the segments necessary to keep 
the work going in both drifts. The average advance of each drift 
is 21 ft. per day, and there being 495 ft. B. M. of timber per lineal 
foot of lining, this gang turns out 495 X 42 = 20,790 ft. B. M. of 
finished segments at a labor cost for sawing of $29, or about $1.40 
per thousand feet. 

Lining. — The 16-in. brick lining inside the timbering is placed 




Handle- 






ENG.-(pNTr^. 



Pig. 11. — Draw Knife. 



by a separate mason gang. It amounts to 3.42 cu. yds. of brick- 
work per lineal foot. The mason gang is organized as follows : 

Per shift. 

7 masons, at $9 .' $ 63.00 

17 helpers, at $2.75 46.75 

10 laborers, at $2.50 25.00 

2 drivers, at $2.25 4.50 

Total $139.25 

The mason gang lays 20 lin. ft. or 68.4 cu. yds. of lining per 
shift at a cost for labor and haulage in tunnel of $2.04 per cu. yd., 
or $6.96 per lineal foot. 

Haulage. — The muck is hauled from the working faces to the 
shaft in tunnel and from the shaft top to the spoil bank on sur- 
face in cars drawn by mules. The same cars are taken back load- 
ed with brick, lining segments or other materials, so that they run 
loaded both ways. In the tunnel the hauling is done by the mining 
and the mason gangs, but a separate lift gang handles the cars on 
the elevator, and still another gang hauls them from the shaft top 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 885 

to tbe spoil bank. This spoil bank is located about a hundred 
yards from the shaft top, since the clay is being saved for sale, it 
being of a kind particularly suited for certain burnt clay products. 
The lift gang works three 8-hr. shifts per day, and is organized 
as follows: 

Per shift. Per 24 hrs. 

2 cagemen, at ?3 $6.00 $18.00 

4 laborers, at $2.50 10.00 30.00 

Total $16.00 $48.00 

The dump gang works three 8-hr. shift and is organized as 
follows : 

Per shift. Per 24 hrs. 

1 hoisting engineer, at $5 $ 5.00 $ 15.00 

1 fireman, at $4 4.00 12.00 

16 laborers, at $2.75 44.00 132.00 

2 drivers, at $2.25 4.50 13.50 

Totals $57.50 $172.50 

From these figures we can make an approximation of the cost of 
hoisting and dumping. Considering the cost of hoisting first, it is 




Fig. 12. — Draw Knife. 

to be noted that this is divided between the work of hoisting the 
muck and of lowering the brick, timber and mortar materials. We 
will, therefore, estimate the total cost of hoisting per day, and 
prorate this sum between the two. Assuming that one-half the fire- 
man's wages and one-fourth the coal consumption are chargeable 
to hoisting, we have the following figures: 

Per day. 
2 cagemen, at $3per shift $18.00 

4 laborers, at $2.50 per shift 30.00 

1 hoisting engineer, at $5 per shift 15.00 

% fireman, at $3.50 per shift 5.25 

5 tons coal, at $3 per ton 15.00 

Total $83.25 

Taking the quantities given elsewhere in the article we can 



886 Hk'NDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

figure the weight of muck hoisted and the weight of materials low- 
ered per lineal foot of tunnel as follows : 

11.63 cu. yds. muck, at 3,000 lbs. per cu. yd... 17.45 tons. 
As 42 lin. ft. of tunnel are excavated each 24 hours, the weight 
of muck hoisted during that time is 733 tons. Turning now to 
the materials lowered, we have : 

Tons. 

0.91 cu. yds sand, at 2,700 lbs. per icu. yd 1.23 

41.2 cu. ft. timber, at 35 lbs. per cu. ft 0.72 

1,650 bricks, at 4% lbs. per brick 3.71 

Total weight of materials 5.66 

This total multiplied by 42 ft. gives 238 tons of materials low- 
ered every 24 hours. The total tonnage of material handled is, 
therefore, 971 tons at a cost of 8.57 cts. per ton, of which about 
one-third, or 2.8. cts., are chargeable to lowering materials and 
two-thirds, or 5.68 cts., are chargeable to hoisting muck. The total 
yardage of muck hoisted every 24 hours is 11.63 X 42 = 489 cu. yds. 
The estimated cost of operating the hoist for 24 hours being $83.35, 
we have ($83.25-^489) % = llVs cts. per cu. yd. as the cost on 
the above assumptions of hoisting the muck. 

The cost of dumping per 24 hours as given above is $172.50, and 
a part of this is chargeable to loading materials and hauling them 
to the shaft head. It is probably fair to assume that at least two- 
thirds of the total Cost is chargeable to hauling and dumping muck. 
As 489 cu. yds. of muck are hauled and dumped each 24 hours, we 
have ($172.50^-489) % = 23.4 cts. as the cost per cu. yd. on the 
above assumptions. 

Plant. — The contractor's plant is housed in wooden buildings 
grouped around the head of the shaft and comprises the following 
machinery: Power plant: two 100 h.p. boilers, on{e dynamo and 
dynamo engine, 20 h.p.; one lift; one emery wheel; one 100 h.p. 
air compressor; one positive blower and 10 h.p. blower engine; 
two 50 h.p. hydraulic pressure pumps, and one 40 h.p. cage hoisting 
engine. Sawmill :^ one 80 h.p. boiler, one 50 h.p. engine, and the 
saws, etc., previously itemized. On the dump : one 15 h.p. hoisting 
engine boiler. The estimated first cost of this plant is $30,000. 
About 20 tons of coal per day (24 hrs.) at a cost of $3 per ton are 
required to operate it. The plant gang works three 8-hour shifts 
and each shift is made up of : 

Per shift. Per 24 hrs. 
1 hydraulic pump engineer, at $5..$ 5.60 $ 15.00 

1 hoisting engineer, at $5 5.00 15.00 

1 fireman, at $3.50 3.50 -10.50 

1 machinist, at $4 4.00 12.00 

1 machinist's helper, at $2.75.... 2.75 8.25 

1 electrician, at $4 4.00 12.00 

1 blacksmith, at $4 4.00 12.00 

1 blacksmith's helper, at $2.50... 2.50 7.50 

1 carpenter, at $5 5.00 15.00 

1 trackman, at $3.50 3.50 10.50 

1 barnman, at $3.50 3.50 10.50 

2 laborers, at $2.50 5.00 15.00 

Totals $47.75 $143.25 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 887 

Office Force. — The office force consists of seven men and its work 
is divided into two 12-hour shifts. It is made up of : 

Per month. 

1 general manager, at $400 $133.00 

2 superintenuents, at fl50 300.00 

2 timekeepers, at $75 150.00 

1 receiving clerk, at $75 75.00 

1 boolckeeper, at $75 75.00 

Total $733.00 

The general manager has charge of several jobs and about one- 
third of his time is chargeable to the work being described. Di- 
viding the total wages by 30, we get $24.33 as the labor cost of 
the office force per day. 

Summary of Costs. — The daily cost of labor, summarized from 
the above figures, is as follows : 

Office force $ 24.33 

Dump gang 172.50 

Lift gang 48.00 

Mason gang 139.25 

Sawmill gang 29.00 

Drift gang 384.75 

Plant gang 143.25 

Lock tender 9.00 

Total $950.08 

The cost of lumber as given above is $18 per M ft. B. M., and 
the cost of coal is $3 per ton. Estimating the cost of brick at $9 
per thousand, of cement at $1.50 per barrel and sand at $1 per 
cu. yd., we get the following as the cost per lineal foot of the 
conduit exclusive of interest and depreciation on plant : 

Per lin. ft. 

495 ft. B. M. of timber, at $18 $ 8.91 

0.48 ton coal, at $3 1.44 

1,650 bricks, at $9 per M 14.85 

3.38 barrels cement, at $1.50 5.07 

0.91 cu. yd. sand, at $1 0.91 

Labor, $950.08 per day , 22.62 

Total $53.60 

This does not include the cost of sinking the shaft, nor does it 
Include plant interest, depreciation and repairs. 

Cost of a IS^a-ft. Sewer Tunnel at Cleveland, Using a Hydraulic 
Shield.* — The method of building large sewers by tunneling is be- 
coming increasingly popular, not only because it is usually cheaper 
than open cut work in soft ground, but because there is no obstruc- 
tion of streets and no settlement of buildings adjacent to the 
sewer. L^nfortunately, however, the use of a hydraulic shield is 
little understood by most contractors, and less is known about the 
actual cost of such work. We believe the following data are the 
first itemized costs of shield work that have appeared in the tech- 
nical press ; and, while a few of the items are probably not abso- 
lutely correct, the data are reliable in the main, and serve to give 

*Engineering-Contracting, July 25, 1906. 



888 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a very close estimate of the cost of similar work. Before giving 
the figures of cost, a word as to the conditions: 

Most of the main intercepting sewer of Cleveland, Ohio, was 
built in open cut, the top width of trench being 20 ft. and the depth 
averaging 40 ft. Two sets of Wakefield sheet piling were re- 
quired, the upper set being 28 ft. long. The sheet piling was well 
driven, but in passing certain brick buildings, enough quicksand 
leaked under the sheeting to cause a settlement of the buildings, 
and resulting cracking of the walls. The trench was through dry- 
sand, wet sand, quicksand, and clay and sand mixed. As a result 
of the damage to one building it was decided to build the remainder 
of the sewer by the tunnel method. The contract price for the 
13% -ft. sewer in open cut (40 ft. deep) had been $71 per lin. ft. 
The contractor agreed reluctantly to undertake the building of the 
sewer by the tunnel method for $60 per lin. ft., and, as we shall 
see, made a good profit at this price. The tunnel work proceeded 
day and night at a rate of 250 ft. a month, as compared with 135 
ft. per month when the open cut method was used. One advantage 
of the tunnel work is that it can be carried on continuously, day 
and night, and there is no interruption on account of bad weather. 
Moreover, it requires fewer laborers than the open cut method, 
under the conditions above stated. 

The secret of the modern success in driving tunnels through 
quicksand and other soft materials lies in the use of the hydraulic 
shield. A shield is a section of steel tube, open at both ends. The 
forward end is provided with cutting edges, and, in very soft 
materials, it is provided with trap doors through which the mate- 
rial is excavated. The shield is shoved forward about 2 ft. at a 
time, by means of hydraulic jacks ; and the tunnel lining is built 
up inside the rear part of the shield, ready for the next shove. In 
this particular case a brick lining was used, and the hydraulic 
jacks bore against blocks of wood laid on this lining when shoving 
the shield ahead. Where the ground is so porous that the water 
flows in faster than it can be pumped out, the tunnel is kept full 
of compressed air. The pressure of the air depends entirely upon 
the pressure of the outside water at the face of the shield. In 
this particular work an air pressure of 5 lbs. per sq. in. was 
ordinarily sufficient, although in a few soft spots a pressure of 9 
lbs. was used. With such low pressures as these there is no danger 
that the men will get the "bends." And there is no danger of 
"blowouts" at the face of the shield where the air pressure is light, 
and the covering of earth over the shield has a fair thickness. In 
a word, this sort of sewer tunneling by the shield method is not 
at all hazardous ; and, it is surprising, indeed, to note how few 
contractors have had the courage to try it. Perhaps the stories of 
the difficulties encountered in driving tunnels under rivers (which 
is a wholly different matter) have served to frighten contractors 
and engineers generally. 

Regarding keeping the shield to line and grade, no difficulty need 
be experienced in sewer work of this character. By making a 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



889 



mark in the earth at the face of the shield, it is easy to see wliether 
the shield is moving in a straight line or not. If the shield is 
moving off to one side, simply relax the pressure on the hydraulic 
jacks of the opposite side, and the shield is easily brought to line. 
In similar manner it is kept to grade. The jacks are so connected 
by piping that any one of them can be cut out. All that is needed 
is careful watching, and the shield can be easily kept to line. A 
cut showing the general dimensions of the shield is given herewith 
(Pig. 13). 

We now come to the details of the work. 

The sewer is 13% ft. in diameter and was built of four rings 




ENS.-C?N''X'' 



Fig. 13.— Tunnel Shield. 

of No. 1 shale brick laid in Portland cement mortar. The masonry, 
from a point 2 ft. below the spring line to a point 4 ft. from the 
crown of arch, was laid in Flemish bond, keyed in with row-lock 
masonry. 

The air lock consisted of a section of the sewer included between 
two brick bulkheads, 2 ft. thick and 24 ft. apart. A wooden door 
made of 4-in. tongued and grooved timber was placed in each bulk- 
head. When closed the doors press against rubber gaskets to pre- 
vent leakage. The lock was supplied with large valves so that it 
could be filled or emptied in about one minute. The ordinary air 
pressure was about 5 lbs., and it was found that this was sufficient 



890 'HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to keep the tunnel dry and to give a good supply of fresh air to 
the workmen. When soft spots occurred in the excavation the 
pressure was run up to about 9 lbs. A higher pressure than this 
might have caused a "blowout" as the hard material in the roof 
of the tunnel was not particularly thick. 

The shield, a section through the center of which is shown in 
Fig. 13, was constructed of %-in. steel, and had a total weight of 
about 16 tons. The shield was 4 ft. long and 16% ft. in diameter. 
The upper half was provided with a follower, 7 ft. long, made of 
%-in. steel, bolted to the shield. When the roof was of hard 
material the "follower" was pulled off the brickwork about 2% ft. 
The shield was pushed forward by 12 hydraulic jacks, Sins, in 
diameter and 26 ins. long. The water is conveyed to the jacks 
by a pipe line containing a swinging joint in the shape of an in- 
verted "V" with the joint at the apex, which allowed the shield 
to be shoved ahead and pulled the pipe with it. The average pres- 
sure used in shoving the shield was about 700 lbs. per sq. in., but 
the pump could develop a pressure of 6,000 lbs. 

The material excavated was principally a hard, dry quicksand, at 
times mixed with clay. All material was handled in cars of a 
1 cu. yd. capacity, the cars being pushed in and out by the laborers. 

The method of excavation was as follows : The miners exca- 
vated about 2 ft. in advance of the shield, the pressure was then 
applied and the shield shoved ahead into the part just excavated. 
At the beginning of each day's work the heads of the jacks stood 
about 1 ft. from tlae brickwork. Large wooden blocks were then 
placed against the two outer rings of the brickwork and other 
blocks were placed between these and the heads of the jacks. The 
pressure transmitted to the brickwork did not damage it. After 
the first shove of 2 ft., the jacks were forced back and naore block- 
ing placed between them and the other blocks. 

The sewer for part of the time, at least, was constructed at 
the rate of 9 ft. a day or about 250 ft. a month. An additional 
foot a day could easily have been made but the contractor did not 
care to take too great chances by pulling the shield follower off 
the brickwork any further. 

Two brick layers laid up the 9 ft. of sewer in about 8 hours, 
each man laying about 5,000 bricks. The mortar was mixed in 
the tunnel at the face of the work. In each lineal foot of sewer 
there were 8 cu. yds. of excavation and 2.62 cu. yds. of masonry, 
or about 1,100 bricks per lineal foot. 

The work was divided into four shifts, the wages and number 
of the men in each shift being as follows : the superintendent's 
were the contractor's sons, their wages being estimated at $5 per 
day: 

1 Head Miner at $4.00 ? 4.00 

3 Miners at $3.50 10.50 

2 Muckers at $2.50 5.00 

1 Double Team at $5.00 5.00 

Total $ 24.50 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 891 

Second Tunnel Gang-, 7 a. m. to 3 p. m. : 
Same number as first gang $ 24.50 

Total for tunnel gangs $ 49.00 

Brick Shift. 3 p. m to 10 p. m. : 

2 Bricklayers at $8.00 $ 16.00 

4 Tenders at $1.75 7.00 

2 Car Pushers at $1.75 3.50 

Total $ 26.50 

Top Gang, 7 a. m. to 5 :30 p. m. : 
4 Laborers at $1.50 $ 6.00 

Day Shift, 7 a. m. to 7 p. m. : 

1 Superintendent at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 Engineer at $3.25 3.25 

1 Fireman at $1.75 1.75 

1 Carpenter at $2.00 2.00 

4 Car Pushers at $1.75 7.00 

1 Car Dumper at $1.75 1.75 

Total $ 20.75 

Night Shift, 7 p. m. to 7 a. m. : 

1 Superintendent at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 Engineer at $3.25 3.25 

1 Fireman at $1.75 1.75 

4 Car Pushers at $1.75 7.00 

•1 Car Dumper at $1.75 1.75 

Total $ 18.75 

Total labor for 24 hours $121.00 

The two tunnel gangs worked 8 hours each, and the total wages 
paid them were $49 for 16 hours, during which time tliey excavated 
9 lin. ft., or 72 cu. yds. Hence their labor cost $5.44 per lin. ft., 
or 68 cts. per cu. yd. 

The two top gangs worked 12 hours each, and their total wages 
were $39.50. In addition to this there was the fuel for a 60-hp. 
boiler, which could not have exceeded 4 tons in 24 hours, and, 
doubtless, was much less. Assuming 4 tons at $3, we have $12 
to be added to the $39.50, making $51.50, or $2.15 per hour. 
In the 16 hours of excavating work, the cost of the top labor and 
fuel would be 16 x $2.15 = $34.40, which is equivalent to $3.82 
per lin. ft. of tunnel, or 48 cts. per cu. yd. The total cost of 
excavation was, therefore, $0.68 plus $0.48, or $1.16 per cu. yd., 
exclusive of interest and depreciation of plant. 

The brick mason gang worked 7 hours, and the total wages 
were $26.50. Since 2.62 cu. yds. of brick masonry were laid 
per lin. ft., there were 23.6 cu. yds. laid each shift, the advance 
being 9 lin. ft. Hence the cost of labor was $1.12 per cu. yd., 
of $3 per M, or $2.95 per lin. ft. But this does not include the 
wages and fuel charged to the surface gang, which is $2.15 per 
hour, or $17.20 for 8 hours. Distributing this $17.20 over the 
23.6 cu. yds. of brick masonry we have 73 cts. per cu. yd. 
of masonry, or $1.91 per lin. ft. of tunnel. The total labor cost 



892 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of brick masonry is, therefore, $1.12 plus 0.73, or $1.85 per cu. yd. 
We are now able to approximate the cost of the tunnel per 
lineal foot. 

Per 
lin. ft. 

8 cu. yds. excav., underground labor, at $0.68 $ 5.44 

8 cu. yds. excav., surface labor, at $0.48 3.82 

2.62 cu. yds. brickwork, underground labor, at $1.12 2.95 

2.62 cu. yds. brickwork, surface labor, at $0.73 1.91 

1,100 bricks at $9 per M 9.90 

2.1 bbls. cement (1 :3 mortar) at $1.70 3.57 

1 cu. yd. sand at $1.00 1.00 

Plant, 50 per cent of first cost, distributed over 1,625 lin. ft. . 5.00 

35 ft. B. M. floor of tunnel at 3 cts 1.05 

Shafts or manholes 1.00 

Total $35.64 

The plant is estimated to have cost aJbout $16,000, including 
$3,000 for track rails, pipe, wire and lamps; and we have assumed 
that half of this $16,000, or $8,000 should be charged to the 1,600 
lin. ft. of tunnel, which is $5 per lin. ft. 

The tunnel was temporarily floored with plank, and upon this 
the tracks were laid. We have estimated that this flooring need 
not have exceeded 35 ft. B. M. per lin. ft. of tunnel. 

No data are available for accurately estimating the cost of 
shafts, but it is safe to assume $1,600 for the 1,600 ft. of tunnel 
as the cost of shafts. 

It will be remembered that the above costs are based upon a 
progress of 9 lin. ft. per 24-hour day. Very bad material might 
reduce progress to 6 ft. per day, correspondingly increasing the 
cost of labor. 

The contractor's plant on this tunnel work was as follows: 

2 boilers, 60 hp., return flue, only one in use at a time. 

1 Duplex feed pump, 4-in. steam cylinder, 3-in. water cylinder, 
5-in. stroke, made by Laidlaw & Dunn, Cincinnati, O. 

1 straight line air compressor, class "A," 16-in. steam cylinder, 
16 14 -in. air cylinder, 18-in. stroke, made by IngersoU-Rand Co., 
New York City. 

1 vertical high speed engine (20 hp.) for dynamo, cyl. 8 x 10 ins. 

1 dynamo with rheostat, capacity 250 incandescent lights, 110 
volts, 55 amperes. 

1 Norton voltmeter and switches. 

1 high pressure hydraulic pump, 10-in. steam cylinder, 1-in. 
water cylinder, 12-in. stroke, made by the National Pump Co., 
Chicago. 

1 hoisting engine, double cylinder, 8 x 10 ins., with one drum 
(22 X 22 ins.), sink motion reverse, made by J. S. Mundy, Newark, 
N. J. 

1 pump shaft, steam cyl., 5% x 4 Ins., made by Knowles Steam 
Pump Co., 114 Liberty St., New York. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 893 

1 elevator cage and guides. 

12 hydraulic jaclcs (5 x 26 ins.), with valves, for shield. 

1 shield, weight 32,000 lbs. 

In conclusion it should be said that this work was done without 
the slightest settlement of adjacent buildings, although a 3-story 
brick building was with a few feet of the line of the sewer. 

The contractor was Mr. John Wagner, of Cleveland, O. Mr. J. 
M. Estep was Assistant Engineer Intercepting Sewers, and to him 
We are indebted for the data upon which the above given costs are 
based. 

Cost of Sewer in Tunnel, Cleveland, O.* — The tunnel construction 
is a portion of the contract for the Lakeside Ave. intercepting 
sewer, between E. 40th and Marquette streets in Cleveland, Ohio, 
Mr. Thomas W. Nicholson, contractor. For some of the intercepting 
sewer, brick, with internal diameter of 13 ft. 6 ins., approximate 
depth to bottom of sewer 40 ft., the price per lineal foot in open cut 
was $88. In spite of all the care taken by the contractors to brace 
the trench it broke away from them in places until at some spots 
the sinking of the street extended to the curb lines. Much trouble 
was experienced with settlement of buildings with the drawbacks 
incidental to such happenings. The contractors were in so much 
trouble that they were permitted to tunnel and no more trouble was 
experienced with buildings settling and there was an immediate 
reduction in the cost of the work. 

The sewer now being put in by Mr. Nicholson was let to him for 
$33 per lineal foot when using three rings of brick with wood 
backing, his price for four rings of brick without the wood backing 
being $36. There were a number of other bidders wlio all bid 
higher for the wood backing form of construction, than for the four 
rings of brick, internal dianieter of the sewer 12 ft. The work is 
now in progress. It may be interesting to note that on Aug. 4, 
1908, a contract was let for another section 3,430 ft. long, to John 
Wagner, the internal diameter being 12 ft. 3 ins. at a price of $32.73 
with wood backing and $33.73 for all brick. The cost to the city 
is thus less than half by tunnelling compared with the open cut 
work and the dangers supposed to be guarded against by open cut 
work are really less with the tunnel. On his present contract for 
the 12-ft. sewer Mr. Nicholson is said to be meeting with no trouble 
by reason of settlement of buildings. 

To get rid of water and prevent settlement by a too rapid un- 
watering of the ground, the tunnel is constructed under air pressure 
of about 7 lbs. to the sq. in. Men work in this pressure for a 
whole shift, the work being continuous in 8-hour shifts. A shield 
is used and an attempt is made to complete a 12-ft. length in each 
shift. The table given shows the progress made during August and 
September, up to the time the tunnel was visited. 



*Engineering-ContracUng, Oct. 6, 1909. 



894 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The material being a fine joint clay is shaved by knives. These 
knives are made like a carpenter's draw knife, or shave knife, with 
the blade bent to a half circle. Small ones can be used by one 
man but in this tunnel the air makes the clay dense and several 
men pull on the knives, thus being enabled to take off long slices. 
When 2 ft. of excavation are gained the shield is driven ahead, 
and the wood lining put in. This wood lining consists of blocks 
of wood about 2 ft. long, 8 ins. wide and 6 ins. thick. On one 
side a curved piece is cut so the face of the block is cut to a 
radius of 7 ft. 1 in. The piece removed is nailed on the back and 
thus the block is 8 ins. wide and 6 ins. thick but front and back 
both curved to a radius. The excavation is 38 ins. larger than 
the interior diameter of the sewer and the wooden blocks are used 
to line the entire excavation, making a wooden ring with the 
inside face 13 ins. larger than the sewer. The jacks of the 
shield press against this wood lining and the pieces being cut to fit, 
any pressure exerted on the side of the excavation will simply force 
the ends of the blocks together and no other bracing is required. 
This leaves the space clear for the brick masons. 

The masons lay three rings of brick on the wooden ring for 
one-half the height. Great care is taken to insure grade and as the 
excavation, if anything, is usually slightly in excess, the extra 
space is filled with cement mortar. The inside diameter of the 
sewer is therefore true. When the sewer is completed on either side 
to the middle, braces are spiked to the ends of the ties of the material 
track and leaning against the sides of the sewer. Upon the upper 
ends of these braces are placed heavy timbers carefully leveled and 
resting upon these timbers are placed semi-circular steel centers 
made from 4 in. channels, with feet riveted to them to enable them 
to be maintained in a vertical position. These centers are placed 
4 ft. apart and the total length of brickwork put in on a shift is 
generally 12 ft., requiring three centers. The space between the 
brickwork and the centers is sufficient to permit the placing of 2 in. 
lagging on the centers. 

Against the lagging the masons lay the brick horizontally on 
the sides, presenting the narrow edge to the inside of the sewer. 
The three rings are thus laid and if any spaces exist between the 
brick and the wooden lining it is easy to slush them in. At the 
top, arrangements are made to place lagging for 3 ft. across, 
instead of lengthwise, and thus 1 ft. at a time can be built and 
cavities taken care of. Bricli and mortar are carried in by cars 
drawn by a mule on ordinary industrial track. Double lines of 
track are laid with frequent switches and cross overs. All the 
excavated material is taken out on these tracks and the brick 
and other materials brought in. There is one shaft from which 
work is carried in two headings but only one heading was being 
worked at the time of the visit. The equipment at the shaft head 
consists of a hoisting engine and air compressor and in the tunnel 
is a pump to force out the water when it becomes troublesome. 
The air lock is at the foot of the shaft and about 25 ft. long. The 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 895 

tunnel was in about 2,000 ft. when visited and under air the whole 

length. 

A usual working force consists of 11 men, according to the city 

sewer inspector, divided about as follows: 

Miners 6 

Men placing blocks 2 

Muckers «. 2 

Mule driver 1 

Total 11 

This exact division is not adhered to as all the men help the 
miners except when blocks are to be placed, when some of the 
laborers are detailed for that work. There are generally two 
masons with four or more helpers. 

The men are paid by the shift and the inspector did not know 
what they were paid but from conversation with the men he gath- 
ered that the rates of pay are about as follows : 

Per hours. 

Masons $1.00 

Helpers 0.25 

Miners 0.30 

Laborers 0.25 

The following table is copied from the inspectors daily reports 
and collected for each week from tables prepared in the office of 
the city engineer. It will be noted that the laborers' hours are 
lumped, regardless of the work performed, no distinction being made 
between miners, muckers and helpers. 

Engineers from the sewer department go into the sewer daily 
to keep up the line and grrade points. For grade, nails are driven 
in each side at a definite height at intervals, and strings are 
stretched from nail to nail across the sewer when the men want 
to check their grade at any time. Upon the strings pieces of 
paper are hung and sights are taken across two or more strings. 
In this way it is easy to keep it almost exactly on the grade with 
the work. Owing to soft places encountered from time to time 
in the material, it is more difficult seemingly to preserve the line 
than the grade. The alignment, however, seemed excellent and the 
work was creditable to the contractor and the men in charge for 
the city. 

Feet 

Week ' — Hours of sewer 

ending. Foreman. Engineer. Masons. Helpers. Laborers, completed. 
Sept. 18... 96 96 112 560 1,647 69 

Sept 11... 84 84 80 400 1,210 51 

Sept. 4 84 84 24 80 406 18 

Aug. 28... 168 168 154 800 2,470 97 

Aug. 21... 168 168 160 800 2,398 111 

Aug. 14... 168 168 160 800 2,910 101 

Aug. 7 168 168 192 960 2,904 124 

Total ..936 936 882 4,400 13,945 571 

The cost was as given in Table XI. 



896 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table XI. — Labor Costs Per Foot op Sewer. 











' 


Total 


Week 










labor cost 


ending. Foreman. 


Engineer. 


Masons. 


Helpers. 


Laborers. 


per foot. 


Sept. 18... $0.68 


$0.56 


$1.62 


$2.03 


$6.56 


$11.45 


Sept. 11... 0.82 


0.66 


1.57 


1.96 


6.52 


11.53 


Sept. 4 2.33 


1.87 


1.33 


1.11 


6.20 


12.84 


Aug. 28... 0.87 


0.69 


1.59 


2.06 


7.00 


12.21 


Aug. 21... 0.76 


0.61 


1.44 • 


1.80 


6.59 


11.20 


Aug. 14... 0.83 


0.67 


1.58 


1.98 


7.92 


12.98 


Aug. 7 0.68 


0.54 


1.55 


1.93 


5.71 


10.41 



The wages are assumed to be correct as given by the inspector. 
The wages for laborers are assumed at an average of 27% cts. per 
hour; foreman assumed 50 cts. per hour; engineer assumed at 40 
cts. per hour. This analysis is made upon the foregoing data 
solely and has not been checked with information from the con- 
tractor. 

The foregoing labor cost takes the wood, brick, mortar, etc., 
down into the tunnel ; puts them in place and the excavated material 
is brought to the surface to be hauled away. This hauling must 
add $2 per foot to the cost unless some arrangements are made 
to dispose of the material at a profit. 

Each foot of excavation contains 6.7 cu. yds. In each foot 
there are 800 brick and 276 ft. B. M. of lining blocks. The 
mechanical equipment consists of a shield, a hoisting engine, air 
compressor and two pumps ; one in each heading and of tracks for 
cars, cars, mules, piping, etc., and locks. For this equipment and 
operation a charge of $1.25 per foot should be reasonable as it will 
not be worn out on this one job. 

The following estimate should be about right for similar work: 

Plant, fuel, etc $ 1.25 

800 brick at $15 per M 12.00 

Mortar 1.28 

Wood lining, 276 ft. B. M. at $35 9.63 

Hauling away material 2.00 



Cost per foot exclusive of labor $26.16 

The labor costs vary as shown from $10.41 to $12.98 per foot, 
which brings the cost per foot from $36.57 to $39.14, the contract 
price being $33. 

When both headings are going the cost for foreman and engineer 
will of course be divided but this will cut off less than $1 per foot. 
If the excavated material is sold the price cannot more than pay 
the cost of hauling. Assuming everything favorable that can be 
assumed, it looks as if the contract is not going to be very 
remunerative. 

The men lumped together as laborers handle all the material 
into and out of the tunnel, do the mining, cleaning up, assisting 
brick masons, helpers, etc., so the actual excavation cost is less 
than $1 per cu. yd. The cost of masons and helpers is about $2.80 
per 1,000 brick. No fault can be found with these items. 

Labor Cost of a Large Brick Sewer in Chicago.* — In 1901 the 

* Engineering-Contracting, May 30, 1906. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 897 

City of Chicago began the construction of the south arm of its 
intercepting sewer system, comprising Section G, wliicli extended 
from 39tli street to 51st street, and Sections G 3 and H, which 
extended from 51st street to 73d street. Tlie work was done by 
day labor under the supervision of the city's engineers. Descrip- 
tions of tlie metliods and cost of driving slaeet piling and of tlie 
excavation for tliese sewers were given in tlae March and April 
issues of this magazine. 

The specifications for the briclcwork on Section G called for 
five rings of hard burned sewer brick, laid in natural cement 
mortar, composed of one part cement and one part sand. From 
39th street to 44th place, the sewer was 16 ft. in internal diameter, 
and from 44 th place to 51st street, it had an internal diameter of 
15% ft. Bricklaying on Section G was commenced in the early 
part of June, 1901, and was completed about March 1, 1903, no 
work being done during tlie winter of 1901-2. On account of the 
necessity of getting through the freight yards of the Illinois Central 
Ry. at 51st street, bricklaying was carried on during tlae winter of 
1902-3 when the weather would permit. At no time was brick laid 
when the temperature was lower than 15 degrees above zero. The 
best quality of torpedo sand, thoroughly heated was used in the 
mortar. This section of the conduit was about 300 ft. long. 

The brick were unloaded from the cars and placed in piles about 
16 ft. from the side of the trench. From these piles the bricks 
were loaded and wheeled to the side of the trench, and were then 
delivered to the bricklayers by means of tossers working on the 
bank and on scaffolds on the braces. All cement mortar was 
mixed by hand and lowered in galvanized iron pails by means of 
ropes, from scaffolds on the top set of braces. 

During the season of 1901, eight bricklayers were employed, and 
an average of about 22 ft. of conduit was built per day. This was 
equivalent to about 40.5 cu. yds. of brickwork per day, or 5 cu. 
yds. per mason. The second year, 13 bricklayers were used, and 
they averaged about 35 ft. of conduit per day. It should be re- 
marked that while 13 bricklayers were carried on the roll at this 
time, the gang usually consisted of 12 men. The gang for handling 
brick, mixing cement, etc., consisted of from 70 to 75 men for 12 
Bricklayers. 

On the construction of that portion of the intercepting sewer 
lying between 51st street and 73d street, the first brick was laid 
Dec. 8, 1901. But 144 ft. were finished that year owing to the 
cold weather. Construction was resumed about March 15, 1902, 
and continued until Jan. 2, 1903, when it was stopped for the 
winter. The work was resumed April 10, 1903, and was completed 
July 10. The masonry consisted of five concentric rings of orick 
laid in natural cement mortar, composed of one part cement and 
one part sand. From 51st street to 56 th street the sewer was to 
have an internal diameter of 14% ft. ; from 56th street to 63d 
street the diameter was 13% ft.; from 63d street to 70th street. 



898 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

13% ft, and from 70th street to 73d street, 12% ft. The excavated 
sections were 48 ft. long, and consequently 12 bricklayers were 
employed most of the time. The work was so arranged that as 
soon as the invert was finished, work was begun on the arch. The 
arch work was usually kept at least one day behind the invert in 
order to give plenty of room for setting up centers, removal of 
timbers, and at the same time keep the mason gang busy, if there 
should be any delay in excavating the bottom or from other causes. . 

Brick were delivered in cars on the street by the Municipal nar- 
row gage railway, no hand wheeling being necessary. When 
dumping space was available, sufficient brick for half the invert 
were usually on the bank before the masons began to work. The 
brick were passed from hand to hand to the masons. 

As in the construction of Section G, the cement was mixed by 
hand, the mixing being done as close to the workers as possible, 
but on the opposite side of the trench from the brick pile. The 
mortar was lowered by hand, one man supplying three masons, that 
number being allotted to each 12-ft. section. The division was 
made on account of the Potter trench machine bents, which were so 
low that a man could not pass under them while on the cement 
platform. The cement platform was laid on the cross timbers which 
supported the trench machine. The platform was about 1 ft. above 
the street surface, thus making a lowering distance of from 22 ft. 
to 28 ft. when mortar was delivered for the invert. A departure 
was made from the usual custom of having the mason tender 
dump the mortar, in that one man in the bottom was assigned to 
do this work. This proved a decided advantage as the mortar 
boxes were always kept filled. It might be well to note here that 
while a mason tender could have handled the mortar for a part of 
the time, yet even a delay of a few minutes for one mason at 
frequent intervals, amounts to considerable at the end of the day. 
Every contractor knows that a slight excuse for slow work will 
make a considerable difference in the amount of finished product. 

When 12 masons were working the mason gang consisted of from 
58 to 65 men. The gang included masons, tenders, brick tossers 
and cement handlers. With this force, from 38 to 44 ft. of com- 
pleted sewer were built daily. 

The mason gang was as follows: 

Rate. Per Day. 

1 Foreman $10.00 $ 10.00 

12 Masons 9.00 108.00 

11 Bottom tenders 3.25 35.75 

7 Bank men 3.50 24.50 

7 First scaffold men 2.50 17.50 

7 Second scaffold men 2.50 17.50 

7 Third scaffold men 2.75 19.25 

6 Cement mixers 2.75 16.50 

5 Cement carriers 2.75 13.75 

5 Cement lowerers 2.75 13.75 

2 Wheelers 2.50 5.00 

5 Sand men 2.50 12.50 

3 Laborers 2.50 7.50 

Total per day $301.50 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



899 



As an average of 38 ft. of sewer was built each day, the labor 
cost per foot is about $7.93. Assuming that the inside diameter of 
the sewer was 13 lA (some sections were 14 14 ft., 13^4 ft. and 12 1/^ 
ft.) the labor cost for the brick masonry amounted to $2.48 
per cu. yd. 

It will be noticed in the above tabulation that the rates of wages 
in many cases were excessive. All that it is necessary to say in 
regard to this is that the work was done by the city. 

Cost of a Concrete and Brick Sewer. — Mr. William G. Taylor, 
City Engineer of Medford, Mass., gives the following data of work 
done in 1902, by day labor, for the city. Figure 14 is a cross- 
section of the sewer, which has a concrete invert and sides and a 
brick arch. The concrete was 1:3:6 gravel. The forms for the 
invert were made collapsible and in 10-ft. lengths. The two halves 




Fig. 14. — Concrete and Brick Sewer 



PorHantf Cement Concr. 
3 sand, 6 grav»l 



were held together by iron dogs or clamps. The morning following 
the placing 01 the concrete the dogs were removed and turnbuckle 
hooks were put in their places, so that by tightening the turn- 
buckle the forms were carefully separated from the concrete. The 
concrete was theen allowed to stand 24 hrs., when the arch centers 
were set in place. These centers were made of % x 1%-in. lagging 
on 2-in. plank ribs 2 ft. apart, and stringers on each side. "Wooden 
wedges on the forward end of each section supported the rear end 
of the adjoining section. The forward end of each section was sup- 
ported by a screw jack placed under a rib 2 ft. from the front end. 
To remove the centers, the rear end of a small truck was pushed 
under the section about 18 ins. ; an adjustable roller was fastened 
by a thumb screw to the forward rib of the center ; the screw jack 
was lowered allowing the roller to drop on a run board on top of 
the truck ; the truck was then pulled back by a tail rope until 



900 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the adjustable roller ran off the end of the truck ; whereupon the 
truck was pulled forward, drawing the center off the supporting 
wedges of the rear section. In this manner not the least injury- 
was done to the fresh concrete. 

Each lineal foot of sewer required 1 % cu. yds. of excavation ; 
4 cu. ft. of concrete, and 1 cu. ft. of brick arch. The sewer was 
1,610 ft. long and was built by day labor, wages being $2 for 8 hrs. 
The material excavated was gravel and clay. 

Excavation and backfill : Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

Excavation, labor, 25 cts. per hr $0,339 $0,424 

Bracing 0.026 0.032 " 

Backfilling 0.168 0.210 

Waterboy 0.017 0.021 

Kerosene 0.009 0.011 

Lumber 0.035 0.044 

Total ?0.594 $0,742 

Concrete masonry : Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

Portland cement, at $2.15 per bbl $2,292 $0,343 

Labor mixing and placing 3.017 0.452 

Cost of forms 0.187 0.028 

Labor screening gravel* 0.471 0.070 

Carting 0.592 0.088 

Miscellaneous 0.146 0.021 

Total $6,705 $1,002 

Brick masonry : Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

492 brick, at $8.50 per M $ 4.182 $0,153 

IVa bbls. cement,t at $2.25 per bbl 3.026 0.111 

Forms 0.408 0.015 

Labor, mason 1.343 0.049 

Labor, helpers 2.091 0.077 

Carting .0.680 0.025 

Incidentals 0.340 0.012 

Total $12,070 $0,442 

*The gravel and sand were obtained from the excavation. 
fThis includes cement used in plastering the arch. 

The cost of this 30-in. sewer was, therefore, $1.44 per lin. ft., 
exclusive of the excavation which cost 74 cts. per lin. ft. The cost 
of brickwork in manholes was $15.34 per cu. yd. It should be 
noted that wages were high ($2 per 8 hrs.) and that the work was 
done by day labor, thus making the cost higher than it would be to 
a contractor. 

Cost of a Concrete Sewer.* — The work consisted of a sewer 1,360 
ft. long and 30 ins. inside diameter, with a 4-in. shell, constructed 
during November and December, 1908, with the thermometer 
ranging 15 degrees above zero to above freezing point. The neces- 
sity of using frost preventives added about 2% cts. per lin. ft. to 
the cost of the work. The following is a description of the sewer 
and its construction. The location of the work was at Fond du 
Lac, Wis. 

About four years ago the city dug an open drain along a high- 
way upon the outskirts of the city for carrying storm water into 

*Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 27, 1909. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 901 

De Neveu creek. On account of the ditch washing Into the road It 
was decided to place a pipe in this trench and baclcfill over it. The 
contract was awarded to Burett & Dooley for a monolithic con- 
crete sewer. 

It contained about 1/9 cu. yd. of concrete per lineal foot. In 
addition there were 17 cu. yds. of concrete In the two abutments 
or portals at the ends of the sewer. 
The itemized total cost of the sewer was as follows: 

Per lin ft 
Items. Total. Cts. 

Labor ?635.50 46.72 

Tools 24.59 1.81 

Sandy gravel 208.40 15.32 

Lumber 14.04 1.03 

"Water 11.35 0.83 

Frost preventives 34.38 2.53 

Cement 370.19 27.22 

Steel forms 204.35 15.02 

Engineering 132.00 9.71 

Totals $1,634.80 $1.20 

In this statement the labor item is for unskilled laborers at $2 
per day, working fi-om 3 to 14 men a day for 29 days and 2 fore- 
men at ?3 each for 31 days. The cost items for tools, lumber and 
frost preventives are the differences between their purcliase prices 
and what they broughu when afterwards sold. The sandy gravel 
was purchased delivered from three different pits at $1.50 per load 
of about 1.75 cu. yds., with some at 10 cts. extra per load; it 
cost, therefore, about 89 cts. per cu. yd. The gravel was mixed 
to obtain the greatest density of aggregates, and 5 parts of gravel 
were mixed with 1 part cement to make tlie concrete. Tlie cement 
cost $1.70 per barrel delivered in sacks, less the rebate on saclts 
returned. Water cost for hauling only 35 cts. per load. The lum- 
ber was used for abutment forms and for establishing grades. The 
frost preventives consisted of horse stable manure, marsh hay, and 
a thin layer of flax straw sewed between two sheets of rosin paper 
and also fuel for heating the concrete materials. The steel forms 
were rented and the cost includes drayage to and from tlie job and 
a small sum for oil to grease them. The charge for engineering 
covers the entire expense to the city and township for plans, speci- 
fications, advertising, inspection of sewer during construction, etc. 

Separating the abutments containing 17 cu. yds. of concrete the 
cost was as follows : 

Items. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $25.50 $ 1.50 

Tools 00.59 0.035 

Gravel 15.00 0.882 

Cement 32.01 1.882 

Lumber 40.04 0.237 

Water 00.60 0.035 

Frost preventives 1.88 0.110 

Centers 0.75 0.045 

Engineering, etc 5.00 0.295 

Totals $85.37 $5,021 



902 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Some of these items are actual amounts and others are close ap- 
proximations. The costs for the sewer proper arrived at in the 
same manner were as follows : 

Per Per 

Items — Total. Lin. Ft. Cu. Yd. 

Labor or concrete $253.00 $0,187 $1,683 

Labor excavation 357.00 0.263 2.367 

Tools 24.00 0.017 0.153 

Gravel 193.40 0.142 1.278 

Lumber 10.00 0.007 0.063 

Water 10.70 0.008 0.072 

Frost preventives 32.50 0.024 0.216 

Cement 338.18 0.249 2.241 

Center molds 203.60 0.149 1.341 

Engineering 127.00 0.093 0.837 

Totals $1,549.43 $1,139 $10,251 

In the above table the amount for the concrete labor includes 
the labor cost for heating the materials, mixing and depositing the 
same in position complete, also for the small expense of operating 
the steel forms. The rest of the labor expense was for excavating 
the trench an average depth of 3 ft. and for back filling. This was 
done, as noted previously, in an old ditch, the bottom of which 
was red clay soil, requiring but a slight expense for trench bracing. 
No water ran in the trench except on a couple of days it rained 
when the water ran out soon through the molds into the sewer. 

Flax straw, bound in paper, already put up, was tried as a cover 
to the fresh concrete pipe, to keep frost away while the cement 
was setting, but the vapor from the concrete softened the paper 
cover so that it could not be handled and the article had to be 
discarded. The horse stable bedding of straw proved to be efficient 
for keeping frost out of the green concrete, it generating a certain 
amount of heat and allowed the moisture to pass through it from 
the heated concrete. Due to the chemical changes going on in this 
cover, too strong an article should not be laid next to fresh con- 
crete, as in some places on the pipe it was observed that the 
cement did not set well for a depth of 1/16 to % in. A thin layer 
of marsh hay was placed between the manure and the concrete on 
the balance of the work and the condition did not appear again. 

In the steel forms lighted oil heaters were placed at short inter- 
vals to keep up summer conditions while the cement made its 
initial set 

The style of the centers used was the full circle form so that 
the crown and invert of the pipe were built in one operation. The 
materials were mixed on a flat No. 12 gage steel sheet, size 60 x 156 
ins. Concrete was put in the bottom of the trench first, which was 
dug somewhat rounding, and graded 4 ins. thick. Strips of No. 26 
gage sheet steel 12 ins. wide by 8 ft. long, previously rolled to the 
arc of 30-in. circle, was next laid, one piece lengthwise on this 
bed, then one 5-ft. section of steel forms was placed upon the strip, 
or track. The form was expanded to size by turning the hand 
wheel, the correct diameter being obtained by fitting a wire hoop 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 903 

gage around the near end of the center and expanding the center 
against the gage. Another batch of concrete now ready was 
positioned around the form, an operator at the front end of the 
form having a steel blade, 5 ins. wide by 10 ins. long, affixed to 
a long handle, tamped the concrete firmly to place under the two 
bottom quarters of the form so that the possibility of voids or 
pocltets forming In the bottom of the concrete pipe to be reflnished 
later was eliminated, the concrete being positioned on top of the 




Fig. 15. — Centers for Concrete Sewer. 

form nearly out to the end. Another form being set, the process 
described was repeated. 

The object of using a light steel track, or slide, under the forms, 
was so that the molds could be drawn out easily the next morning 
one at a time, and to prevent scraping out partially set 
concrete from the bottom of the sewer, the steel track being laid 
with lapped ends so that the forms could slide over the joints 
and not disturb the track. The track was, of course, taken each 



904 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA: 

morning from the sewer after the centers were withdrawn and used 
repeatedly. 

Collapsing of the center's was accomplished by merely giving the 
hand wheel a few turns to the left, when the mold was pulled out 
of the sewer with a rope and taken ahead in the trench for re- 
setting when needed. No bracing of the forms was required to 
keep them in alignment. The top of the concrete pipe was shaped 
with a wood hand float, the concrete for this purpose not being 
made wet enough to make it sloppy. 

The adjustable steel centers as used on this job were handled on 
the desirable unit plan ; however, all the forms may be set before 
placing concrete about them, or in any other way that may appeal 
to a contractor as most advantageous. Two Y-connections were 
made to this sewer by placing the small ends of clay pipes against 
the steel forms as the concrete was being positioned. The next 
morning when the steel forms had been removed the first connec- 
tion had some concrete to be broken out of the end and refinished, 
while the one made later was found perfect. Gas engine oil thinned 
with kerosene and applied with a brush to the surface of the molds 
prevented the adhesion of concrete to the forms. The temperature 
varied during construction when concrete was made from 15° 
above zero to above the freezing point. The thermometer one 
morning registered 12" below zero, but by 10 o'clock it showed 15° 
above when concreting was started. One foreman with a crew of 
six men often put in 70 ft. of sewer in less than 5 hours' time. 

The style of mold used on this job is patened by J. E. Dooley, 
and is manufactured by the Adjustable Steel Centering Co. of Fond 
du Lac, Wis. We are indebted to the contractors, Burett & Dooley, 
for fhe information from which this article has been prepared. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Sewer at Cleveland, O. — ^Mr. Wal- 
ter C. Parmley, M. Am. Soc. C. E., gives the following data: There 
were 3% miles of reinforced concrete sewer, 13% ft. diameter, of 
section shown in Fig. 16, and 12 ins. thick at the crown. The 
contract price was ?62 per lin. ft., including excavation, and the 
excavation averaged 20 cu. yds. per lin. ft. The bid for a brick 
sewer was ?75 per lin. ft. 

It will be noted that there are two rows of "anchor bars" buried 
in the side walls. The invert and side walls were first built up as 
high as the top of the brick lining, then the arch centers were 
placed, and the steel skeleton was bolted to the anchor bars.- The 
ribs of this steel skeleton were spaced 15 ins. centers, and there 
were 8 rows of horizontal or longitudinal bars of l%x%-in. steel 
bolted to the ribs. The metal was all bent to shape in the shop, 
so that there was no field work except to place and bolt the metal 
together. There were 93 lbs. of steel per lin. ft. of sewer, of which 
56' lbs. made the skeleton in the arch, and 37 lbs. of anchor bars. 
This design of steel skeleton was patented by Mr. Parmley. 

The lagging of the arch centers was covered with building paper 
water-proofed with parafflne. Then Portland cement mortar 2 to 3 
ins. thick was plastered on the pa^er, so as to form the interior 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



905 



finish of the arch. Then the concrete for the arch was placed 
and rammed, being 12 ins. tliiclv at tlie crown and 15 ins. tlaiclt at 
the spring line. No outside forms were used on the arch. Tlie arch 
concrete was 1:3: 7^2- When the paper lining was pulled off a 
smooth surface was left. The invert concrete was made with 
natural cement. 

Mr. Parmley had an inspector keep a record of progress for sev- 
eral days on the work, when the men did not know they were being 



. /iH' 



I'l^irHamlCtmtnf Ma-tar 



Back- Fill. 




timed. He informs me that an 8-hour shift was worked. The labor 
cost of building 13%-ft. concrete steel sewer was as follows: 
Labor placing anchor bars (1,500 lbs.) : 

1 man Iday, at ?3.50 $3.50 

1 man 1 day, at $1.75 1.75 

1 man y^ day, at $1.60 0.80 



Placing 1,500 lbs. steel, at 0.4 cts $6.05 

Labor on concrete invert and side walls: 

5 men mixing and wheeling, at $1.75 $ 8.75 

1 man tamping 1.75 

1 man carrying concrete 1.75 

% man lowering concrete, at $2.25 1-50 

Labor, 13 cu. yds. concrete, at $1.06 $13.75 



906 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor on shale brick lining (2 rings) : 

2 masons, at $5.60 $11.20 

1 man mixing mortar 2.25 

3 men wlieeling sand, filling buckets and dumping at $1.75. . 5.25 
% man lowering materials, at $2.25 0.75 

Labor, 6.38 cu. yds. brick work, at $3.05 , .$19.45 

Labor on concrete arch: 

1 man putting mortar lining on centers, 3 days, at $1.75..$ 5.25 

2 men mixing mortar, screening and wheeling sand, 3 days, 

at $1.75 10.50 

8 men on mixing board, 3 days, at $1.75 42.00 

1 man tamping, 3 days, at $1.75 5.25 

Labor, 72 cu. yds., at $0.87 $63.00 

Labor placing centers and steel skeleton : 

1 man, 3 days, at $3.50 1 $10.50 

2 men, 3 days, at $1.75 10.50 

Labor, 40 lin. ft, at 52% cts. per ft $21.00 

There were 56 lbs. of steel skeleton per lin. ft., and about % the 
time of this last gang of 3 men was spent in placing the metal, 
% being spent in moving and placing the centers ; so the labor cost 
0.3 cts. per lb. of steel (not including shop work) and the labor 
moving centers cost 35 cts. per lin. ft. of sewer. The backfilling 
was begun 6 to 12 hrs. after the arch was built, but the centers 
were left in place 14 days. 

On another section of this sewer a six-day observation showed 
the labor cost (hand work, no machine mixers) was 81 cts. per cu. 
yd. of concrete in the invert and side walls, and 70 cts. per cu. yd. 
on the concrete in the arch; 36 cts. per lin. ft. for placing centers, 
and 18 cts. per lin. ft. for placing the steel skeleton; 0.32 cts. per 
lb. for placing the anchor rods. A gang of 2 brick masons and 6 
laborers laid 11.2 cu. yds. of the double-ring brick lining per day, 
at a cost of $2 per cu. yd. All wages were as above given. It 
will be seen that this longer observation gave much lower costs 
than above tabulated, and Mr. Parmley regards it as being nearer 
a fair average. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Sewer, Wilmington, Del. — Mr. T. 

Chalkley Hatton, M. Am. Soc. C. E., gives the following data: Fig. 
17 shows a profile of Price's Run Sewer, "Wilmington, Del., built in 
1903, by day labor for the city, the working day being 8 hrs. long. 
Fig. 18 shows cross-sections at different points. The notable fea- 
ture is the boldness in the design of such thin concrete shells for 
sewers of such large diameters. The cross-sections of sewers in 
trenches deep enough to cover the arch are marked "deep cutting" ; 
the sections where the arch projects above the ground surface are 
marked "light cutting." Tlie section through the marsh was 700 ft 
long, the cutting being 8 ft. deep, and at high tide the marsh was 
flooded 1 to 4 ft. The material was a soft mud that would pull 
a tight rubber boot from a workman's foot. The cost of this marsh 
excavation including cofferdams, underdraining, pumping, etc.. 



SERVERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



907 



was ?4.60 per cu. yd. For 1,100 ft. the 914-ft. sewer was through 
a cut 22 to 34 ft. deep, the material being clay underlaid by gran- 
ite. A Carson-Lidgerwood cableway was used. Although the 
crown of the arch was but 8 ins. thick, it withstood the shock of 
dumping 1 cu. yd. buckets of earth and rock from heights of 3 to 
10 f t. ; and the weight of 25 ft. of loose filling caused no cracks 
in the concrete. 

Concrete was placed in 4-in. layers (the depth of the lagging) 
and well rammed, since it was found that "wet" concrete left small 
honeycombed spaces on the inner surface. Concrete for the invert 
was 1:2:6, the stone being 1 1/2 -in. and smaller, and the sand 
being crusher dust. The arch was 1:2:5. 

The reinforcing metal used in the 9% -ft. sewer was No. 6 ex- 
panded metal, 6-in. mesh, in sheets 8x5% ft., supplied by Merritt 
& Co., of Philadelphia. A single layer was placed around the 



!<■- 6'0"Sef/er -^- 6'6" Sewer -^ 9'3''Setver >| 




10 15 20 . 25 20 35 40 "^45 

S + a + i O n S. Black Marsh Mud 



Fine Sotnd-^''^) 
Coarse Sand ■' 



Fig. 17. — Profile of Sewer. 

sewer, 2 ins. from the Inner surface, its position being carefully 
maintained by the men ramming, and with but little difficulty as 
the sheets were first bent to the radius of the circle. Each sheet 
was lapped one mesh (6 ins.) over its neighbor at both ends and 
sides, and no sheets were wired except the top ones, which were 
liable to displacement by men walking over them. 

The metal used on the rest of the work was a wire-woven fabric 
furnished by the Wight-Easton-Townsend Co., of New York. This 
fabric comes in rolls 5% ft. wide and 100 ft. to the roll. The wire 
is No. 8, with a 6 x 4-in. mesh. This fabric was placed by first 
cutting the sheets to the required length to surround the sewer 
entirely, embedding it in the concrete as fast as concrete was 
placed, in the same manner as was done with the expanded metal, 
except over the center where, on account of its pliability, the fabric 
was held the proper distance from the lagging by a number of 2-in. 
blocks, which w^ere removed as the concrete was placed. The 
wire cloth, being all in one sheet, can be placed a little more ex- 
peditiously than expanded metal, but, on the other hand, the 



908 



Ftrfland Concrete 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Portland Concrete 
ire Wiven Mesh 




" Win Woven hiesk 




Broken Stone 



6"T.C.P!p& 



PirHand Concrete 



Pbrtland 
Woven Mesti 

Wire Woven ll/lesh 



Section in Deep Cutfina.i 

5fi 



Section In Light Cu+f-inof 




Brvhen Stoi 



"ZC.P/pc 
Section in DeepCytHng., 



Portland Concrete 



Expanded Meivrt 




^"r.CPlpc 

Section in Deep CuWing. 



Section thnaugh Mcirsfu 

Fig. 18. — Cross Sections of Concrete Sewer. 



i 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 909 

expanded metal holds its position better in the concrete, since it is 
more rigid. 

I quote now from Mr. Hatton's letter to me: "The major portion 
of concrete was mixed by machine at a cost of 66 cents per yard, 
including wheeling to place, coal and running of mixing machine, 
wages being $1.50 per day of 8 hrs. Stone was delivered alongside 
of machine and all material had to be wheeled in barrows upon the 
platform, and after mixing to the sewer. Placing and ramming 
concrete around the forms cost 39 cts. per cu. yd., additional. 
Setting forms in invert cost 2 cts. per cu. yd. of invert ; setting 
centers, 7 cts. per cu. yd. of arch. Cost of setting forms and cen- 
ters includes placing steel metal. Each lineal foot of 9 14 -ft. 
sewer contained 1 cu. yd. of concrete, although the section only 
calls for 0.94 cu. yd. The excess was usually wasted by falling 
over sides of forms or being made too thick at crown. 

"This yard of 1:2:5 concrete cost in place as follows (record 
taken as an average of several days' run) : 

Cement, 1.31 bbls., at $1.30 $1,703 

Stone, 0.84 cu. yds., at ?1.21 1.016 

Stone dust, 0.42 cu. yds., at $1.21 0.508 

Labor, at 18% cts. per hour 0.987 

Labor setting forms and setting metal 0.045 

Cost of forms (distributed over 1,800 ft. of 

sewer) 0.082 

40 sq. ft. expanded metal, at 4% cts 1.700 

Labor plastering invert 0.070 

Cost per lin. ft., or per cu. yd $6,111 

"The forms for the invert were made of 2-in. rough hemlock 
boards cut out 4 ins. less diameter than the diameter of the sewer, 
except for 18 ins. at the bottom of the form which coincided with 
the inside form of sewer. The bottom of the sewers was laid to 
the bottom of this form before it was set. Then the lagging, con- 
sisting of 2 X 6-in. X 16 ft. hemlock planed, was placed against each 
side of the form, one at a time, and the concrete brought to the line 
of this top in 6-in. layers until the whole invert was finished. 
These forms were set in 16 ft. sections, five to each section. 

"The centers consisted of seven ribs of 2-in. hemlock upon which 
was nailed 1%-in. lagging, 2 ins. wide, tongued and grooved, and 
were 16 ft. long, non-collapsible, but had one wing on each side, 
9 ins. wide, which could be wedged out to fit any inaccuracies in the 
invert. We used four of these centers setting two at each opera- 
tion and worked from two ends. We left the centers in for 18 
hours before drawing. 

The cost of the concrete on the smaller sewers was the same as 
are the larger sewers, but the steel metal cost less, as it was wire 
woven metal that cost 2i^ cts. per sq. ft. It was much easier 
handled and cut to no waste as it came in long rolls and was very 
pliable. 

"After training our men, which occupied about one week or 10 
days, we had no difficulty in getting the concrete well placed around 
the metal, preserving the proper location of the latter, which, how- 



910 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



ever, bore constant watching, as a careless workman would often 
take the temporary supporting blocks and allow the metal to rest 
against the wooden center, in which case the metal would show 
through the surface inside of the sewer. The metal was kept 2 ins. 
away from the inside forms and the arch. To keep it at this loca- 
tion we had several 2-in. wooden blocks cut which were slipped 
under the wire or expanded metal and as soon as some concrete 
Was pushed under the wire at this point the block was removed. 

"After the forms were removed the invert needed plastering, but 
the arch was practically like a smoothly plastered wall except 
where it joined the invert, where it frequently showed the result 
of too much hurry in depositing the first loads of concrete on the 
arch. We remedied this by requiring less concrete to be deposited 




Fig. 19. — Reinforced Concrete Sewer. 



at the start, thus giving the rammers time to place the material 
properly. 

"An interesting result was obtained in the smoothness of the in- 
side surface by using a mixture of different sized stones. When 
%-in. stones or smaller were used in the arch, the inside was 
honeycombed; but, where 1 to l^^-in. stones (nothing smaller) 
were used, the inside was perfectly smooth, and the same was t'-ue 
of the invert, showing that the use of larger stones is an advan- 
tage and secures more monolithic work. When the run of the 
crusher from 1% to %-in. stones was used the work was not at all 
satisfactory. 

"The difference in cost of mixing by hand and machine is prac- 
tically nothing on this kind of work, as the moving of the ma- 
chine to keep pace with the progress of the work equals the extra 
cost of mixing by hand when the mixing can be done close to the 
point where the cement is being placed." 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 911 

The total cost of the sewers, including excavation, etc., was : 

Cost per lln. ft. 

9 14-ft. sewer througli marsh $32.00 

9^-ft. sewer in cut averaging 24% ft 24.00 

61/^-lt. sewer in cut averaging 12 ft 10.00 

5-ft sewer in cut averaging 11% ft 6.70 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Sewer, Kalamazoo, Mich.— Mr. 
Geo. S. Pierson gives the following data ; 

A reinforced concrete sewer 1,080 ft. long at Kalamazoo, Mich., 
was begun Nov. 3, 1902, and finished Jan. 10, 1903. The work 
was done by day labor for the city. Much of the work was done at 
a temperature of 12° to 25°. The sewer arch has a span of 9 ft. 
10 ins., and the sewer is 6 ft. high from invert to crown. The arch 
is 8 ins. thick at the crown, and tlie invert is 6 ins. thick. Fig. 19. 
The concrete was reinforced with woven-wire fabric of No. 11 steel 
wires. The concrete was 1 cement to 6 gravel and sand, but this 
proportion was not strictly adhered to. The centers were built in 
sections 12% ft. long, and there were 6 arch sections and 12 invert 
sections. The ribs for the arch centers were of 2-in. pine, and 
were 2 ft. apart. The sheeting was 1-in. dressed white pine. The 
average gang was 10 men mixing and wheeling concrete, 5 men 
placing and ramming, and 4% men moving and setting up forms. 
This gang averaged 18.6 lin. ft. of sewer per day, the best day's 
work being 28 lin. ft. There were 0.95 cu. yds. of concrete per lin. 
ft. of sewer. Wages were $1.75 a day. The cost per lineal foot 
was as follows, including superintendence: 

Per lin. ft. Per cu- yd. 

1.18 bbls. cement $2.44 ?2.56 

Sand and gravel 0.42 0.44 

Labor mixing and wheeling (10 men).... 0.98 1.03 

Labor placing and ramming (5 men) .... 0.47 0.50 

Labor moving and setting forms (4% men) 0.43 0.45 

Cost of forms and templates 0.30 0.32 

Metal fabric (175 lin. ft. No. 11 wire) 0.39 0.41 

Finishing 0.09 0.10 

Tools, general expenses and superintend- 
ence 0.43 0.45 

Total $5.95 $6.26 

The cost of excavation and backfilling is not included 

It will be noted that the cost of moving and setting the formB 

was unnecessarily high. Compare this cost of 45 cts. per cu. yd. 

with the 5 cts. per cu. yd., at Wilmington, Del., in the next case 

cited. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Sewer at South Bend, Ind.* — ^in 

building 2,464 ft. of 66-in. circular reinforced concrete sewer at 
South Bend, Ind., In 1906, the method of construction illustrated tn 
Figs. 20, 21 and 22 was employed. The sewer has a 9-in. shell but- 
tressed on the sides, and is reinforced every 12 ins. by a 3/16 x 1-in. 
peripheral bar in the sides and roof and 3 ins. in from the soffit. 



'Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 22, 1906. 



912 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Each bar is composed of three pieces, two side pieces from 15 ins. 
below to 6 ins. above springing lines and a connecting roof bar at- 
tached to the side bars by cotter pins. Two grades of concrete 
were used, a 1:3:6 bank gravel concrete for the invert and a 
1:2:4 bank gravel concrete for the arch. The invert was given a 
%-in. plaster coat of 1 : 1 mortar as high as the springing lines. 

Forms and Concreting. — In constructing the sewer the trench waa 
excavated so as to give a clearance of 1 ft. on each side and waa 




Fig. 20. — Concrete Sewer Construction. 




Soichecf Brace 
Fig. 21. — Concrete Sewer Construction. 



sheeted, as shown by Fig. 20. The sewer was built in 12 ft. sections 
as follows: The bottom of the trench was shaped as nearly as 
possible to the grade and shape of the base of the sewer. Four 
braces to each 12-ft. section were then nailed across the trench be- 
tween the lowest rangers on the trench sheeting. A partial form 
consisting of a vertical row of lagging was set on each of the out- 
side lines of the sewer barrel as shown by Fig. 20. Each section 
of this lagging was held by stakes driven into the trench bottom 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



913 



and nailed at their tops to tlie cross braces, as shown by Fig. 21. 
A template for the invert was then suspended from the cross braces 
by pieces nailed to the four ribs of the template and to the cross 
braces, as shown by Fig. 20. The concrete was now placed and 
carried to the top of the template, which was then removed. The 
side pieces of the reinforcing bars were then set and fastened, as 
shown by Fig. 21. The side forms extending up to the springing 
lines were then placed. They were held in position by braces 
nailed to their ribs at the tops and by otlior braces fitting into 
notches in the ends of their ribs at the bottom. The concrete was 
then carried up to the springing lines ; the arch centers in two 
pieces were placed ; the arch bar of the reinforcement was placed, 
and the extrados forms erected up to the 45° lines, all as shown by 
Fig. 22. The placing of the arch concrete completed the sewer 
barrel. The outside forms and bracing were removed about 24 



jf,x/ Bcrnc^s, 
.' JZr.foC. 




Fig. 22. — Concrete Sewer Construction. 



hours after the completion of the arch, and backfilling the trench 
was begun immediately, but the inside forms were left in place for 
two weeks ; they were then removed by the simple process of 
knocking out the notched braces. By building several lengths of 
invert first and following in succession by the side wall construction 
and then by the arch construction, the form erection and the con- 
creting proceeded without interruption by each other. It was also 
found that, by making bends in the form of polygons with 10-ft. 
sides instead of in the form of curves, there was a material saving 
in expensive form work. To overcome the friction of the angles 
in such bends, an additional fall was provided at these places. All 
concrete was made in a Smith mixer mounted on trucks so that it 
could be moved along the bank of the trench and discharging into 
a trough leading to the work. 

Labor Force and Cost. — 'With a gang of 12 men, from 24 to 36 
ft. of sewer were built per 10-hour day, working only part of the 



914 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

time on actual concreting. The disposition of the force mixing and 
laying concrete and the wages were as follows : 

Per day. 

Six wheelers, at 18.5 cts. per hour $11.10 

One mixer, at 22.5 cts. per hour 2.25 

One dumper, at 18.5 cts. per hour 1.85 

Four placers, at 22.5 cts. per hour y.OO 

Total $24.20 

There were 0.594 cu. yds. of concrete per lineal foot of sewer, 
and its cost is given as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Gravel $0,774 

Sand 0.36 

Cement 1.50 

Steel reinforcement 0.84 

Labor, mixing and placing concrete 1.094 

Moving forms, templates, etc 0.757 

Forms, templates, etc 0.589 

Finishing, plastering, etc 0.639 

Tools and general expenses 0.841 

Total $7,395 

The work was done under the direction of Mr. A. H. Hammond, 
M. Am. Soc. C. E., City Engineer, South Bend, Ind., to whom we 
are indebted for the information given. 

Cost of a Large Reinforced Concrete Sewer at St. Louis, IVIo.*— 
An unusual piece of sewer work is being carried out by the city of 
St. Louis. Harlem Creek, which drains a large area of the city 
and which has been made the outlet of district sewers until it has 
become a menace to health, is being replaced by a large reinforced 
concrete intercepting sewer. Ultimately the sewer will be several 
miles long, but at present only 2,200 lin. ft. of the lower end are 
under construction and about as much more is planned for early 
contract. The sewer under construction comprises 162 ft. of 29-ft. 
section, and 1,340 ft. of 27-ft. section; the 162 ft. of 29-ft. section 
have been completed and the following is an account of the methods 
of construction adopted by the contractors, the Hoffman-Hogan 
Construction Co., of St. Louis, Mo., with a statement of the cost 
of the work. 

The interior dimensions of the sewer are 29 x 18.62 ft., giving an 
area of opening of 411 sq. ft. The grade of the sewer is 0.0025 
per cent, which gives a velocity running full of 18.9 ft. per second 
and a capacity of 7,489 cu. ft. per second. The estimated run-off, 
calculated by McMath's formula, is 100 cu. ft. per second less. 
The area drained is about 6,000 acres and the maximum rainfall 
assumed is 2.75 ins. per hour. 

The cross-section of the sewer is given by Pig. 23, which also 
shows the arrangement of the reinforcing bars. Johnson corru- 
gated bars, old style, are used for reinforcement. The sections 
of the various reinforcing bars are: Longitudinal bars, 0.18 sq. in. ; 
invert bars, 0.7 sq. in. ; and arch bars, 0.7 sq. in. The spacing of 



^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 20, 1907. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



915 



the bars and the arrangement of the splices are indicated on the 
drawings of Fig. 23. All splices have a lap of 36 ins. Some gravel 
concrete has been used in the invert, but most of the concrete has 
been crushed limestone and Mississippi River channel sand. The 
proportions were 1:3:6 in the invert and 1:2:5 in the arch. The 
arch was computed by Prof. Greene's method. The ultimate 
strength of concrete in compression was taken as 2,000 lbs. per sq. 




I ENa.-CpNTft 

K- 



■36''3 





— H 


^. 


1 




=_=j 




~ 




M 


^^ 


.1-.'= 


, :., , 1 


^ 


— 




J4-'0". 






-"-."""-"-"-i 








Bars in ■ Ex+rados. 

Fig. 23. — Reinforced Concrete Sewer. 



in. and the working strength at 500 lbs. per sq. in. The elastic 
limit of the reinforcing bars was taken at 50,000 lbs. 

The trenching was done by wheel scrapers to the amount of 
waste. Then a cableway was erected spanning the entire length of 
the section and the remainder of the material taken out. The last 
4 or 5 ft. in depth were in limestone and the excavated rock was 
taken by cableway to dump carts which took it to the crusher and 
returned with crushed rock to be used for concrete. This rock 
foundation was taken advantage of to reduce the amount of invert 
concrete. 

In constructing the sewer proper the invert was first concreted to 
template. The arch forms were then placed and the roof arch con- 



916 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

creted. Both templates and arch forms were constructed of wood. 
The arch forms were moved ahead on iron rails and jacked into 
place. The ribs were 2 x 10-in. pieces and were spaced 4 ft. on 
centers ; the lagging was 2 -in. tongue and grooved stuff and was 
smeared with crude oil. The reinforcing bars were bent to proper 
radius by means of a wagon tire bender and were held in place 
by templates. The concrete was all mixed by two Chicago Im- 
proved Cube mixers operated by electric power. 

The cost records of constructing the section of 2 9 -ft. sewer so 
far built are not susceptible of complete analysis, but the follow- 
ing figures can be given. The prices of materials were as follows: 

Cement, per barrel $ 1.80 

Sand, per cubic yard 0.75 

Broken stone, per cubic yard 1.00 

Reinforcing bars, per pound 0.02 

Vitrified brick, per 1,000 12.00 

The wages paid different classes of labor were : 

Per hour. 

Firemen $0.50 

Laborers 0.175 

Laboi-ers 0.20 

Laborers 0.25 

Laborers 0.2 8 

Laborers 0.3025 

Bricklayers 0.66% 

Helpers 0.25 

Carpenters 0.55 

Engineers 0.50 

Timekeepers 0.25 

Watchmen 0.175 

Hostlers 0.175 

Teams 0.60 

Taking up the several items of work in order, the excavatioi* 
amounted to 21,400 cu. yds., of which 1,400 cu. yds. were rock ex- 
cavation. The cost of excavation was as follows : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Earth, excavation $7,640 $0.38 

Earth, bracing 2,000 0.10 

Rock, excavation 1,400 1.00 

Rock, dynamite, tools, etc 560 0.40 

The cost of crushing the excavated rock and returning it to the 
mixer was $1 per cu. yd. 

The cost of the concrete work was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

1.30 bbl. cement, at $1.80 $2.34 

0.44 cu. yd. sand, at 75 cts 0.33 

1 cu. yd. broken stone, at $1 1.00 

Total concrete materials $3.67 

There were 1,600 cu. yds. of concrete placed at a cost of for: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Mixing and placing $1,180 $0.7375 

Forms 2,000 1.25 

Movmg forms 400 0.25 

Total for forms and labor. .. .$3,580 $2.2375 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



917 



For reinforcing the concrete 86,600 lbs. of steel, or about 55 lbs. 
per cu. yd., were used. The cost of placing and bending this steel 
was as follows: 

Total. Per lb. 

Placing ?172 0.20 ct. 

Bending 52 0.06 ct. 

"We can now summarize the cost of the concrete work proper of 
this sewer as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Cement, sand and stone $3.67 

55 lbs. steel, at 2 cts 1.10 

Forms, labor and materials 1.25 

Mixing and placing concrete labor 0.74 

Placing steel, at 0.20 ct. per lb 0.11 

Bending steel, at 0.06 ct. per lb 0.03 

Moving forms 0.25 

. Total labor and materials $7.15 




"^?^7.2',;'. ^ ^„i -^ 

Fig. 24. — Reinforced Concrete Sewer. 



To get the total cost of the sewer proper we must add the cost of 
the vitrified brick invert paving. There were 71 cu. yds. of this 
paving and its cost was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.6 bbls. cement, at $1.80 ?1.08 

0.25 cu. yd. sand, at 75 cts 0.19 

450 bricks, at ?12 per M 5.40 

Labor laying, 71 cu. yds., at ?180.33 2.54 

Total $9.21 

None of the preceding figures include the plant charges. The 
plant cost $12,000, and the cost of running it during the work de- 
scribed was $2,000. This plant will, of course, serve for the whole 
work under contract. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Sewer. — ^Mr. Wm. G. Taylor is 
authority for the following data. 
The sewer had the section shown by Fig. 24 ; it was constructed 



918 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of 1:7% concrete mixed to a mushy consistency using the forms 
shown by the illustration. The reinforcement was of twisted steel 
rods for parts of the work and of expanded metals for parts. 
When rod reinforcement was used it was bent on the bank and 
erected in cage form in the trench. The invert section was built 
as the first operation and the forms erected on it. The first cost 
of the forms shown was $1.80 per lin. ft. of sewer and the cost 
of maintenance was about 12 cts. per lin. ft., including depreciation 
and fixed charges. Petroline was used to grease the forms and was 
found superior to soft soap or to both light and dark mineral oils 
which were also tried. The concrete was deposited in level layers 
6 ins. thick. The normal cost per lineal foot and per cubic yard of 
the sewer was as follows: 

Materials : Per lin. ft Per cu. yd. 

Reinforcement (17% lbs. per lin. ft.) $0.43 $1.16 

Cement (0.482 bbl. per lin. ft), at $1.53.. 0.74 2.00 

Sand (0.17 cu. yd. per lin. ft), at $0.50.. 0.09 0.24 

Stone (0.435 cu. yd. per lin. ft), at $1.10 

per ton 0.47 1.27 

Total ..,.$1.73 $4.67 

Labor : 

Making and placing reinforcement $0.14 $0.38 

Operation of forms 0.16 0.43 

Mixing concrete 0.30 0.81 

Placing concrete 0.27 0.73 

Screeding and finishing invert 0.08 0.22 

Finishing interior surface 0.01 0.03 

Sprinkling and wetting 0.02 0.06 

Total $0.98 $2.66 

General charges: 

Interior forms, cons, and maint $0.12 $0.32 

Exterior forms, cons, and maint 0.05 0.14 

Coating oil for forms 0.01 0.03 

Cement, storage, handling and cartage.... 0.08 0.22 

Total $.26 $0.71 

Grand total $2.97 $8.04 

In reference to these figures it should be noted that, as several 
contractors did the work, these are the composite costs. They in- 
clude a foreman at 50 cts., a sub-foreman at 35 cts., common labor 
at 17% cts., and teams at 50 cts. per hour. No administration ex- 
penses or contractor's profit are included. 

Cost of Concrete Sewers, Richmond, Ind. — From a long and in- 
structive article by Mr. Fred R. Charles, in Engineering-Qontracting, 
Dec. 29, 1909, the following is an abstract : 

Concrete Pipes. — Fifty-two-inch was the largest size used in 
concrete pipe. This was made according to the "Sheets" system, in 
which expanded metal is used for reinforcement ; thickness of shell 
is 1 1/12 ins. per foot diameter; 24 ins. pipe made in 2% ft, and 
larger sizes in 3-ft. lengths. Pipe is made in a mold consisting of 
an outer steel casing and an inner collapsible shell. The pipe 
rests on the end upon a pallet, and each end is formed by a shaping 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 919 

ring, so that It is notched or rabbeted through half the thickness 
of tlie shell, on the outside for one-half the circumference, and 
on the inside for the other half circumference. The pipes are laid 
so as to form a groove at the joint, coming on the interior for the 
lower half and on the exterior of the upper half, whereby the 
mortar is always plastered downward in cementing the joint. 
For handling and placing in the trench a tripod or beam derrick 
is needed with a block and tackle or chain hoist, as the weight is 
considerable. Our average cost to lay these pipes, including plas- 
tering the joints, was for 42-in., $0.083 ; 30-in., $0.06 ; 24-in., $0,053 
per lin. ft. 

Monolithic Concrete. — Another sewer, 54 ins. in diameter, was 
built in horse-shoe shape, semi-circular arch, vertical sides and 
bottom slightly V shaped. It was in an open ditch or water course, 
so nearly all except the flow line was above ground, and outside 
forms were necessary, in the absence of the trench walls, to hold 
the concrete. First the bottom was laid as in sidewalks, and the 
vertical sides run up to the spring line with ordinary plank inner 
and outer forms, the expanded metal reinforcement having been 
bent and placed as before, with plenty of lap at the spring line. The 
arch was put on with a semi-circular "Blaw" form. On all these 
monolithic jobs the average labor hours per linear foot for the 
different operations of constructing the sewer, using "Blaw" forms 
and expanded metal reinforcement, is given in the following table. 
Knowing the wages paid labor per hour and the price of materials, 
this will be some guide to the cost in other places: 

Labor hours 
per lin. ft. 

Placing flow line 0.48 

Setting invert forms 0.50 

Concreting invert 0.44 

Setting arch forms 0.33 

Concreting arch 0.25 

For the lower half of the sewer the concrete should be very wet, 
so that it will flow freely around and under the forms ; for the 
arch not so much water must be used ; only enough to show quite 
perceptibly when concrete is tamped, as the concrete must have 
sufficient consistency to retain its position and not run off the 
arch ; for the flow line the proper consistency is between the two. 
At first, house connections were provided for by building in ordinary 
vitrified slants or thimbles, but the flanges of these Were frequently 
broken by falling rock and otherwise, so a change was made and 
an opening left in the concrete shell by means of a special form or 
core, devised by Mr. D. B. Davis, inspector on the work. This 
comprised two circular blocks of hard wood, nailed together ; one 
8 ins. in diameter and 2 ins. thick, the other 6 ins. in diameter and 
3 ins. thick. Inserted in the concrete this left a good flange to 
receive the end of the 6-in. house connection pipe, and was ex- 
tremely inexpensive, two of these blocks lasting for the whole sea- 
Bon. The average cost of this work was as follows: 



920 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

For 54-in. sewer, 5-in. shell, rib metal 10 ft.: 

Per lin. ft 

Cement, 0.347 bbl. at $1.25 $0,434 

Gravel at $0.80 0.260 

Rib metal 0.30 

Forms (cost of) 0.125 

Labor, 20 cts. per hour 0.230 

Total cost, exclusive of machine and super- 
intendence $1,349 

For 48-in. sewer, 5-in. shell, rib metal 9 ft. : 

Cement, 0.29 bbl. at $1.25 $0,362 

Gravel at $0.80 0.170 

Rib metal 0.25 

Forms 0.115 

Labor, 20 cts. per hour 0.186 

Total $1,083 

For 42-in. sewer, 4-in. shell, rib metal 8 ft. : 

Cement, 0.20 bbl. at $1.25 $0.25 

Gravel at $0.80 0.118 

Rib metal 0.24 

Forms 0.115 

Labor at 20 cts. per hour 0.188 

Total cost, exclusive of machine and super- 
intendence $0,911 

Forms were made by the Adjustable Steel Centering Co., 6 ft. 
long, and 6 sections were used, which make 35 ft. of sewer, allow- 
ing for the necessary lap. These forms are especially well adapted 
to large sewer work, owing to the accessibility of all the parts, 
which renders them easy and inexpensive to handle. They are 
made of sheet steel with steel ribs on the inside at each end. 
These ribs are collapsed by especially made "collapsers" ; forms 
then set in place. 

Cost of Making Blocks for a Concrete Sewer. — At Coldwater, 
Mich., in 1901, there was built a concrete sewer with a monolithic 
invert and an arch of concrete blocks. Riggs & Sheridan, of To- 
ledo, O., designed the sewer, and H. V. Gifford, of Bradner, O., 
was In charge of construction. 

The sewer was circular, having an inner diameter of 42 ins., the 
thickness of the invert and the arch alike was 8 ins. The con- 
crete was 1 of Portland cement to 6 of gravel. There were 11 con- 
crete blocks in the ring of the arch, each block being 24 ins. long, 
8 ins. thick, 8 ins. wide on the outside of the arch and 5 % ins. wide 
on the inside of the arch. A block weighed 90 lbs. Which was too 
heavy for rapid laying; blocks 18 ins. long would have been better. 
Some 8,500 blocks were made. Molds were of 2-in. lumber, lined 
with tin, for after a little use it was found the concrete would stick 
to the wood when the mold was removed. The four sides of the 
mold formed the extrados, the intrados, and the two ends of the 
block ; the other two sides being left open. When put together 
the mold was laid upon a 1-in. board, 12x30 ins., reinforced by 
cleats across the bottom. The sides of the molds were held to- 



SHIVERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 921 

gether with screws or wedge clamps. When the blocks had set, 
the sides of the molds were removed, and the blocks were left on 
the 12 X 30-in. boards for 3 days, then piled up, being watered 
several times each day for a week. 

A gang of 14 men made the blocks ; 2 screening gravel through 
1-in. mesh screen ; 4 mixing concrete ; 4 molders ; 3 shifting and 
watering blocks ; and 1 foreman. With a little practice each 
molder could turn out 175 blocks a day ; and since each block 
measured % cu. ft., the output of the 14 men was 19 1^ cu. yds. a 
day. Mr. Gifford informs me that the wages were $1.50 a day for 
all the men, except the foreman. The daily wages of the 14 
men were ?22, so that the labor of making the blocks was $1.10 
per cu. yd. 

Each batch of concrete, containing % bbl. of Poi'tland cement 
costing $1.35 per bbl., made 18 blocks, (x bbl. per cu. yd.) Since 
the gravel cost nothing, except the labor of screening it, the total 
cost of each block was 11 to 12 cts., which includes 0.85 cent for 
use of molds and mold boards, which were an entire loss. At 12 cts. 
per block the cost was $4.32 per cu. yd. 

The contract price was $3 per lin. ft. of this sewer, as against 
a bid of $3.40 per ft. for a brick sewer. 

When the trenching had reached to the level of the top of the 
invert, two rows of stakes were -riven in the bottom, stakes being 
6 ft. apart in each row, and rows being a distance apart %-in. 
greater than the outer diameter of the sewer. Those stakes were 
driven to suen a grade that the top of a 2 x 4-in. cap or "runner" 
set edgewise on top of them was at the proper grade of the top 
of the invert. The excavation for the invert was then begun and 
finished to the proper curve by the aid of a templet drawn along 
the 2 X 4-in. runners. In gravel it was impossible to hold the true 
curve of the invert bottom. Concrete was then placed for the 
invert. To hold up the sides of the invert concrete, a board served 
as a support for the insldes, but regular forms were more satis- 
factory in every respect except that they were in the way of the 
workmen. A form was tried, its length being 6 ft. It was built 
like the center for an arch, except that the sheeting was omitted 
on the lower part of the invert. It was suspended from cross-pieces 
resting on the "runners." After the concrete had been rounded in 
place, the form was removed and the invert trued up. This form 
worked well in soil that could be excavated a number of feet 
ahead, so that the forms could be drawn ahead instead of having to 
be lifted out ; but in soil, where the concreting must immediately 
follow the excavation for the invert, the form is in the way. The 
invert was trued up by drawing along the runners a semicircular 
templet having a radius of 21 1.^ ins. Then a %-in. coat of 1 : 2 
mortar was roughly troweled on the green concrete. Another tem- 
plet having a 2 1-in. radius was then drawn along the runners to 
finish the invert. 

When the plaster had hardened, two courses of concrete blocks 
were laid on each shoulder of the invert, using a 7:2:% mortar. 



922 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the % part being lime paste. The lime made the mortar more 
plastic and easier to trowel. Then the form for the arch was 
placed, and as each 8-ft section of the arch was built, a grout of 
1 : 1 mortar was poured over the top to fill the joints. Earth was 
thrown on each shoulder and tamped, and the center moved ahead. 
Common laborers were used for all the invert work, except the 
plastering, which was done by masons who were paid 30 cts. per hr. 
Masons were also used to lay the concrete blocks in the arch. Mr. 
Gifford states that two masons would lay at the rate of 100 lin. ft. 
of arch per day, if enough invert were prepared in advance. As 
there were 11 blocks in the ring of the arch, this rate would be 
equivalent to 7% cu. yds. of arch laid per mason per day. 

Cost of Concrete Sewer Blocks. — The cost of molding several 
thousand concrete blocks to be used in sewer construction at 
Halifax, N. S., is given in the "Canadian Engineer," from which 
we rearrange and further analyze the figures as follows : 

The work involved the mixing and molding of 356.35 cu. yds. 
of concrete in 1,341 batches of 7.17 cu. ft. each. The cost of 
the molded blocks was as follows: 

5,050 hrs. labor, at 16 to 24 cts. 

1,733 bushels cement, at 80 cts 1,386.40 

2,850 bushels sand, at 6 cts.... 
2,684 bushels gravel, at 6 cts... 
5,364 bushels stone, at 7 cts.... 

Paper 

Soap 

Coal 

Total $3,006.30 $0.3096 

The cost of the blocks complete was thus 31 cts. per cu. ft. or 
$8.37 per cu. yd. This cost includes cleaning molds, moving and 
storing blocks and all expenses incident to the cost of manufacture 
except the cost of the water used. 

Cost of Concrete Block Manholes. — Mr. Hugh C. Baker, Jr., 
gives the following : 

The cost of making concrete block manholes at Rye, N. Y., was 
as follows per manhole : 

30 blocks for walls, 2.5 cu. yd. of 1 : 2 : 5 concrete $21.00 

6 blocks for cover, % cu. yd. reinforced concrete. . . 4.27 

I-beams for cover in place 5.40 

Supervision, freight and hauling, 5.6 tons concrete. . 9.38 

3 hrs. labor placing cover, at 15 cts 0.45 

20 hrs. labor placing walls, at 15 cts 3.00 

Total per manhole, exclusive of iron cover. ... .$43.50 

Each manhole was 5 ft. deep inside, 8-in. walls, 5 ft. in diameter. 
All concrete was hand-mixed, very wet, %-in. stone being used. A 
set of 30 wooden molds for the wall blocks was made. These 
molds cost from $3.50 to $12 each; some being made of hard wood 
lined with zinc. In making the blocks 4 men averaged 15 wall 
blocks a day of about 2% cu. ft. each, which is equivalent to 0.84 
cu. yd. per man per day. The concrete was allowed to set 3 to 12 



Total. 


Per cu. ft. 


,$ 838.76 


$0,087 


, 1,386.40 


0.144 


171.00 


0.017 


. 141.04 


0.014 


375.48 


0.038 


26.82 


0.0028 


17.85 


0.0018 


48.95 


0.0050 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



923 



hrs. before removing the molds; 24 to 36 hrs. before taking the 
blocks outside to dry, and 7 days before shipping the blocks. About 
1,000 blocks were made and only 9 lost by breaking. 

For comparison it is well to give the cost of brick manholes, as 
follows : 

1,450 brick, at $8.25 per M $11.96 

Mason 6.00 

46 hrs. labor, at 15 cts 6.90 

4 bbls. cement, at $1.25 5.00 

Sand 75 

Supervision, etc 2.50 

Concrete top blocks ( % cu. yd.) and I-beams 11.40 



Total 

This brick manhole had a flat concrete top. 



yas of Sana or Morfar 



.$44.51 




Eng.-Contr 

Fig. 25. — Diagram for Elstimating Quantities in and Costs of Man- 
holes. 

Estimating the Cost of Manholes from a Diagram. — This dia- 
gram and tlie description of its use were given by Mr. John "Wilson, 
in Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 8, 1908. 

Herewith is given a diagram (Fig. 25) for estimating the quanti- 
ties of materials in manholes ; and, at given prices of materials and 
labor, the cost of the manhole can likewise be ascertained. The 
diagram shown is for a 4-ft. manhole. 

Having the depth of the manhole given, the number of brick, the 
amount of sand, cement, mortar, the cost of labor, and total cost of 
manhole complete, plus 15 per cent profit, may be taken from the 
diagram. 

Thus for a 15-ft. manhole, follow the vertical 15-ft. line to inter- 



924 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



section with brick curve, thence horizontally to left read 2,600. 
From the intersections of the last horizontal line with the sand, 
mortar and cement curves, respectively, read vertically above 1.88 
cu. yds. of sand, 2.22 cu. yds. of mortar and 4.6 barrels of 
cement. To ascertain the cost, follow the vertical 15-ft. line from 
bottom to intersection with the cost curves, and read horizontally 
to right, cost plus 15 per cent, $64, of which the cost of labor alone 
is ?12.50, as shown by the labor curve. 

The curves allow for a double layer of brick in the bottom and 
the outside of the manhole to be well plastered. It is an easy 
matter to draw similar curves to meet local conditions and thus 
secure a very ready method of making estimates. 

A Device for Building Circular Manholes.* — We illustrate here- 
with a device (Fig. 26) for use in building circular manholes hav- 
ing a concrete bottom and brick walls. The device was designed 




Ef<s-CP'^TH;:vVv"//;'-'VX'-'-;V"^'''^;''-'-V'''-:V''". •'• ' 

Fig. 26. — Device Used in Building a Manhole. 



by Mr. Elmer B. Barnard, Assistant City Engineer of Lynchburg, 
Va., and has been in use in the sewer department of that city for 
about a year. 

While the device was put in service with the primary object of 
getting a better class of work, yet both this has been obtained and 
the cost of the work has also been decreased quite a good deal. 

Mr. Barnard informs us tliat, using the device, they have built 
two 10-ft. manholes in 2% days, two men at 31.40 per day each, 
and one man at $2.00 being employed. 

Hence the labor cost of each manhole was : 

2% days, at $1.40 $3.15 

IVs day, at $2.00 2.25 

Total $5.40 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 19, 1906. 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



925 



It has been found that on a system where a large number of 
manholes are to be installed, they can be built in much less time 
than the figures given above, owing to the fact that the concrete 
bottoms can be put in before the bricklayers have gotten up to the 
work. 

Cost of a Concrete Manhole. — The following figures of the cost 
of constructing a concrete manhole are rearranged from the "Cana- 
dian Engineer." The construction of the manhole is clearly shown 
by the accompanying sketch (Fig. 27). About the only point that 
need be noted is that the form lumber was so cut up that it could 
not be used again and its total cost is therefore charged against the 




I- 

-» 


5^M5; 




a- J 


1 






- *. 


% 
^ 


'•. r. 

u .r 


Si 


a 

<• 

i' >. 


1 

> ■ 


^Q\ 



Ens/rContn 
Fig. 27. — Concrete Manhole. 

work. The costs were as follows, there being 4.08 cu. yds. of con- 
crete in the manhole: 

Materials : Total. Per cu. yd. 

300 ft. B. M. lumber, at $30 ? 9.00 ? 2.21 

5 bbls. cement, at $2.25 11.00 2.69 

4 cu. yds. sand and gravel, at fl. 4.00 0.98 



Total materials $24.00 

Labor : 
Forms, 70 hrs., at 32% cts $22.75 

Mixing and placing concrete: 
13 hrs.. at 22 Va cts $ 2.92 



Total 
Total 



labor $25.67 

labor and materials. . . .$49.67 



$ 5.88 
$ 5.57 
$ 0.71 

$ 6.28 
$12.16 



Cost of Brick Manholes. — The walls of brick manholes are gen- 
erally 8 ins. thick up to 12 ft. in depth, and 12 ins. thick below. 
The cross-section of manholes is usually elliptical, 3 ft. x4% ft., up 
to the neck of the manhole which is circular and narrows down to 
about 24 ins. in diameter. The cast-iron ring and cast-iron cover 
weigh from 375 lbs. to 650 lbs., the lighter weight being used in 
village streets. A common weight for use in cities is 475 lbs. These 
"manhole heads" are carried in stock by manufacturers of sewer 



926 • HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

pipe, and are listed in their catalogues. The following is the 
actual cost of a manhole built by day labor for a Western city: 

2,000 brick, at $6 $12.00 

475-lb. ring and cover, at 2 cts 9.50 

2% bbls. Louisville cement, at 75 cts 2.00 

1 cu. yd. sand 1.50 

24 hrs. bricklayer, at 55 cts 13.20 

24 hrs. helper, at 18% cts 4.50 

Total $42.70 

It will be noted that the mason averaged less than 700 bricks per 
8-hr. day, which indicates that he realized that he was working for 
a city and not for an individual. However, small jobs like manhole 
work are apt not to be handled with rapidity. Consult, for com- 
parison, other data. See "Manhole" and "Vault" in the index. 

Cost of a Brick Manhole, Flush Tank and Laying Pipe Sewer.*— 
The following data relate to the construction of a brick manhole, 
a brick flush tank, and the laying of a section of sanitary sewer ac 
Columbus, Mass. The work was constructed by day labor. 

Brick Manhole. — The manhole was 4 ft. in diameter and 6^ ft, 
deep ; it was of the "churn pattern." Its cost was as follows : 

1,000 hard brick, at $6.50.... $ 6.50 

7 sacks Portland cement, at 50c 3.50 

1 cu. yd. sand, delivered 0.85 

Ring and cover, 395 lbs., at $2.40 per 100 lbs 9.48 

3 step irons 0.30 

Hauling iron 0.20 

Digging hole — in brick clay 2.25 

Filling 0.75 

Mason, 8 hours, at 55 cts 4.40 

Helper, 8 hours, at 12 % cts 1.00 

Total actual cost $29.23 

Engineers' estimate of cost $30.00 

Brick Flush Tank. — The flush tank was 4 ft. in diameter by & 
ft. deep. Its cost was as follows: 

650 brick, at $6.50 $ 4.22 

9 sacks Portland cement, at 50 cts 4.50. 

1 load sand 50 

1 load gravel .60 

Ring and cover, 395 lbs., at $2.40 per 100 lbs. 9.48 

5-in. automatic syphon 22.10 

Freight 65 

Drayage .45 

Drain pipe 50 

Digging and filling (sand) 1.50 

Mason, 9 hours, at 55 cts , 4.95 

Helper, 9 hours, at 12 i/g cts 1.13 

Total actual cost $50.58 

Engineer's estimate of cost 60.00 

Laying Sewer. — The sewer was 1,613 ft. long, of 8-in. terra cotta 
pipe. The sewer pipe was furnished by the city, delivered on the 
job, so that the following is the cost of laying only. 

Four manholes and one flush tank v/ere also constructed, but 
these were paid for separately and their cost is not included in the 



*Engineering-Contracting, June 9, 1909. 



n 



SEWERS, CONDUITS AND DRAINS. - 927 

figures below. The average depth of the trench was 6% ft The 
work was completed in 14 days of 10 hours each. The cost was 
as follows: 

Total. Per lin ft 
Labor, 1,639% hours, opening trench, laying 

and backfilling with shovels, at 10 cts. per 

hour $163.95 ?0.1016 

Wiping joints (acting foreman), 143 hours, 

at 15 cts 21.45 .0133 

Superintendence, 14 days, at ?5 70.00 .0434 

Cement 12 sacks, at 50 cts. 6.00 .0037 

Sand, 3 loads, at 50 cts 1.50 .0010 

Total ?262.90 ?0.163 

"We are indebted to Charles Lyon Wood, C. E., Columbus, Mass., 
for the above information. 

Cost of Making Cement Pipe. — Mr. Arthur S. Bent gives the fol- 
lowing data: In 1892 four miles of 28-in. cement pipe were laid 
for an irrigation system in Riverside county, California. The mor- 
tar was mixed by hand in boxes holding % cu. yd., and was hoed 
over 3 times dry and 3 times wet. It was then tamped (17-lb. 
tampers) by hand into sheet iron molds. 

The pipe was 28 ins. in diameter, 2% ins. thick and in 2-ft. 
lengths. The mixture used was 1 part Portland cement and 3% 
parts pit gravel and sand. During the best week's work, a gang 
of 25 men made 1 mile of pipe, or 35 ft. per man per day, or 1% 
cu. yds. of concrete per man per day. But the average week's 
work was % mile of pipe made by a gang of 25 men, or 17 lin. ft., 
or 0.9 cu. yd. per man per day. The laborers received $2 and up- 
ward per day. 

This pipe line, after seven years of use, showed no appreciable 
loss of water in its 4 miles of length. 

The Miracle Pressed Stone Co., of Minneapolis, Minn., manufac- 
ture molds for making cement tile and cement sewer pipe with 
bell ends. Their catalogue contains the data given in the follow- 
ing table : 

Cost of Cement Pipe, in 2-ft. Lengths. 

(Mortar, 1:3 mixture; sand, 75 cts. per cu. yd.; cement, ?2 per 

bbl. ; labor, $2 per day.) 

^Pipe, 2 ft. long. 

Tot cost Totsil 

Kind of Thick- Cu. ft Cost Cost of Cost of 2-ft cost 

pipe. ness. of sand, of sand, cement, labor, pipe, per ft. 

24" Bell-End... 2" 2.75 $0,075 $0,460 $0.15 $0,685 $0.34 

24" Straight 2" 2.25 .063 .370 .12 .553 .28 

20" Bell-End... 1%" 1.95 .056 .325 .13 .511 .26 

20" Straight 1%" 1.67 .045 .266 .09 .401 .20 

18" Bell-End... 1%" 1.84 .055 .230 .13 .445 .22 

18" Straight 1%" 1.50 .045 .190 .10 .335 .17 

15" Bell-End... 1%" 1.40 .039 .235 .11 .384 .19 

15" Straight 1%" 1.17 .033 .195 .08 .308 .15 

12" Bell-End... 11/2" 1.10 .030 .180 .10 .310 .16 

12" Straight IVa" .88 .026 .145 .07 .240 .12 

10" Bell-End... 1%" .83 .025 .105 .10 .230 .12 

10" Straight... 1%^' .68 .020 .850 .07 .175 .09 



928 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost of Cement Pipe Sewer and Manholes at Brooklyn, N. Y.— 

The following records of the methods and cost of constructing a 
24-in. egg-shaped cement pipe sewer in Butler street, Brooklyn, 
N. Y., were furnished by Mr. J. J. B. LaMarsh and published in 
Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 3, 1906. A plan and profile of the 
sewer are shown in Fig. 28., which gives all lengths. The work 
Included trenching, pipe-laying and backfilling, manhole construc- 
tion and catch basin construction. 

The trench had an average depth of 12 ft. and was opened 3 ft. 
wide throughout. For the first 2 ft. the soil was loam and for 
the remainder of the depth it was gravel and sand. Picks were 
used. The timbering consisted of l%xl2-in. vertical sheeting 
held by 2 x 10-inx 16-ft. rangers and 4-in. diameter bars 3 ft. long. 



Jy [ 



Butler 



769MFr. Street 






1-0 ?^o.^l3L-.^--^enw%t_Piee__^ 

fe^ Stree t not Payee! 



l| 



Flatbush 



^ — '^ 1 ;? /" 




_ '^i 



U/-,^^--/-r'--|f--"i^^ 



3 UJ) 



i 



!3|!l 



Fig. 28. — Plan and Profile of Sewer. 



The sheeting was easily placed, as the bank stood until dried by the 
sun. On the 18-in. pipe curve into Rogers avenue the sheeting 
was left in place, but all the other timbering was removed. 

The pipe was laid on a foundation plank 1^4 x 12 ins. It was 
cement pipe manufactured by the Wilson & Baillie Mfg. Co., and 
was of the general form shown by Fig. 29. It came in- 3-ft. lengths, 
weighing for the 24-in. size 500 lbs. each. It was laid with a three- 
leg derrick, using a goose-neck to lower. Four men handled the 
pipe to the derrick and lowered it and two men in the bottom of 
the trench placed it. There was no separate pipe gang, the work 
being done by men taken from the trenching gang and in stretches 
of from 3 to 20 lengths, as the progress of work necessitated. In 
all 933 ft. of 24-in. pipe were actually laid, although the contractor 
got paid for 964 f t. ; the difference of 31 ft. was taken up in the 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 



929 



3 X 5-ft. manholes. Besides the 24-in. pipe main, there were 
36 ft. of 18-in. pipe, 33 ft. of 12-in. pipe, 10 manholes and 3 sewer 
basins. 

Turning now to the cost of this work we have the following 
figures : 

Amounts and Cost of Materials Used. 

18,500 brick, at $8.75 $ 161.875 

27 barrels of cement, at $1.35 36.450 

10 manhole heads and covers, at $11.00 110.000 

5,500 ft. B. M. lumber, at $18.50 46.750 

3 sets granite stones for basins, at $35 105.000 

3 sets blue stones for basins, at $5 15.000 

3 pans and hoods, at $9.50 28.500 

933 ft. 24-in pipe, at $1.43 1,334.190 

36 ft. 18-in. pipe, at $0.85 30.600 

96 ft. 12-in. pipe, at $0.40 38.400 

Total cost of materials $1,906,765 




Fig. 29. — Cement Pipe for Sewer. 



Owing to the method of doing the work the labor costs can be 
only partially classified. The trenching, sheeting, pipe-laying and 
backfilling were all done by the same gang, the men changing 
from one item to another, as occasion demanded. As a rule, the 
whole gang was worked on backfilling from 4:30 to 6 p. m. each 
day ; there was no ramming. 

Of the 5,500 ft. B. M. of lumber, the contractor got paid for 



930 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

3,250 ft. B. M., leaving 2,250 ft. B. M. lost from use. In this con- 
nection it should be noted that about 40 loads of sand from the ex- 
cavation were sold by the contractor at 25 cts. a load, or a total 
of $10. 

The team work was mostly hauling brick and lumber ; the outfit 
was owned by the contractor and with driver was estimated to cost 
$3.50 per day. The labor thus is itenaized as follows: 

Trenching^ Pipe-laying, Timbering and Backfilling. 

Per lin. ft. 

Tota,l Cts 

One foreman, 34 days, at ?3.50 $119,000 11.90 

One boy, 317 days, at 75 cts 23.775 2.37 

One bracer, 34 days, at $2.40 81.600 8.16 

Labor, A, 172.5 days, at $1.70 293.250 29.32 

Labor, B, 192.9 days, at $1.60 308.640 30.S6 

Team and driver, 12 days, at $3.50 42.000 4.20 

Total $868,265 86.82 

These figures per foot are based on 1,002 ft. of sewer, namely, 
933 ft. 24-in., 36 ft. 18-in., and 33 ft. 12-in. sewer. They include 
labor, excavating and backfilling, manholes and basins, but not the 
mason's labor. With a trench 3 ft. wide and 12 ft. deep, there were 
1.33 cu. yds. of trench excavation per lin. ft. ; hence the excavation 
cost 65 cts. per cu. yd. 

The labor for ten manholes and three basins was as follows: 

Mason, 12.4 days, at $7 $ 86.80 

Mason's helper, 12.4 days, at $2.10 26.04 

Total $112.84 

The actual cost of one sewer basin was as follows: 

Sewer Basin. 
Materials : 

1 set granite $35.00 

1 set bluestone 5.00 

1 hood and pans 9.50 

2,100 brick, at $8.50 17.85 

3 barrels cement, at $1.35 4.05 

21 ft. 12-in. pipe, at 40 cts 8.40 

Total materials $79.80 

Labor : 
5 men, 1 day, excavating and backfilling, at $1.70. . . .$ 8.50 

1 mason, 1 day, at $7 7.00 

1 helper, 1 day, at $2.10 2.10 

Total labor $17.60 

Grand total -. . . $97.40 

The manholes were 3x4 ft. of brick masonry. The actual cost of 
one manhole was as follows: 

Manhole. 

1 head and cover $11.00 

1,600 brick, at $8.50 13.60 

lYz barrels cement, at $1.35 2.03 

1 day mason, at $7 7.00 

1 day helper, at $2.10 2.10 

Total $35.73 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 931 

From the preceding figures the total cost of the work may be 
summarized as follows: 

Materials ?1, 906. 765 

Labor 981.105 

Total $2,887,870 

Deduct sand 10.000 

Total $2,877,870 

In this total there is no wear on tools, interest on money invested, 
oil for 10 lanterns, or payment on bond included. There was no 
insurance on men. 

Cost of Constructing Cement Pipe in Place.* — The method of 
making cement pipe in place, which will be briefly described in this 
article, is an invezation of Mr. Ernest L. Ransome. 

A short stretch of 8-in. pipe was built at the rate of 1 lin. ft. 
per minute by six men and a foreman. The men were working 
with great energy, and tlie records show that they actually aver- 
aged about half this rate, their average being 300 lin. ft. per 
10-hr. day. 

As shown in Fig. 30, three men work in the trench, one of the 
men packing the cement mortar in the mold, one continuously 
pulling the_ mold ahead by means of the lever and the third filling 
around the green pipe with earth. The other three men mix 
mortar and deliver it into the trench. 

Before giving the cost of this pipe, a word as to the method of 
construction : 

The mold. Fig. 31, is made of sheet steel with an inner core 10 ft. 
long. The front end of this core is surrounded by a short steel 
shell that serves as the outer form for the cement pipe. The mortar 
for the pipe is packed in between the inner core and this outer 
shell by a man who uses a small wooden rammer for the purpose as 
shown in Fig. 30. The man standing in the foreground keeps mov- 
ing the mold forward slowly by means of the lever grasped in the 
right hand. This lever is provided with a dog that works in a 
ratchet and thus rotates a small drum upon which a wire rope ia 
wound. The wire rope is anchored into a deadman in the trench 
ahead. As the mold is thus moved forward it leaves behind it the 
cement pipe which is still green. The cement mortar, however, is 
mixed with a small amount of water so that it possesses sufficient 
cohesion to hold together when unsupported by the core. To pro- 
tect the pipe until it hardens, it has been found advisable to pack a 
little earth around its sides and over the top ; this is done by the 
third man in the trench, and he does this backfilling upon the part 
of the pipe that is still supported by the core. 

In verbally describing this feature of the construction two ques- 
tions have invariably been asked: 

1. Doesn't the pipe cave in occasionally, especially when it is 
of large diameter? 

2. How are branches put in? 



* Engineering-Contracting, March, 1906. 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




Fig. 30. — Ransome Cement Pipe Mold in Trench. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 933 

Answering the first question, Mr. Ransome says that caving does 
not occur except when some heavy object falls upon the pipe before 
the cement has hardened. The pipe does not brealc down of its own 
weight even wlien made tliree feet in diameter. 

To put in a branch a hole is cut in the side of the "green" pipe 
before the core has been pulled ahead. A branch of the proper 
pattern is shoved up tightly against the pipe and the collar of the 
branch is plastered with cement mortar, producing a strong water- 
tight joint. 

The following was the itemized cost of an 8-in. cement pipe, built 
as before described, at Despatch, N. Y. : 

6 men, at $1.70 per day, 10 hours $10.20 

1 foreman 2.00 

3 bbls. cement, at $1.25 3.75 

3.3 cu. yds. sand, at 85 cts 2.80 

Water 15 

Total for 300 lin. ft $19.90 



V':-'^^!'*' 



fTft^f^m^vni 



Fig. 31. — Ransome Cement Pipe Mold. 

This is equivalent to 6.63 cts. per lin. ft. of pipe. It should be 
added that the shell of this particular 8-in. cement pipe was made 
unusually heavy, being 1% ins. thick. 

On another stretch of 12-in. pipe the cost was as follows : 

Per day. 

7 men, at $1.70 $11.90 

1 foreman 2.20 

13 bbls. cement, at $1.33 17.30 

12 cu. yds. fine gravel, at 88 cts 9.60 

Total for 400 ft. of pipe $41.00 

This is equivalent to 10% cts. per ft. In none of these cases is 
the cost of digging the trench included in the labor item, for that 
cost is common to all kinds of pipe sewers. However, due to the 
fact that there are no bells on the cement pipe and no joints to be 
made, the trench can be dug about 6 ins. narrower than where vitri- 
fied pipe is used, thus effecting considerable saving in the cost of 
excavation. 

It was noted that in building the 8-in. pipe the men in the trench 
were capable of putting in pipes at the rate of 1 lin. ft. per minute. 
Which was just about twice what they averaged for the whole job. 



934 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The speed depends very largely upon the man who is packing the 
mortar into the mold, and as this is hard work, it would be ad- 
visable to let him change places frequently with the man who works 
the lever that pulls the mold ahead. By having two strong and 
willing men in these positions, it is believed that 500 lin. ft. of 8-in. 
pipe could be built in 10 hours, day in and day out. 

The molds for making this pipe are made by the Ransome Inter- 
national Conduit Co., 11 Broadway, New York City. 

Cost of Cleaning a Large Brick Sewer. — Mr. Frederick K Ford 
gives the following, relating to work done in Hartford, Conn., in 
1905. 

The Franklin avenue sewer cleaned consists of 9,269 lin. ft. of 
circular brick sewer, 5,12 8 ft. of which is 6 ft. inside diameter; 
2,225 ft. 4 ft, and 1,916 ft. 3 ft. inside diameter. This sewer was 
built in 1872-73, at a cost of about $150,000, and drains a district 
containing about 1,167 acres. It has never been thoroughly cleaned 
since it was built. The sewers which discharge into this trunk 
sewer vary from 8 ins. to 3 ft. in diameter, and have grades rang- 
ing from 0.5 to 6.0 ft. per hundred. The 6-ft. Franklin avenue sewer 
has a grade of 2 ft. per 1,000, and the 4 and 3-ft. sections a grade 
of 3 ft. per 1,000. 

The first work done was a thorough inspection of the sewer to 
determine the location and amount of the deposits. In the 6-ft. 
sewer this was an easy task with lanterns, and the material was 
found only in patches on the bottom, averaging from 6 ins. to a 
foot deep and from 50 to 150 ft. in length, located usually just below 
where some large tributary sewer entered the Franklin avenue 
sewer. 

It was impossible to make a thorough advance inspection of either 
the 4 or 3-ft. sections of the sewer, as the manholes were, as 
originally built, sometimes 1,000 ft. apart, and the ventilation so bad 
that we found it suffocating and too dangerous to enter either for 
any great distance from any manhole. 

The deposits in the 3-ft. sewer were found, upon opening the 
sewer, to average about 1 ft. in depth and the ordinary sewage, 
about 6 to 8 ins., was running on top of it, so there was little 
available working space left. 

The cleaning was done by a contractor on a percentage basis 
(15%). The laborers received ?2 a day, and their foreman received 
$15 per week. 

Before commencing the cleaning, manholes were built where nec- 
essary, so that they are now not more than 300 ft. apart, and often 
less on the smaller sizes. 

In cleaning, the force was organized in small gangs, which could 
work to advantage ; two starting at a manhole and working in op- 
posite directions until they met the men coming in the opposite 
direction. 

In the 6 and 4-ft. sections, wheelbarrows were used to convey the 
material to the nearest manhole, where it was hauled up and re- 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 935. 

moved in carts, each holding 1 cu. yd. In the 3-ft sewer the men 
used pails to remove the deposit. 

The result of the work was as follows: 

Diam. sewer. Length. Loads. Cost. 

6-ft 5,128 ft. 107 $ 387.55 

4 ft 2.225 ft. 61 243.80 

3-ft 1,916 ft. 107 466.38 

Total 9,269 ft. 275 $1,097.73 

The average cost per load (cubic yard) on 9,269 ft. of sewer was 
$3.99, and the average cost per lineal foot was $0,118. 

Size of sewer, ft 6 4 3 

Cost per load ?3.62 ?3.99 $4.36 

Cost per foot 0.075 0.109 0.243 

The 6-ft. sewer was cleaned in 7 days. The total time on this 
work, including foreman and team, was 1,592 hours. This is 
equivalent to 22.7 men working 10 hours a day for 7 days. 

The 4-ft. sewer was cleaned in 4 days. The total time was 1,000 
hours, equal to 25 men employed 10 hours a day for 4 days. 

The 3-ft. sewer was cleaned in 13 days. The time occupied was 
2,019 hours, or an average of 15.3 men, working 10 hours a day 
for 13 days. 

The average distance cleaned by each man per day on the 6-ft. 
sewer was 32 ft. ; on the 4-ft. sewer, 33 ft., and on the 3-ft. 
sewer, 9 ft. 

The total cost of the work, including manholes built, was 
$1,395.47, of which 15% was paid to Mr. Charles H. Slocomb, who 
furnished the labor and materials and superintended the work. 

Cost of Cleaning Sewers and Catchbasins. — The following tabu- 
lation shows the amount expended per mile per year for the past 
21 years by the Bureau of Sewers of Chicago, 111., in cleaning 
sewers and catch basins : 

Miles of sewer Cost of Cost per mile 

to maintain. cleaning. per year. 

1887 474 $50,264.65 $106.04 

1888 492 52,423.41 106.55 

1889 712 61,503.01 86.38 

1890 785 107,878.34 137.42 

1891 888 123,620.44 139.21 

1892 992 142,720.52 143.87 

1893 1,145 132,633.51 115.84 

1894 1,211 154,225.45 127.35 

1895 1,248 134,424.44 107.71 

1896 1,306 96,901.65 74.20 

1897 1,345 91,414.89 67.96 

1898 1,388 92,961.88 66.98 

1899 1,424 72,439.07 50.92 

1900 1,453 80,985.64 55.73 

1901 1,475 94,369.87 63.98 

1902 1,501 99,372.58 66.20 

1903 1,529 118,303.41 77.37 

1904 1,583 124,260.26 79.50 

1905 1,615 127,003.97 78.64 

1906 1,633 150,942.10 92.43 

1907 1,673 204,329.37 122.13 



936 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The work is done by regular employes of the Bureau of Sewers, 
common laborers during 1907 receiving $2.50 and up per 8-hr. day. 

Cost of Cleaning Sewers and Catchbasins. — The following table 
shows the cost of sewers cleaned in the city of Chicago during the 
year 1907: 

Method. Feet cleaned. Total. Per ft., cts. 

Flushing 2,485,900 $29,060 1.17 

Iron scraper 488,700 32,161 6.58 

Wood scraper 6,200 204 3.29 

A total of 24,974 catchbasins were cleaned at a cost of $96,522, 
the average cost per basin being $3.86. The work is done by day 
labor by the Bureau of Sewers, common labor being paid $2.50 per 
day of 8 hours. 

Cost of Sewage Purification at Providence, R, I.— The cost of 
treatment per million gallons of sewage during 1906 at Providence, 
R. I., was as follows: Chemical precipitation, $3.50; sludge dis- 
posal, $3.10. The population served by sewers in 1906 was about 
182,000, according to the annual report of Otis F. Clapp, City Engi- 
neer. The sewerage system included 205.89 miles of combined 
sewers and 9.94 miles of storm sewers. The sewage was com- 
posed of manufacturing, wool washings, jewelers' dyeing and bleach- 
ing wastes, with domestic sewage, and the strength of average sew- 
age (parts per 100,000) was: Albuminoid ammonia, total 0.729-; 
soluble, 0.370 ; suspended, 0.359 ; chlorine, 45.58. Other data from 
Mr. Clapp' s report were as follows: Daily flow of sewage in mil- 
lion gallons: Maximum, Dec. 31, 43.5; minimum, Aug. 19, 10.3; 
average for the year, 20.36. Average daily flow of sewage treated: 
19,550,000 gals. Pounds of lime used per million gallons of sew- 
age (treated): 637.75. Other chemical used: Copperas, 72.1 lbs. 
per million gallons. Cubic contents of settling basin up to water 
surface, when in use, in million gallons: 11.13. Per cent organic 
matter removed from sewage in terms of albuminoid ammonia. 
Total, 43.35; suspended, 85.07. Disposition of effluent : Discharged 
into Providence River off the end of Field's Point under 36 ft. of 
water. Volume of sludge produced in gallons per million gallons 
of sewage treated: 4,444.4. Per cent of solids in wet sludge: 7.43. 
Method of sludge disposal : Pressed and cake hauled by steam train 
to dump. Sludge pressing: Average number of gallons pumped 
per day, 86,893. Per cent of solids in wet sludge: 7.43. Pounds of 
lime added per thousand gallons of sludge: 23.07. 

Sludge Disposal. — Description of machinery used : Sludge pumped 
by Shone ejectors (two, 500 gals.) to storage reservoirs; thence by 
gravity to forcing receivers (four, 8 ft. dia. x 12 ft. long) ; thence 
forced under 60 to 80 lbs. pressure per square inch up into the 
presses. The ejectors and forcing receivers are run by air pres- 
sure generated by one 150 and one 50-hp. air compressors actuated 
by electric motors; 18 filter presses are used, each with from 43 
to 54 plates, with 6-in. center holes, forming cakes 36 ins. square 
and from 1% in. to % in. thick, between filter cloths which sur- 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 937 

round the plates. Hours of operation of presses daily: 6.83. For 
light, heat and power, $7.69 per day. Tons of sludge cake pro- 
duced daily: 97.16. Per cent of solids in pressed cake: 27.7 Tons 
of solids in sludge cake produced daily: 26.97. Cost of operation 
per ton of solids : $2.24. The quantities per day in above table are 
calculated on basis of 365 days' work. 

Cost of Sewage Disposal, 6 Cities. — In Engineering-Contracting, 
Oct. 6, 1907, appeared a five-page article compiled from a report 
prepared by Mr. A. C. Gregory. It contains many valuable data 
relating to six cities, of which the following is a very brief 
abstract. 

Chemical Precipitation, Providence, R. I. — Providence has the 
distinction of being the one large city in this country which treats 
all (except in time of heavy storm) of its sewage by chemical 
precipitation, the object, of course, being clarification. This is all 
that is considered necessary, inasmuch as the clarified effluent is 
discharged into the Providence River and speedily carried into Long 
Island Sound, where the dilution is amply sufficient to take care of 
what organic matter remains in the effluent. 

The disposal works consist of a pumping plant, chemical house, 
precipitation tanks and sludge compressing house with sludge well 
and tanks and a chemical laboratory. 

A pound of lime used as a precipitant produces 10 lbs. of sludge 
(Dunbar, 1908) and that the amount of sludge amounts to about 
three times that produced by sedimentation or septic tank action. 

Population in 1907, 208,000. 

Population served by sewers, about 185,000. 

Length of sewerage system: Combined, 209.8 miles; storm, 10.11 
miles. 

Character of sewage : Manufacturing, wool washings, jewelers, 
dyeing and bleaching waste, with domestic sewage. 

Daily flow of sewage, in gallons: Maximum, 40,462,000; mini- 
mum, 9,424,000 ; average for year, 19,329,000. 

Pounds of lime used per million gallons of sewage treated, 
653.54. 

Other chemicals used: Copperas, 83.05 pounds per million 
gallons. 

Volume of sludge produced in gallons per million gallons of sew- 
age treated, 4,504. 

Per cent of solids in wet sludge, 7.85. 

Average number of gallons of sludge pumped per day, 83,660. 

Hours of operation of sludge presses per day, 671. 

Tons of sludge cake produced daily, 96.84. 

Tons of solids in sludge cake produced daily, 28.2. 

Cost of treatment per million gallons of sewage: Chemical pre- 
cipitation, ?3.54 ; sludge disposal, $3.07 ; total, $6.61 per million 
gallons. 



938 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Annual cost of maintenance about 22.4 cts. per capita. 

Per cent of organic matter removed from sewage in terms of 
albuminoid ammonia, 44.74, and of suspended matter, 83.92. 

In the analysis of sewage the amount of albuminoid ammonia 
found is a valuable index of the amount of organic matter present. 

Chemical Precipitation, Worcester, Mass. — The Worcester dis- 
posal plant consists of a chemical house for storing and mixing 
the lime precipitant, and also containing sludge presses, a chemical 
laboratory, 16 precipitation tanks and 61 acres of filter beds. 

The sludge is finally deposited at a distance of about a mile 
from the works. During the year ending with Nov. 30, 1908, 
15,930,000 gals, of semi-liquid sludge were pumped from the pre- 
cipitation tanks. After as much as possible of the liquid had been 
drawn off the remaining 12,074,000 gals, were pressed into sludge 
cake, amounting to 12,987 tons. Of this about 10,000 cu. yds. were 
taken as fertilizer by farmers. 

The above figures, together with those that follow, are taken 
from or based upon the report of the city engineer for 1908: 

Average daily quantity of sewage treated (precipitation), 11,- 
240,000 gals. 

Length of time sewage remains in tanks, 4 to 8 hours. 

Volume of sludge per million gallons of sewage, 3,872 gals. 

Cost of tanks, $265,628.75. 

Cost of maintenance for year, including disposal of sludge, 
$35,671.15. 

Kind and quantity of chemicals used per 1,000,000 gals., 871 lbs. 
of lime. 

Cost of chemical precipitation per 1,000,000 gals., $4.82 ; sludge 
pressing, $3.85 ; total, $8.67. 

Annual cost of maintenance per capita, about 26.5 cts. 

In terms of albuminoid ammonia chemical precipitation removes 
37.3% of the total organic matter and 75.3% of the suspended 
organic matter. 

Intermittent Sand Filtration, Worcester. — There are in use about 
61 acres of sand filters, divided generally in units of one acre and 
having a depth of from 4 to 6 ft. A large part of this area is a 
natural sand bed, by reason of which fact a considerable saving 
was effected. At the bottom of the beds are laid parallel lines of 
drain pipes at intervals of about 50 ft. These collect the efHuent 
and carry it to an intercepting pipe, whereby it is conveyed to the 
main effluent channel and finally reaches the Blackstone River. 

Date of construction of works, 1899-1908. 

Cost of beds, $263,340.93. 

Total filtering area, 61 acres. 

Average area of beds, 0.98 acre. 

Average daily quantity of sewage treated, 4,022,000 gals. 

Average daily quantity treated per acre, 79,000 gals. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 939 

Annual cost of maintenance per capita, about 10% cts. 

Sewage flows on one bed, two to six hours. 

Beds used, one to four times weeicly. 

Cubic yards material removed from surface of beds, 23,804. 

Cost of removing same, $8,500. 

Total cost of maintenance for year, $13,555.37. 

Cost of maintenance per million gallons of sewage treated, $9.21. 

The net cost of maintenance per capita for botli sand filtration 
and chemical precipitation is slightly less than 37 cts. 

Intermittent Sand Filtration, Brockton, Mass. — There are 37 filter 
beds of an acre each. The use of water meters has brought water 
consumption down to 35 gals, per capita. 

The sewage runs by gravity to a sump (pit) passing through 
screens before entering the sump, and from which it is pumped to 
the disposal beds about tliree and one-quarter miles away. About 
110 lbs. of refuse per 1,000,000 gals, is screened out before the 
pumping. No pumping is done at night, the sewage being allowed 
to collect during that time, and is pumped away on the following 
day. A considerable amount of sediment is deposited in the sump. 
Tliis is stirred up, pumped to the disposal plant, and applied to beds, 
of which there are five, especially used for that purpose, an aver- 
age of about 136,000 gals, of sludge sewage being thus treated each 
day. The average amount of sewage treated per day at Brockton 
amounts to about 1,208,000 gals. The minimum seems to be about 
1,079,000 gals., and the maximum about 1,433,000 gals. This would 
indicate a rate of about 45,000 gals, per acre per uay. 

The population of Brockton is estimated at 55,000. 

The above figures are for 1908. In reaching the bed from the 
pumping station the sewage travels 3.3 miles and is raised 42 ft. 

The Brockton plant has been placed in a spot naturally lending 
itself to economical construction. For the most part the prepara- 
tion of the beds consisted in removing the upper soil so as to leave 
exposed the sand and gravel underneath. Under drains were put 
in only where the sand at a depth of 5 or 6 ft. was too fine to 
allow the sewage to percolate freely through it. Where such a con- 
dition existed drains with open joints were placed about 40 ft. 
apart. Banks were also raised and the necessary dosing arrange- 
ments made. 

The disposal plant, up to Jan. 1, 1909, has cost $337,488.64. 

Seven new beds, constructed in 1907 and 1908, were completed 
at a cost of $23,239.06, or at about $3,320 per bed. 

The expense for maintenance of the beds during 1908 amounted 
to $6,169.04, or about $12.53 per million gallons filtered, or 11.2 cts. 
per capita. 

Intermittent Sand Fltration, Saratoga, N, Y. — Saratoga has a 
population of 12,000 to 60,000, according to the season of the year. 

The filter beds handle 100,000 gals, per acre per day. The plant 
cost $200,000, including $65,000 for metering water supply and for 



940 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

drains designed to separate the storm water. Some of the items of 

cost were : 

Pumping plant $11,000 

Force main 24,500 

Septic tanks 15,500 

Filter beds 48,000 

Total $99,000 

The operation of the pumps costs $700 per year. 
The cost of maintenance of beds for 1907, according to figures 
secured on the ground, was $1,833.47, and for 1908, $1,153.07. 

Mr. Barbour states that the total cost of maintenance per year 
amounts to about $3,000. Assuming the normal population at 
12,000, a rate of 25 cts. per capita per year is indicated. 

Septic Tanks and Contact Beds, Ballston Spa, N. Y. — Ballston 
Spa has a population of about 6,000, although being somewhat of a 
summer resort, the population varies. The plant was designed to 
deal with an estimated flow of 1,000,000 gals, per twenty-four hours. 
No figures are in our possession as to expense of maintenance. 
The management, at the time of our visit, appeared to be in the 
hands of one man, who not only looked after the electrically driven 
pumps but the disposal works as well. Probably one man is all 
that is necessary for such a plant except in extraordinary occa- 
sions. The following is the cost of the plant as it appears in the 
accepted bid : 

Septic tanks, beds, etc $39,456 

Receiving tanks, pumping outfit 15,254 

Pump house 3.072 

Two gate houses 1,118 

Force main ($1.68 per foot) 4,536 

Sewer extension ($1.41 per foot) 1,551 

Crushed stone ($0.90 per cubic yard) 18,000 

Total $82,987 

Estimated Cost of Sewage Filtering. — Profs. C. E. A. Winslow and 
E. B. Phelps read a paper before the Boston Society of Civil Engi- 
neers, in 1907, wherein the following estimates were given of the 
probable cost of a 50-acre trickling or percolating sewage filter 
were given. It was estimated that 2,000,000 gals, per acre would 
percolate daily through a bed of broken stone 8 ft. thick. It was 
estimated that such filter could be built for $1,800,000, or $36,000 
per acre, including all necessary land (Thompson's Island), grading, 
etc. The cost of treating the sewage was estimated thus per million 
gallons : 

Capital charges $3.50 

Operation, including extra pumping 2.00 

Chloride of lime 1.50 

Total $7.00 

It is not stated what the land was estimated to cost. 
Cost of Sewage Filters, Pawtucket, R. I. — Mr. George A. Carpen- 
ter gives the following relative to a sewage filter at Pawtucket, 
R. I. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 941 

The filter serves 7 miles of sewers, combined system, draining 
960 acres, with a population of 9,500. These 7 miles of sewers 
deliver 58,000 gals, per day, as the average for the year (1895), 
more than half of this being ground water which enters the sewers, 
notwithstanding underdrains beneath of some sections of the sewers. 
There are 13 filter beds having a total filtering area of 2.36 acres; 
four of these beds (0.51 acres) being sludge beds, and receive the 
sewage from the bottom foot of the settling tanks. The two 
settling tanks are each 30 x 100 ft., 4 ft. deep. Sewage is held 
24 hrs. in these tanks, and then delivered through 8-in. pipes to the 
filter beds in doses of 100,000 gals, to the acre. The underdrains are 
4-in. tiles, buried 5 ft. deep in the natural sand that forms the filter 
beds. The cost of this plant was $12,000, or about $5,000 per acre 
of filter bed. One man operates the plant. 

Cost of Sewafle Filters, Waterloo, Ont. — Mr. Herbert J. Bowman 
gives the following relative to the cost of sewage filter beds built 
in 1895 for Waterloo, Ontario. The work was done by contract. 
Six filter beds were built, each averaging 132 x 200 ft., or 26,400 
sq. ft., or a total of 3.65 acres, with an available filtering area of 
3 acres. The land is of sand and gravel, requiring little leveling 
up. The beds are underdi-ained by 3 -in. tiles, laid 10 ft. apart in a 
tile gutter composed of 5-in. half-tile, with joint covers of quarter- 
tile. The contract cost of 10,545 ft. of 3-in. tile in place (for 4 ' 
of the beds) was as follows: 

Materials, 10,545 ft. at 2.5 cts ? 264 

Laying 10,545 ft. at 3.5 cts 369 

1,856 cu. yds. gravel backfill at 20 cts 371 

Removing surplus earth 129 

Total, 10,545 ft. at 10.75 cts |1,133 

The trenches were dug 4 ft. deep, and backfilled with gravel 
which cost 20 cts. per cu. yd. delivered. The 3.5 cts. per lin. ft. 
for "laying" included digging the trench and backfilling, at which 
price the contractor barely paid his men, and had no profit. 

The entire cost of the 6 beds, with 3 acres of filtering area, was: 

3,050 cu. yds. excavation for embankments at 

12 cts ? 366 

1,500 cu. yds. gravel for leveling up beds at 20 cts. 300 

15,800 lin. ft. 3-in. drain at 10% cts 1,699 

Sewer carriers (18-in.) 300 

Total ?2,665 

This is equivalent to only $900 per acre. The low cost is due to 
favoi-able conditions and to very low contract prices. The excava- 
tion for embankments was done with drag scrapers. The 3.6 acres 
of land cost $100 an acre in addition to the above cost. 

Cost of a Sewage Filter and Septic Tank With Costs of Opera- 
tion.* — Mr. F. A. Barbour gives the following relative to a sewage 
filter and septic tank plant at Saratoga Springs, N. Y., built in 
1903. 



*Engineering-Contracting, July 14, 1909. 



942 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The sewage is lifted 15 ft. by three electrically driven centrifugal 
pumps (6-in.). and carried 8,800 ft. through a 16-in. cast-iron main, 
and then passed in succession through covered septic tanks, an 
aerator, an automatic dosing tanli and intermittent sand filters. 
The volume ranges from 1,250,000 gals, to 2,500,000 gals, per day, 
the latter during the summer. The regular population is about 
12,500, which increases to 50,000 during the summer. 

The pumps and motors have an average combined efficiency of 
35%. They cost $5,400. The pump, well and building cost $4,000. 
The pumps work only during the day. The 4 septic tanks are of 
concrete with a concrete vaulted roof, each being 52 x 91 ft. in 
area. The total capacity of the 4 tanks is 1,000,000 gals., the 
sewage being 8 ft. deep. 

The aerator and dosing tank hold 26,000 gals. 

There are 20 filter beds of about 1 acre each. About 2% to 3 ft. 
of topsoil was excavated (and built into embankments) exposing 
the natural sand bed. 

The cost of the plant was as follows (exclusive of a $40,000 storm 
water built to reduce the amount of sewage treated) : 

Pumping plant and accessories .$11,000 

Force main (16-in.) 8,800 ft 25,000 

Septic tanks, 1,000,000 gals 15,000 

Filter beds, 20 acres 48.000 

Total $99,000 

The cost of pumping and operating the purification works is 
$3,000 a year, of which $720 is for the electric power, and $600 
covers all services at the screen and pumps. At the filter beds, 
$1,680 a year is spent, of which 66% is for work not relating to the 
maintenance of the surface of the filter bed, being trimming em- 
bankments, weeding drives, etc. 

In midsummer 12 filter beds are used daily, the gates being 
changed twice ; during the remainder of the year 8 beds are used 
daily, the gates being shifted once. The average daily amount of 
sewage per bed in use is about 140,000 gals., applied in four doses. 
All the filter beds are kept in commission and the beds are used 
alternately, so that the average daily rate for the field is 60,000 gals, 
per acre. Mr. Barbour believes that double this rate could be 
maintained with equally good results. 

Assuming a cost of $3,000 per year for operation and $5,000 per 
year (5% of $100,000) for capital charges, we have a total of $8,000 
per year, to which may be added, say, $1,000 for repairs and depre- 
ciation of pumping plant, making a grand total of $9,000, or less 
than $30 a day for treating 1,2000,000 gals., or about $25 per 
million gals. 

Cost of Cleaning Sewers and Catch Basins.* — Mr, Allen Aldrich 
gives the following relative to the cost of cleaning 173 miles of 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 11, 1909. 



SEWERS. CONDUITS AND DRAINS. 943 

sewers at Providence, R. I., during 1898. Tliere were in use 4,026 
catcli basins (23i/4 per mile), eacli of wliicli was cleaned, on an 
average, 3V^ times during the year. The 14,522 cleanings yielded 
10,600 cu. yds. of deposit, or about 0.7 cu. yd. per cleaning. A gang 
of 2 laborers and 2 one-horse carts with drivers averaged 20 cu. 
yds. per day, cleaned out and hauled away. Assuming men's 
wages to be $2 each and a horse to be $1, the daily wage of this 
gang would be $10, and the cost would be 50 cts. per cu. yd. of 
sludge, or 35 cts. per catch basin per cleaning. The labor cost for 
the year would then be about $300 per mile of sewer, since 600 
cu. yds. were removed per mile. 

In addition to this, about 10.4 miles of sewers were flushed out 
with a fire hose during the year, yielding 831 cu. yds. more. 

In cleaning the catch basins a man descends into the basin and 
first bails out the water into the sewer, until nothing but sludge is 
left ; and the sludge is removed with buckets raised by a "wheel 
derrick" (a tripod with a drum operated by the wheels on which 
the derrick is transported) and dumped into the cart. Steel carts 
holding 1 cu. yd. are used. 

Mr. T. Chalkley Hatton describes a more economic method of 
cleaning catch basins, which involves a special design of catch 
basin, so that the sludge accumulates in a "catch bucket." This 
galvanized catch bucket is 3 ft. high and 2% ft. diam. at the top. 
A cast-iron hood is placed over the outlet to the sewer, for trap- 
ping the sewer gases. This hood is removed before raising the 
catch bucket. Riveted to the top of the bucket is an angle iron 
that rests on a ledge in the catch basin, the joint being merely dirt 
proof and not water proof. The bucket is raised with a "wheel 
derrick" (a trip on wheels), by means of a friction pulley. The 
legs of the derrick are of gas pipe. 

A brick catch basin (8 ft. 8 ins. deep) on a 6-in. concrete founda- 
tion, with a bucket, hood, and connections complete, costs $40. Each 
connecting inlet costs about $35. The "wheel derrick" costs $35. 
Two men, with a horse and cart, can clean 20 catch basins a day, 
at a cost of 25 cts. per catch basin. 

Cost of Flushing Sewers.* — Mr. Andrew Rosewater gives the fol- 
lowing relative to the cost of flushing sewers by automatic flush 
tanks and by hand. The costs are estimated, but said to be based 
upon actual performance. 

In 1893 Mr. Rosewater designed flush tanks that averaged 400 
gals, capacity each and discharged at the rate of 11 gals, per sec- 
ond, developing effective scour in an 8-in. sewer for a distance 
of 2,000 ft. below the tank. To avoid sedimentation in the pipe 
that serves the flush tank, Mr. Rosewater states that the velocity 
of flow should not be less than 2 ft. per sec, and this is attained 
in a %-in. pipe discharging 445 gals, in 24 hrs. A larger pipe 
causes decreased velocity and sedimentation where unflltered water 



^Engineering-Contracting, July 28, 1909. 



944 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

is used. He estimates the cost of maintenance and operation of 
each flush tanlc as follows per annum, provided the flush tank is 
properly designed : 

Interest on $100 tank at 5 per cent $ 5.00 

"Water, 182,000 gals, at $15 per million 2.73 

Labor of attendance ($2,000 -=- 300 tanks) 6.67 

Total per tank per year $14.40 

Two men with a horse and wagon (costing $2,000 per year) are 
estimated to be able to take care of 300 flush tanks and maintain 
them in repair. 

In 100 miles of sewers in Omaha, Mr. Rosewater found that the 
existing flush tanks were using 1,800,000 gals, daily, which was 
three times the amount needed if the flow had been properly ad- 
justed. 

If flushing is done by hand labor, thare are three methods avail- 
able : ( 1 ) Water carts ; ( 2 ) direct portable base connections to 
hydrants ; and ( 3 ) connection with pipe mains and hand valves. 

Flushing with water carts requires two men, at $1.50 each, and 
two horses, at $0.75 each, to handle 25 tanks per day, or 18 cts. 
per tank per day, or $65.70 per tank per year, to which must be 
added $2.73 for the water, making a total of $68.43. 

Flushing with portable base requires 2 men and a horse, who 
handle 30 tanks daily, at a cost of $49.25 per year per tank, to 
which must be added $2.73 for water, making a total of $49.25. 

Flushing with pipe connection and hand valves requires the con- 
struction of a manhole, which, with connections, etc., will cost $100. 
One man with a horse and wagon can handle 40 tanks daily, at a 
cost of $22.50 per tank per year. To this must be added $5 for 
interest and $2.73 for water, making a total of $30.25. 

Cost of Vitrified Conduits and of Tile Drains, Cross- References. — 
Data on these subjects will be found in Section XV, Miscellaneous 
Cost Data. 



SECTION IX. 
PILING, TRESTLING AND TIMBERWORK. 

Definitions. — Consult the index for words 'not found in the fol- 
lowing alphabetical list 

Ads. — A carpenter's chipping tool, like a small hoe with a handle. 

Angle Block. — A block of cast iron or wood, having a triangular 
cross-section, against which the braces and counters of a Howe 
bridge truss abut. : 

Apron. — A covering at the foot of a spillway, to protect the 
ground from scour. 

Balk. — A large stick of timber. 

Batter Piles. — Piles driven inclined, as distinguished from plumb 
piles. 

Bent. — One of the transverse frames of a trestle which supports 
the "deck" or floor system. It consists of a sill, a cap, posts (verti- 
cal and batter), and sway braces. A pile bent consists of the 
piles, cap and sway braces. 

Bit. — The part of an auger that does the boring. 

Block and Tackle. — A pulley block and rope. 

Board Measure. — The unit of timber measure is the board foot 
(ft. B. M. ), which is 1 ft. square and 1 in. thick, or 1/12 cu. ft. A 
thousand feet board measure (1,000 ft. B. M. ) is often designated 
by the letter M. 

Box Culvert. — A culvert having a water way of rectangular cross- 
section. 

Brace. — A diagonal compression member of a truss, also any stick 
used to resist compression, like the horizontal timbers running from 
one side of a trench to another. Sway braces are the diagonal 
braces of a trestle bent. Lateral (or wind) braces are the diagonal 
braces between the lower, or the upper, chords of a Howe truss 
bridge. 

The frame that holds a bit or auger Is called a brace. 

Brad Spike. — A railway spike. 

Brash. — Brittle. 

Bridgiyig. — The small diagonal braces between two joists or 
stringers of a floor system, which prevent the joists from turning 
over on their sides, or from buckling laterally. 

Brush Hook. — A curved blade, mounted on a wooden handle, used 
for cutting brush. 

Burnettizing. — Impregnating the pores of wood with a solution of 
zinc chloride under pressure. 

945 



946 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Burr. — The nut of a bolt. 

Calk. — To fill joints with oakum, or the like, to prevent leakage. 

Cant. — To tip or lean. 

Cant Hook. — ^A tool for handling timber. It is like a peavey, except 
that the pole or handle is not pointed. 

Cap. — A timber across the tops of posts or piles, and usually 
driftbolted thereto. 

Centers. — The falsework that supports an arch during construc- 
tion, or, more strictly, the arch ribs of this falsework. 

Check. — A crack in timber due to shrinkage from seasoning. 

Clear Inspection. — A class of timber conforming to some such 
specification as follows (N. Y. Lumber Assoc.) : 

"Scantling and plank shall be free of sap, large knots or other 
defects. Dimension sizes shall be free from sap, large or unsound 
knots, shakes through or round." 

Clearing. — The removal of all trees and brush above the ground 
level. The removal of the roots below the ground level is grubbing. 

Close Piles. — Sheet piles. 

Corbel. — A projecting beam acting as a cantilever supporting an- 
other beam. 

Cord. — A cord of wood measures 4x4x8 ft., or 128 cu. ft. 

Corduroy. — A road made of round or split logs laid side by side 
upon marshy ground. 

Creosoting. — Impregnating the pores of timber with hot creosote 
(dead oil of coal tar) under pressure. 

Crih. — A log cabin structure built of timbers whose ends are 
notched and drift bolted together. 

Dap. — A notch cut into the side of a stick of timber. 

Deck. — The wooden floor system of a railway bridge, consisting 
of the stringers, cross-ties and guard rails. 

Deciduous. — Subject to shedding leaves in the fall and winter, 
as distinguished from evergreen. 

Docking. — A retaining wall of piles sheeted with plank, and 
capped with a "dock stick" bolted thereto. 

Dolly. — A roller upon which is mounted a small truck for carry- 
v^^ ing timber. 
--^ Dimension lumber. — Sticks measuring Gx6 ins. and larger. 

Dosey. — Sap rotted. 

Dovetail. — A timber joint made by cutting the end of a stick 
so that it is narrower a few inches back of the end, ' and is let 
into a cross timber notched to fit it. 

Dowel. — A short iron pin inserted into bored holes in two faces 
of sticks that meet. Usually a dowel is used to hold the foot of a 
trestle post from displacement from the sill on which it rests. 

Dressed. — Planed. 

Drift bolt. — A bar of round iron (% to 1 in.) used like a large 
nail (without a head) to fasten timbers together. An auger hole, 
1/16 to % in. smaller than the drift bolt, is first bored and the bolt 
is driven in the hole. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 947 

Drop Timbers. — Timbers dropped into place to close an opening in 
a dam. 

Dry rot. — Rotting of timber not exposed to rain. The moisture 
is supplied by the sap of the timber. Dry rot often occurs when 
green timber is painted, the paint preventing the evaporation of 
the sap. 

Dubb. — To cut the end of a stick to a bevel around the edge. 
It is usually good practice to dubb the end of a pile preparatory 
to ringing it. 

Falsework. — The temporary frame work or staging built to 
support a bridge or other structure during its erection. 

Fascine. — A bundle of brush or small branches wired or tied 
together. 

Flume. — A trough for carrying water. 

Follower. — A short length of pile placed on top of the pile that 
is being driven, to protect it from the blows of the hammer, or to 
force it down below the bottom of the leaders as when driving 
under water. 

Forms. — The mold in which concrete is cast. 

Frame. — To shape the members of a timber structure. Some- 
times tlie term is used to include the erection and fastening to- 
gether of the members. 

Frap. — To bind together with a rope. 

Gib or Gib Plate. — A large flat plate of wrought iron or steel, 
used like a washer between the timber and the nut heads of rods 
in a Howe truss. 

Gin or Gin Pole. — A mast with a pulley at the top, guyed with 
three or four ropes, and used to raise heavy timbers, etc. 

Gins. — See Leads. 

Grillage. — Timbers laid criss cross, bolted together and fastened 
by drift bolts to the heads of foundation piles. 

Grub. — To remove the roots of trees and brush. 

Jetting Piles. — To sink piles by means of a water jet. 

Joist. — A beam or stringer that supports flooring. 

Kerf. — The narrow slot made in sawing timber. 

Kiln Dried. — Dried artificially in a kiln. 

Knot. — The American Society for Testing Materials adopted 
(1906) the following definitions: (1) A sound knot is one which 
is solid across its face and which is as hard as the wood surround- 
ing it; it may be either red or black, and is so fixed by growth or 
position that it will retain its place in the piece. (2) A loose knot 
is one not firmly held in place by growth or position. (3) A inth 
knot is a sound knot with a pith hole not more than % in. in 
diameter in the center. (4) An encased knot is one which is sur- 
rounded wholly or in part by bark or pitch. Where the encasement 
is less than % of an inch in width on both sides, not exceeding one- 
half the circumference of the knot, it shall be considered a sound 
knot. (5) A rotten knot is one not as hard as the wood it is in. 

(6) A pin knot is a sound knot not over % in. in diameter, 

(7) A standard knot is a sound knot not over 1% in. in diameter. 



948 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

(8) A large knot is a sound knot, more than li/^ in. in diameter. 

(9) A round knot is one which is oval or circular in form. (10) A 
spike knot is one sawn in a lengthwise direction ; the mean or 
average diameter shall be considered in measuring these knots. 

Lagging. — The plank sheeting placed upon the frames of arch 
centers. 

Lag Screw. — ^A thick screw with a square bolt head. 

Leads or Leaders. — The vertical guides that guide a pile driver 
hammer during its rise and fall. Also called gms, ways, etc. 

Lug Hook. — A timber grapple, much like ice tongs hung from the 
center of a wooden handle ; used for carrying timber, one man at 
each end of the handle. 

Mattock. — A grubbing tool with one cutting edge shaped like an 
adz (or hoe), and the other edge like an ax or pick. 

Mattress. — A brush mattress consists either of fascines bound 
together, or of strands of brush woven together, ballasted with 
stone and sunk in a river bed to prevent scour. 

Merchantable Timber. — According to specifications of the South- 
ern Lumber and Timber Asso. : "Scantling shall show three corners 
heart free from injurious shakes or unsound knots. Plank nine 
inches and under wide, shall show one heart free and two-thirds 
heart on opposite side ; over nine inches wide shall show two-thirds 
heart on both sides, all free from round or through shakes, large or 
unsound knots. Dimension sizes: All square lumber shall show 
two-thirds heart on two sides and not less than half heart on two 
other sides. Other sizes shall show two-thirds heart on faces and 
show heart two-thirds of the length on edges excepting where width 
exceeds thickness by three inches or over, and then it shall show 
heart on the edges for half its length. All stock to be well and 
truly manufactured full to size and saw butted." 

Miter. — The joint between two beveled edges, the bevel usually 
being 45 degrees. 

Mortise. — ^A hollow cut made in the side of a timber to receive the 
tenon or tongue on the end of another timber. 

Mud Sills. — Short pieces of timber (often ceclar) laid beneath the 
sill of a trestle bent to keep it from contact with the ground. 

Needle Beam. — Floor beam of a Howe truss, through the enda 
of which pass the vertical rods. 

Nippers. — The scissor-like tongs that clutch the hammer of a free- 
fall pile driver. 

Overhang Driver. — See Pile Driver. 

Packing Piece. — A piece of wood or metal placed between two 
timbers to prevent their coming in contact. 

Peavey. — A pointed pole with a pivoted hook near the pointed 
end, used for handling timbers. See Cant Hook. 

Pile. — A stick driven into the earth. F'oundation piles are driven 
to support a bridge, building or other structure. Sheet piles are 
sawed timber piles driven touching one another, so as to form a 
tight diaphragm. Wakefield piles are sheet piles made by bolting 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 949 

or spiking three planks together, so as to form a tongue and groove. 
When driven, this gives a triple lap sheet piling. 

Pile Driver. — A free-fall pile driver has a hammer held by nippers 
which, when tripped, allow the hammer to fall freely. A friction 
clutch driver has its hammer always attached to the hoisting rope, 
which is operated by the drum with a friction clutch. A steam 
hammer is raised by steam acting directly upon a piston attached 
to the hammer. An overhang driver is one mounted in a frame 
whose leads project 8 to 20 ft. beyond the base of support. 

Pinch Bar. — A steel bar with a chisel-shaped end. 

Pitch Pocket. — The American Society for Testing Materials gives 
the following specification : Pitch pockets are openings between the 
grain or the wood containing more or less pitch or bark. These 
shall be classified as small, standard and large pitch pockets, (a) A 
small pitch pocket is one not over % of an inch wide. (b) A 
standard pitch pocket is one not over % of an inch wide, or 3 ins. 
in length, (c) A large pitch pocket is one over % of an inch wide, 
or over 3 ins. in length. A jntch break is a well-defined accumu- 
lation of pitch at one point in the piece. 

Plank. — In the lumber trade, the term plank is applied to pieces 
1% to 5 ins. thick x 7 ins. wide, or wider. 

Posts. — The upright members in a trestle bent. 

Put Logs. — Horizontal stringers supporting a building scaffolding, 
the ends being inserted in put-log holes left in the masonry. 

Rangers. — The longitudinal timbers used in bracing a trench ; the 
"braces" being the cross timbers between the rangers. 

Revetment. — A river bank protection. 

Ring. — An iron band around the head of a pile to protect it from 
splitting or brooming. » 

Scantling. — A timber of small cross-section. Also the cross-sec- 
tion dimensions, as a "scantling" of 4x10 ins. 

Scarf Joint. — A joint made by overlapping and bolting or locking 
together the ends of two pieces of timber that are halved, notched 
or cut aw-ay, so that they will fit each other and form a lengthened 
stick of the same size at the scarf joint as elsewhere. 

Scissors. — See Nippers. 

Seasoned. — Air dried. 

Sheet Piles. — See Piles. 

Shoe. — An iron point over the lower end of a wooden pile. 

Sill. — The horizontal timber of a trestle bent on which the posts 
rest. 

Sheeting or Sheathing. — Plank or boards forming a wall, or a 
diaphragm. 

Skeleton Bracing. — Trench bracing consisting only of rangers and 
cross braces, without any plank sheeting. 

Stay Lathed. — Temporarily fastened with small cleats or braces. 

Stringer. — A longitudinal joist in a floor system. 

Studs. — The vertical pieces of timber (in a building) to which 
sheeting is fastened. 



950 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Stitnipage. — The amount paid a land owner for standing timber. 

Tenon. — A projecting tongue cut on the end of a stick of timber. 
See Mortise. 

Tongs. — See Nippers. 

Treated.- — Preserved by impregnation with creosote, zinc chloride, 
or the like. 

Trestle. — A bridge consisting of bents supporting a floor system. 
A frame trestle consists entirely of sawed timber. A pole trestle 
is made largely of round poles, none of which, however, are used as 
piles. A pile trestle has bents composed of piles. See Bent. 

Wakefield. — See Pile. 

Wale. — A longitudinal timber bolted to a row of piles ; but not on 
top of the piles, such a timber being a cap. 

Water Jet. — See Jetting. 

Ways. — See Leads. Also the inclined timbers down which any 
structure is launched into the water. 

Importance of Timberwork. — ^Although timber will be used to a 
less and less extent for permanent engineering structures, it will 
long have a wide field of usefulness for falsework, forms, centers, 
temporary trestles, etc. In foundations that are always under 
water, timber will doubtless never cease to be used to a considerable 
extent. In supporting the roofs of mining excavations timber may 
never cease to be used. Trestle bridges for railways are still built 
extensively in the West, and even in the East. In brief, there is 
and long will be an enormous amount of timber used annually in 
engineering construction. It is a serious mistake, therefore, to re- 
gard a knowledge of timberwork as being comparatively non-essen- 
tial to the engineer of the future. 

Measurement of Timberwork. — Timber is sold by the 1,000 ft. 
H M. (thousand feet board nneasure). A common abbreviation for 
1,000 ft. B. M. is the letter M. One foot board measure is 12 ins. 
square and 1 in. thick, which is one-twelfth cubic foot. To esti- 
mate the number of feet board measure in a sawed stick, multiply 
the end dimensions (in inches) together and divide by twelve, then 
multiply this quotient by the length of the stick (in feet). For 
example, in a 10xl2-in. stick, 16 ft. long, there are: 

10 X 12 

X 16 = 160 ft. B. M. 

12 
Timberwork is paid for at a specified price per M for the timber 
measured in the work. The contractor must be cautious to make 
allowance for wastage in framing the timber. Scarf joints, for ex- 
example, may cause a wastage of 6%. If bridge flooring planks are 
laid diagonally for a 16-ft. roadway, there Is a wastage of about 
5% when the ends are sawed off on line with the outer stringers. 

Timber is usually sold in lengths containing an even number of 
feet, as 10, 12, 14, 16 ft. In examining plans, the contractor should 
be careful to note whether the dimensions are such as to require the 
use of even lengths or not, for a careless engineer or architect may 
so design a structure as to cause a large wastage of timber. 



PILING, TRESTLING. TIMBERWORK. 951 

In measuring dressed lumber, remember that the thickness used 
in calculating the number of board feet is not the actual thickness 
of the dressed board, but the thickness of the original stock from 
which the dressed board was made. So also the width of a tongue 
and grooved board is not its actual face width, as laid, but it is 
the width of the original board. 

Cubic Contents and Weight of Piles and Pples. — Table I gives the 
cubic feet contents of a tapering pole. Thus a pole 8 ins. diam. 
at the small end and 16 ins. at the large end, contains 0.81 cu. ft. 
per lin. ft. of pole (see Table I). Hence if the pole is 30 ,ft. long, 
it contains 30 X 0.81 = 24.3 cu. ft. of timber. 

The weight of timber per cubic foot is given below. 

In estimating the amount of lumber that can be sawed from a 
log, the following rule is used: 

From the least diameter in inches subtract 4, divide by 16, multi- 
ply by the length in feet, and the quotient is the number of feet 
board measure. 

Expressed as a formula, we have 

Ft. B. M. =(- 1 d L. 



(^) 



Weight of Timber. — The cost of hauling timber must frequently 
be estimated. Timber is bought by the M, and it is well to remem- 
ber that an M contains 83% cu. ft., which at a specific gravity of 1 
(the same as water) would be 5,200 lbs., or 2.6 tons per M. How- 
ever, only very dense, green oaks, and similar dense timber, ever 
have a specific gravity equal to 1. 

Table II gives the weight of timber for different specific gravities. 

The following is the specific gravity of some of the common kinds 
of timber : 

Kiln 

Green. Dried. 

Yellow pine (Southern) 0.90 0.60 

Norway pine (Northern) 0.50 

Douglas fir 0.65 

White pine 0.40 

"WTiite oak 1.00 0.70 

Hemlock 0.60 0.50 

Cedar 0.35 

See Frye's "Civil Engineer's Pocketbook" for the most complete 
data on weights of wood. 

Table II. — Weight op Timber Per Cu. Ft. and Per M Ft. B. M. 

Specific Weight per Weight per 1,000 

gravity. cu. ft., lbs. ft. B. M., lbs. 

1.0 62.40 5,200 

0.9 56.16 4,680 

0.8 49.92 4,160 

0.7 43.68 3,640 

0.6 37.44 3,120 

0.5 31.20 2,600 

0.4 ■ 24.96 2,080 

0.3 18.72 1,560 



952 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



inxDtnmiiVitDiimvxmmtiirDminmxnminmmviaiin 

jj . _ « ^ .„ .rt .« -H « »H .rH .rt .« .rt .rt .rt .--■ .rt .rt .rH .r^ .„ .« .« .« .„ ^ 



KlQ 



ll-lTHTHiHrHiHTHrHN 



M g 






o 

P-i ;em 

as 1-1.3 



MIL-'-' 



o 

K ^ . • • • • oq •* t- O M to 05 CO 50 O M t- T-l T)< 00 (N CO 1-4 lO Oi "d< 

Pq >^m • ■ • . lO lO lO «D to «0 «0 t- t- 00 00 00 05 05 05 O O r-l tH tH N 

'^ OJgj.S iHr-JrHi-irHTH 

Q S3 

O +J 

O <B ,,; • • •t~ONu5007H-^[-0(Mt-0-^C-rHl005eOt-THtOO 

»> Soi S • * • '^ '^ ''^ U5 "^ "^ «0 «D t- t- t- OO 00 00 05 05 05 O O tH ,H e<l 

f^ rt"^'' ' ' rHrHi-SrHiH 

o O 

. • •Kl'<HC^0iC<lU500rH'*t-O'^t-THT^005qCCO-*00lMt- 

^ SJ^M • • -*■ •* ^ ■* in in lO to «0 CO t-; t-; t- 00 00 00 05 05 O O O rH iH 

Cu rtoO.S l-ii-Hr-HrHrH 

s 

O 00 S • CO CO Th ^ Tt< Lrt urs ITS int CD CO cc t-- 1> c- 00 00 00 05 0:1 O O rH 



9 ^ 



.^ comt:~oc<imir-ocv5toa5<Mir50oc<iL£5asc<icoo-^ooc<itoo 
^2 CO CO CO •* •* ■* ■* in 10 m in CO to to t- c- c- 00 00 05 03 05 o o T-i 



t-C 



THCOint-OC<!mOOOCOtOa5<MCOO^C<Jt005COt^rHmOiCOt>" 

co^5coco■*■*T(<T^•lnlnmlOCOcocDt-c-t-ooooo50505oo 



. oir-icomooocoinoOi-tT)<t-ocotooeot-OT}>ooc^cooM< 
^g CO CO CO CO CO ■* Tji Tt< ■>!< in in in CD CO CO c- 1- 1- 00 00 00 as cfa o o 

. t~ 0> rH CO CO 00 r-l CO CO 05 (N in 00 iH ■<JH t- tH •<*i 00 iH in Cn CO t- tH 

w coeqcocococo-^-^Tt^Tt^ininintococDt^t^t-oooooooso^o 
'^ fl • 



© . C C C C C C C (3 C C C C C C C C C C C C C tJ C C fl 
g ^ ' -.-.r,.^.-., ^.-.^ , 

h-3Q 00 00 05 05 o o tH T-i ffq (M CO CO ■* ■* in in CD CD t- 1- 00 CO oj oi o 

iHrHrHr-tTHTHTHTHTHr-iTHlHrHTHi-tTHT-HrHTHTHW 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 953 

Cost of Manufacturing Lumber. — A contractor will often find it 
profitable to cut and saw lumber. A 20-hp. portable engine will run 
a small sawmill, and with a crew of 5 men the output will be about 
8,000 ft. B. M. of 3-in. plank per day. If the wages of the 5 men 
are $10 a day, and the rental of the engine and saw is $10 more 
per day, the cost of sawing is about $2.50 per M. The price of the 
timber as it stands before cutting, is called the stumpage price, and 
this ranges from $1 to $5 per M. The cost of cutting and skidding 
hemlock logs, I have found to be about $1 per M, half of which 
is for cutting and the other half for skidding, wages being $1.50 a 
day. The total cost of sawed plank in one case was as follows : 

PerM. 

Stumpage $1.50 

Cutting 0.40 ~ 

Skidding 0.60 

Sawing 2.50 

Total per M $5.00 

I have been told by a lumberman in Washington that his "log- 
ging" cost him $5 per M, wages of laborers oeing $3 per day. This 
seems like a high cost. It includes cutting the trees and dragging 
the logs to an incline up which they are hauled by a hoisting engine 
to a chute, down which they are slid by gravity to tidewater. 

Cost of Sawing and Planing Lumber.* — In connection with the 
operation and care of the Muscle Shoals Canal, IT. S. Government 
Tennessee River Improvement, a small sawmill was used for 
sawing and planing lumber. This lumber was largely used in build- 
ing and repairing boats and was usually sawed and planed just as 
needed. Consequently the mill was run very spasmodically, some- 
times being in operation all day, and again only an hour or so. 
The men operating the mill were used on other work when not em- 
ployed in the mill. The sawyer was paid $50 per month and helpers 
from $1.20 to $1.50 per day of 8 hrs. 

During the year 1904-5 a total of 77,591 ft. B. M. of lumber were 
sawed at an average cost of $2.11 per M, and 56,121 ft. B. M. were 
planed at an average of $1.38 per M. 

The lumber ranged in size from 8 ft. to 45 ft. long and from 
1-in. boards to sticks 20-in. x 20-in. in cross-section. 

The planer, which would take a stick as large as 6x24 Ins., was 
worked by the same operations as the sawmill. 

The mill was run by a 55-hp. Victor turbine and had a 60-in. 
circular saw. 

Price of Yellow Pine for Fourteen Years.f— The "American L.um- 
berman," Aug. 22, 1908, gives a very complete table of prices of 
Southern yellow pine lumber of different classes, from which we 
have selected the prices of two classes only. These prices apply to 
lumber delivered at points that are reached by a 23-ct. rate (per 



*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 29, 1906. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Sept, 2, 1908. 



954 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



100 lbs.) from the mills, and include the 23-ct. freight rate. The 
prices are as follows : 

No. 1 Timbers 
Dimension ■ 4" x 10" to 
Year. 2" x 10" — 16'. 12"xl2" — 16'. 

1894 $12.50 $16.25 

1895 12.25 16.25 

1896 11.00 ■ 15.50 

1897 12.50 16.00 

1898 13.50 17.00 

1899 13.50 17.75 

1900 14.50 19.25 

1901 15.50 20.00 

1902 16.00 20.50 

1903 16.00 20.50 

1904 16.00 21.00 

1905 17.50 23.25 

1906 21.00 28.00 

1907 22.25 28.25 

1908 17.75 25.25 

Life of Trestle and Bridge Timbers.* — A committee of the Ameri- 
can Railway Bridge and Building Association reported in 1908 that 
the following is the average life: 

Caps of Trestles: Years. 

Long leaf pine (av. of 12 rys.) 10 

Douglas fir (av. of 8 rys. ) 10 

White or burr oak (av. of 2 rys.) 11 

Stringers: 

Long leaf pine (av. of 13 rys.) 10 

Douglas flr (av. of 10 rys. ) 11 

"White oak (av. of 1 ry.) 10 

White pine with iron cover (1 ry.) 14 

Ties: 

Long leaf pine (av. of 10 rys.) 9 

Douglas fir (av. of 4 yrs. ) 12 

White oak (av. of 4 rys.) 10 

Piles: 

White or burr oak (av. of 10 rys.) 10 

White cedar (av. of 6 rys. ) 17 

Red cedar (av. of 2 rys. ) 12 

Treated pine (av. of 2 rys.) 14 

In 1899 a committee of the same association made a similar re- 
port, of which the following is an abstract. It is not so reliable 
as the report above given. 
The life of piles is as follows: 

Years.- 

In water. 

Cedar, white (Wis. ) 

Cedar (Wis.) 28 

Chestnut (New England) 15 to 20 

Cypress (111.) 

Oak (New Bng.) 9 to 20 

Oak, white (Middle States) 8 to 30 

Pine, yellow (Miss.) 10 

Pine, Norway (Wis.) 7 

Spruce (New Eng. ) 4 to 10 

Spruce, red (Colo.) 10 to 15 

Tamarack ( New Eng. ) 18 

Tamarack (Wis. ) 



On land. 


20+ 


16 to 20 


12 to 18 


7 


8 to 14 


8 to 12 


10 


6 


4 to 8 


7 to 10 


10 to 12 


8 



*Englneering-Contracting, Nov. 25, 1908. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 955 

The life of unprotected bridge timber, whether In stringers, 
bents, or trusses, is as follows : 

Years. 

Pine, yellow long leaf (New Eng. ) 12 to 20 

Pine, yellow long leaf (Miss.) 8 

Pine, yellow long leaf (111.) 8 to 14 

Pine, yellow long leaf (Colo.) 10 

Pine, white (New Eng.) 10 to 18 

Pine, white (111.) 10 to 14 

Pine, white (Minn.) 10 

Pine, Colorado 8 to 15 

Pine, Norway (Wis.) 8 to 10 

Spruce (New Eng.) 5 to 10 

Douglas fir (Wyo.) 10 to 16 

Douglas fir (Colo.) 18 to 20 

Oak, white (Ohio) 7 to 8 

Oak, white (111.) 14 to 18 

Cypress, red (Ala.) 12 

Even a casual study of these figures shows that many of them 
are merely rough guesses. For example, why should white oak 
timber in Illinois last twice as long as in Ohio. The reports for 
these two states are from different superintendents, which accounts 
for the discrepancy. 

The life of timber truss bridges protected from the weather was 
reported to be 20 to 50 years, several superintendents saying in- 
definitely. 

Consult the section on Railways for life of timber, particularly 
ties. 

Life of Treated and Untreated Fence Posts. — A committee of the 
Am. Ry. Bngrg. and Mn. of Way Assoc, reported in 1907 that the 
average life of fence posts is as follows : 

Chestnut and oak 9 years 

Locust 10 years 

Catalpa 12 years 

Cedar 15 years 

Bois d' Arc Everlasting 

Mr. B. E. Buffum made some experiments in Wyoming with 80 
pitch-pine fence posts, by treating them in three different ways. 
The posts were placed in 1891 and in IS 07 the following conclusions 
were reached. The best treatment consisted in dipping the lower 
2% ft. of post in California (?) crude asphaltic oil and then burn- 
ing off the outside oil. This drives the hot oil into the post and 
chars the outside. After 16 years these posts seemed good for a life 
of fully 30 years, as they were as sound as the day they were 
placed. 

Of 15 untreated posts the life was estimated as follows: 

Estimated life, 
Number. years. 

4 12 

2 14 
4 16 

3 17 
1 18 

1 20-}- 

15 Average. 15 



956 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A treatment of the lower 2% ft. of the post with tar was less 
effective than with crude oil, and it seemed to make little differ- 
ence whether the tar was burned off or not. Of ten posts thus 
treated 8 appeared to be good for a life of 20 years or more. 

Posts simply well charred seemed good for a life of about 20 
years. 

For cost of fences see the sections on Railways and on Miscel- 
laneous Costs. 

Life of Creosoted Ties. — In 1880-2, some 150,000 ties were creo- 
soted with 10 lbs. of oil per cu. ft. and put in the tracks of the 
Houston and Texas Central Ry. In 1907, there were still 11,300 in 
service, and Mr. O. Chanute estimated that the average life had been 
19.35 years. 

Cost of Treating Timber, Cross References. — The steadily advanc- 
ing price of timber has lead to "treating" timber with preserva- 
tives, such as creosote and zinc chloride. 

Cedar may be regarded as a timber containing a natural pre- 
servative — the oil of cedar, which is too often "killed" by kiln 
drying to reduce the weight before shipment. 

In addition to the data in the following paces, consult that part 
of the section on Railways relating to tie preservation. See the 
index under "Timber, Preserving." 

Process Treatment of Timber and Approximate Costs.* — Mr. G, B. 

Shipley is author of the following: 

The evolution of timber preserving processes in this country with- 
in the last ten years has developed many new methods of treating 
ties, piling, timber, poles, crossarms, mine timbers, etc., and a great 
many antiseptics or compounds are being proposed, but the subject 
is of such vital importance that the leading organizations are back- 
ward about experimenting. Consequently the processes actually em- 
ployed may be subdivided into only two methods and these are the 
full cell and partial cell treatments. The full cell treatment consists 
of impregnating the wood fibres and filling the cells with the anti- 
septic, whereas the partial cell treatment consists of impregnating 
the wood fibers only. These two methods are sometimes confused 
with processes or the manner in which the treatment is performed. 

The treatment of wood depends upon where the wood will be 
used, the climatic conditions, the permissible cost of treatment and 
the wood structure. If first-class wood is to be used for such work 
as docks around salt water, telegraph poles, building foundations 
or for railroad ties, where there is no mechanical wear, the full 
cell method is best, but if the wood is soft and not protected from 
mechanical wear, then the partial cell method will be satisfactory 
for the reason that with the latter method the chemical life ■vrill 
be equivalent to the mechanical life. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 19, 1910. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 957 

The Important processes that are In use in this country and 
which may be classed under the full cell method are the burnettiz- 
Ing, Wellhouse, full cell creosote and card processes, and those which 
may be classed under partial cell method are the Reuping, I^owry 
and absorption processes. These processes, with the exception of 
the absorption process, are manipulated by mechanical contrivances, 
such as pressure pumps, vacuum pumps and air compressors and can 
be controlled to suit the wood structure, while with the absorption 
process the treatment is governed by temperature and atmospheric 
pressure, therefore is limited to certain woods. 

Burnettizing Process. — This is often referred to as the zinc chlo- 
ride process and consists of impregnating the wood fibers with a 
solution containing i/4 lb. of dry zinc chloride per cubic foot of wood 
and is operated as follows : The wood is first air seasoned in the 
open, or steamed in retorts to expel the moisture, then a vacuum is 
produced and maintained until the solution is introduced and the 
wood is completely submerged, the pressure is then increased to 
about 100 lbs. or 125 lbs. per sq. in., by pumping in additional solu- 
tion until the required penetration and impregnation is obtained, 
when the solution is drained from the retort. The approximate 
time required for the process is : 

Hrs. Mins. 

Steaming to 20 lbs. pressure 30 

Steaming, 20 lbs. to 35 lbs. pressure 3 30 

Blowing off steam 15 

"Vacuum 45 

Solution to about 100 lbs. pressure 45 

Solution maintained to 100 lbs. pressure 1 15 

Forcing back solution 15 

Total cycle 7 15 

If the steaming time Is reduced 2 hrs., then the total cycle is 5 hrs. 
15 mins. 

Wellhouse Process. — This is often referred to as the zinc tannin 
process. It consists of impregnating the wood fibers with a hot 
solution containing about % lb. of dry zinc chloride plus %% of 
glue or gelatine per cubic foot of wood, then following by injecting 
a second solution containing %% of tannic acid. The purpose of 
the tannin is to solidify the first injection to prevent leaching. 

The wood is first air seasoned in the open or steamed in retorts to 
expel the moisture, then a vacuum is produced and maintained until 
the solution is introduced and the wood is completely submerged, 
the pressure is then increased to about 100 to 125 lbs. per sq. in. 
by pumping in additional solution until the required penetration and 
Impregnation are obtained, when the solution is drained from the re- 
tort and the second movement takes place by filling the retort with 
a solution containing tannic acid and increasing the pressure by 
pumping in additional solution at about 100 or 125 lbs. per sq. in. 
until the required penetration is obtained, when the solution is 
drained from the retort. The approximate time required is: 



958 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Maximum Time, 

Hrs. Mins. 

Steaming to 20 lbs. pressure 30 

Steaming, 20 to 35 lbs. pressure 3 30 

Blowing off steam 15 

Vacuum 45 

Solution and glue to 100 lbs. pressure 45 

Solution and glue maintained at 100 lbs. 

pressure 1 15 

Forcing back solution and glue 15 

Tannin introduced to 100 lbs. pressure 20 

Tannin maintained at 100 lbs. pressure 50 

Forcing back tannin 15 

Total cycle 8 40 

If steaming time is reduced 2 hrs., then the total cycle equals 
6 hrs. 40 mins. 

Absorption Process. — This is often referred to as the non-pressure 
process consists of submerging the wood in a boiling preserva- 
tive at a temperature of from 180° to 230° F., then following with 
a cold preservative as follows: The wood is first air seasoned in 
the open to reduce the moisture, then placed in either an open or 
closed receptacle where it is submerged in a hot preservative 
which expels the air and additional moisture ; the receptacle is then 
drained and the wood submerged in a cold preservative. The first 
movement opens the pores or cells of the wood forming a vacuum 
within, while the second movement causes absorption due to the 
difference in temperature and atmospheric pressure. This process 
can be used in either open tanks or closed retorts. For treating the 
butts of poles, fence posts, piling and small quantities of ties the 
open tank is satisfactory, but for treating large quantities of ma- 
terial the closed retort is recommended where thorough impreg- 
nation is desired. The time of treatment is as follows : 

Green Timber. 

Boiling in hot preservative from 8 to 10 hrs. 

Bath in cold preservative from 8 to 16 hrs. 

Total time of treatment, 16 to 26 hrs. 
Seasoned Timber. 

Boiling in hot preservative from 3 to 6 hrs. 

Bath of cold preservative from 4 to 8 hrs. 

Total time of treatment, 7 to 14 hrs. 

With this process it is possible to impregnate a limited class of 
woods with about 6 to 12 lbs. of concrete oil per cubic foot. 

Full Cell Creosote Process. — This consists of impregnating the 
wood fibers and cells of ties with 6 to 12 lbs. of creosote oil per 
cubic foot and timber and piling with 10 lbs. to 20 lbs. of creosote oil 
per cubic foot, as follows : The wood is first seasoned in the open or 
steamed in the retorts (generally both) to reduce the moisture and 
expel the sap ; then a vacuum is produced and maintained until 
the creosote oil is introduced and wood is completely submerged. 
The pressure is then increased to about 100 to 125 lbs. per sq. in. 
and maintained until the desired penetration and impregnation is 
secured, when the creosote oil is drained from the tanks. In some 
cases a vacuum is produced and maintained at the finish to drain 
the surplus oil from the exterior of wood to nrevent loss by drippage 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 959 

after the wood has been removed from retorts. The approximate 

time required is: 

10-lb. Treatment. 
Hrs. Mins. 

Steaming to 20 lbs. pressure 30 

Steaming, 20 to 35 lbs. pressure 3 30 

Blowing off steam 15 

"Vacuum 45 

Creosote to 100 lbs. pressure 1 30 

Forcing back solution 15 

Vacuum 30 

Total cycle 7 15 

If the steaming time is reduced 2 hrs., then the total cycle equals 
5 hrs. 15 mins. 

Rueping Process. — This is often referred to as a partial cell 
treatment and it is used principally in connection with creosote 
oil. It consists of forcing compressed air into the pores or cells 
of wood and at a higher pressure creosote oil without relieving the 
air pressure and upon relieving the combined pressure the air 
expands and forces out the surplus oil, leaving wood fibres im- 
pregnated. The wood is first air seasoned in the open or 
steamed in the retorts (sometimes both) to reduce the moisture; 
with compressed air and by air equalizing reservoirs or pumps 
the retorts are filled with oil without releasing the air pressure. 
The oil pressure is thus started at from 80 to 100 lbs. per sq. in. 
and gradually increased to about 100 to 150 lbs. per sq. in., 
having the effect of compressing the air in the cells to a smaller 
volume and permitting about 10 to 12 lbs. of creosote per cubic foot 
to enter. The pressure is then released and the oil drained from 
the retorts ; then a vacuum is produced, which causes the air within 
the cells to expand and forces the surplus oil out of the wood, 
leaving the wood fibres impregnated with from 4 to 6 lbs. of 
creosote per cubic foot. This process Is best adapted for treat- 
ment of ties. The approximate time required using equalizing 
cylinders is: 

Hrs. Mins. 

Air to 80 lbs. pressure 30 

Transferring oil 20 

Creosote to 150 lbs. pressure 1 30 

Maintaining 150 lbs. pressure 15 

Forcing back oil 20 

Vacuum 1 

Maintaining vacuum 15 

Draining i ® 10 

Total cycle 4 20 

This time is based on thoroughly air seasoned ties. 
Lowry Process. — This is often referred to as a partial cell treat- 
ment and it is used in connection with creosote oil. It consists of 
forcing creosote oil into the wood cells and then drawing out by 
vacuum the surplus oil, leaving only the wood fibres impregnated. 
The wood is first air seasoned in the open, then placed in retorts 
and submerged in creosote. The pressure is then applied by 



960 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

forcing in additional creosote of 10 to 12 lbs. per cu. ft. at about 
180 lbs. pressure so as to saturate the pores and cells, after which 
the retort is drained and a quick vacuum is produced and main- 
tained from 1% to 2 hrs., leaving the wood fibres impregnated with 
from 4 to 6 lbs. of creosote per cubic foot. This process is used 
principally in the treatment of ties. The approximate time re- 
quired is: 

Ties thoroughly seasoned : Hrs. Mins. 

Creosote to 180 lbs. pressure 2 00 

Draining oil from retort 10 

Vacuum 2 00 

Draining 10 

Total cycles about 4 20 

Card Process. — This process consists of impregnating the wood 
cells with an emulsion consisting of zinc chloride and creosote 
oil, as follows: The wood is first air seasoned in the open or 
steamed in the retorts (generally both) to reduce the moisture and 
expel the sap. Then a vacuum is produced and maintafned for 1 
hr., when the retort is filled with the hot emulsion consisting of i^ 
lb. of dry zinc and from 1% to 4 lbs. of creosote per cubic foot. 
The pressure is then applied by forcing in additional emulsion at 
about 100 to 150 lbs. pressure per square inch, after which the 
retort is drained and a vacuum produced and maintained for about 
30 min. to draw the surplus emulsion from the exterior of the 
wood to prevent loss by drippage when wood is removed from 
retort. 

It is necessary to keep the emulsion constantly agitated to 
prevent a separation of the zinc and creosote and to accomplish 
this a centrifugal pump draws the emulsion from top of retorts 
and discharges into the bottom of the perforated pipe. 

This process is used principally in the treatment of ties. The 
approximate time required is: 

Hrs. Mins. 

Steaming to 20 lbs. pressure 30 

Steaming, 20 to 35 lbs. pressure 3 30 

Blowing of£ steam 10 

Vacuum 1 00 

Emulsion to 120 lbs. pressure 1 00 

Maintaining 120 lbs. pressure 1 30 

Forcing back oil 15 

Vacuum 20 

Draining 10 

Total cycle about 8 25 

If the steaming time is reduced 2 hrs., then the cycle equals 6 
hrs. 25 mins. If ties are thoroughly seasoned this time can be 
reduced to 4 hrs. 25 mins. 

Cost of Treatment. — The prevailing rates for treating material 
with these processes depend upon locality, structure of wood, con- 
dition of wood ; that is, whether it has been air seasoned or requires 
steaming, residual impregnation and quality to be treated ; however, 
it is safe to assume that the following is an average rate when 
taking creosote at $0.07 per gal. and zinc chloride at $0.04 per lb. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWOKK. 961 

Per Per 

7 X 9-in. X 8-ft. 1,000 ft. 

Process. tie. B. M. 

Burnettizing Mi lb. zinc chloride per cu. ft. .$0.17 $4.10 

Wellhouse, etc 0.23 5.50 

Card 0.26 6.10 

Rueping 0.32 7.60 

Lowry 0.32 7.60 

Absorption 0.33 7.80 

Full cell 0.47 11.15 

Cost of Creosoting and Life of Creosoted Timber. — Mr. O. T. Dunn 
gives the following data: Creosoting costs $15 to $20 per M. 
Assuming that two 6-ft. cylinders 100 ft. long are used, the capacity 
of each cylinder is 16,800 ft. B. M. The total plant will cost, say, 
$80,000. If the timbers are to be impregnated with 20 lbs. of 
creosote per cu. ft., it will take about 36 hrs. for a run, and the 
annual capacity of the plant will be nearly 7,000 M. If the Interest 
and depreciation of the plant is assumed at 10% we have $8,000 h- 
7,000 = $1.14 per M. chargeable to this item. The labor will cost 
about $3.75 per M. If the oil costs 8 cts. per gal., and 20 lbs. 
be used per cu. ft., the cost of oil is $15.33 per M. This makes 
a total of $20.22 per M. If 16 lbs. of oil per cu. ft. are used, the 
cost of oil is $10.26 per M., thus reducing the total cost by $5. 
If the plant is not worked to its full capacity, the interest charge 
per M. becomes greater. 

Treated with 20 lbs. of oil per cu. ft., piles in the bridge of the 
L. & N. R. R., over the mouths of the Pascagoula river, have 
been in the structure 28 years, and will be good for many years to 
come. These piles are subject to attacks of the teredo, where 
uncreosoted piles 1% ft. in diameter have been cut off by the 
teredo in a single year. 

Beech ties impregnated with 12 lbs. of oil per cu. ft. have lasted 
30 years on the Eastern Railway of France. 

Mr. Dunn underestimates the "plant charges," for while 10% for 
interest and depreciation, may be ample, it does not provide for 
current repairs. No data are available to determine what repairs 
will amount to, but I should put the item at less than another 
10% of the first cost of the plant, excluding land and buildings. 

Cost of Creosoting Ties. — Mr. W. H. Knowlton gives the follow- 
ing relative to a tie creosoting plant at Shirley, Ind. Ties are 
first seasoned 8 to 12 mos., then loaded on "buggies," 55 ties per 
buggy, running on 30-in. gage track made of 52 lb. rails., and 
hauled in trains of 15 buggies by an electric motor. There are 
200 buggies. Two retorts, 7 ft. diam. X 130 ft. long, receive these 
trains of ties, hence each retort holds 800 ties. The boilers are 
rated at 200 hp. The following force is required to work one 
shift : 

1 man at the boilers. 

1 headman in retort house. 

3 assistants. 

15 laborers to handle ties. 

1 machinist. 



962 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

When working at full capacity, two shifts are run. The laborers 
receive % ct. for each tie handled. 

Each tie receives about 2% gals, of oil, costing 6 cts. per gal. 
(in 1906), and having a specific gravity of 1.02 to 1.07, averaging 
1.05%. A chemist analyzes all oil. The charge for tie treating is 
30 cts. per tie, including loading and unloading ties. This plant 
cost about $75,000. Working only one shift per day, and allowing 

5 hrs. for treatment of ties, the two retorts would handle 3,200 
ties per day, or about 900,000 per year. Mr. Kn owl ton does not 
give the output but states that ties are left in the retort 3^^ to 

6 hrs. 

Cost of a Zinc Chloride Treating Plant. — A zinc chloride tie treat- 
ing plant was built in 1902 at Carbondale, 111., for the Ayer & 
Lord Tie Co. It has 8 cylinders or retorts, 6 ft. diam X 125 ft. 
long, and the plant capacity is 2,000,000 ties per year, or 250,000 
per retort. Each cylinder holds 14 iron cars, each with 30 to 40 
ties, or about 500 ties. The buildings are of brick. The main 
building is 115 X 123 ft, the retort room being 90 X 123 ft. The 
boiler house contains six tubular boilers 6 X 18 ft. The total cost 
of the plant is said to have been $175,000, exclusive of yards and 
tracks. This is equivalent to about $22,000 per retort, including 
buildings, etc., or about 90 cts. is invested in the plant per tie 
treated annually. See the section on Railways for other data on 
zinc chloride plant costs. 

Ties Treated With Crude Asphaltic Oil. — On the A. T. & S. F. 

Ry. some seasoned pine ties were impregnated (in 1902) with 
California crude oil under a pressure of 150 lbs. per sq. in. Each 
tie took up 4 to 8 gals, of oil containing 77%% of asphaltum. 
After 5 years of service they were in first class condition, although 
untreated ties in the same locality (Southeastern Texas) lasted 
only 2 to 4 years on account of the heat and moisture. 

General Data on the Cost of Framing and Erecting Timber, — A 
study of the data given in the subsequent pages of this section and 
in the sections on Buildings and on Railways will show that it 
seldom needs cost more than $10 per M. to frame and erect almost 
any kind of a timber structure. In fact $10 per M. is generally 
used by many contractors as a basis for a rough estimate of the 
labor cost of any timber work. Nevertheless, it should not be 
hastily assumed that labor on timberwork does not vary con- 
siderably in cost, depending on the character of the work. While 
it will rarely exceed $10 per M. under good management, it may 
often be done for as little as $1, and I have, in fact, had men 
lay plank roads for 50 cts. per M. These very low costs are 
obviously obtained only where there is no framing, measuring, 
or sawing, but simply handling and spiking the timber. Even in 
such simple cases, a little poor naanagement may run the cost up 
to $2 or $3 per M. 

I have made no mention of the rate of wages, for the cost per 
M. has been almost independent of rates of carpenters' wages. 
This seems incredible, but I find it to have been so, as a general 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 003 

rule. Railway companies in America have long paid about $2.50 
per 10 hr. day to carpenters in shops and on bridge and building 
work. Contractors doing similar work often pay carpenters $3.00 
to even $3.50 per 8 hr. day, and get the work done at less cost 
per M. than do the railway companies. The reason is not far to 
seek. By a process of natural selection the hard working, ambitious 
carpenters are soon found where higher wages prevail, and their 
hard work justifies the higher wage. It is the old story. Of 
course, it is also a fact that the average contractor is a much 
better manager than the average railway superintendent. That is 
why the one is a contractor and the other is a superintendent. 
This is not true of all individuals, but it is true of the classes taken 
as classes. The workman is usually worthy of his hire. 

It does not follow, however, that labor unions may not force up 
wages without likewise forcing up the output of the workmen. 
This unfortunate condition — unfortunate, because it is against 
the best ultimate interests of the workmen themselves — exists in 
many cities. 

Nor does it follow that it is not good economics to use common 
laborers as much as possible in heavy timber work. The usual 
mistake in management of timberwork is to let high priced car- 
penters do loading, carrying, cross-cut sawing, etc., which can be 
done just as well by common laborers. 

Cost of Loading and Hauling Timber. — One man, assisted by the 
driver of a team, will load 1 M. of 2 -in. plank onto a wagon in 
about 16 mins. These same two men will unload in 12 mins. With 
wages at 15 cts. per hr. per man, the cost of loading is 8 cts. per 
M., and unloading is 6 cts. per M. On short hauls, where the team 
is idle during the loading and unloading, it is necessary to add 7 
cts. more per M. for lost team time, if the two horses are worth 
15 cts. per hr. This makes a total of 21 cts. per M. for loading 
and unloading a wagon, including lost team time. Green timber 
weighs from 3 lbs. to 5 lbs. per ft. B. M., depending upon the 
kind. Assuming 4 lbs., as an average illustration, we see that 1 M. 
weighs 2 tons, which is a good load for hard earth roads in first- 
class condition. If the wages of a team and driver are 30 cts. 
per hr., and the load is 1 M., and the speed going and coming is 
2% miles per hr., the cost of hauling is nearly 25 cts. per M. 
per mile measured one way from loading point to unloading point. 
On muddy earth roads, 1 ton, or % M. is often a good load ; then 
the cost of hauling is nearly 50 cts. per M. per mile. I have known 
earth roads to be so bad that hauling cost 75 cts. per M. per mile. 
Consult the index under "Hauling" for further data. 

The cost of unloading timber from wagons can be entirely 
eliminated by having a roller 3 ft. long (or two 18 ins. long) at 
the rear end of the wagon box, and by tilting the wagon box 
up so that its front end is, say, 2 ft. higher than the rear end. 
The roller is provided with a ratchet wheel and a dog. Where 
the dog is tripped the timber rolls out of the wagon by gravity, 
if long sticks are on the wagon. If sticks are short, other rollers 



964 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

must be placed in the bottom of the wagon box. All rollers are 
mounted in bearings, of course. 

Sawing, Boring and Adzing. — In heavy timberwork the cost of 
framing consists mainly in sawing, boring and adzing the sticks. 
Where a large number of sticks are to be sawed to the same 
length it generally pays to install a small power saw ; but on 
jobs of moderate size the customary practice is to frame the 
timbers with a cross-cut saw operated by two men. Using a sharp 
saw and working rapidly two men can cross-cut a 12 X 12-in. oak 
stick in 3 mins., but it is generally safer to allow 5 mins. to 
cover delays. 

When a timber is to be notched, or scarfed, a cross-cut saw is 
used to cut to the bottom of the scarf, then a hatchet or adz is 
used to cut away the wood roughly, and an adz is used to dress 
the face. I have seen poor foremen permit workmen to use 
chisels instead of adzes, thus "making the job last." 

A "dap" is a shallow notch cut in a stick. 

Mortise and tenon joints are no longer used by those who know 
how to design economic and durable timber structures. Dowel 
pins and drift-bolts have largely replaced the old mortise and 
tenon. 

In boring holes for bolts, there are three methods commonly used : 
( 1 ) Boring by hand with ship augers ; ( 2 ) boring vertical or in- 
clined holes of moderate depth with hand-power boring machines ; 
and (3) boring with augers operated by compressed air. 

A man with a ship auger will bore a 1%-in. hole in oak, 12 ins. 
deep in 5 mins, or at the rate of 120 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Using a geared boring machine, a man will bore a 1-in. hole 
12 ins. deep in 2 mins., by hand, or at the rate of 300 ft. in 10 hrs. 

With a pneumatic auger a man will bore a 1-in. hole 3% ft. 
deep, in yellow pine chord members of a trestle, in 5 mins. of 
actual boring time, but 2 mins. more must be added for cleaning 
the shavings out of the hole, and moving to the next hole, making 
7 mins. in all for 3% ft., or 2 mins. per ft., or at the rate of 300 
ft. in 10 hrs. 

This is the most economic method of boring where much work is 
to be done. For cost of operating pneumatic machines, see index 
under Pneumatic Machines. 

Mr. W. E. Smith states that in building an ore dock three 
pneumatic boring machines were used. The air was supplied by 
two 9-in. Westinghouse locomotive air pumps, through 1,200 ft. of 
1%-in. pipe in one direction of the dock and through 1,000 ft. of 
1%-in. pipe in another direction to the framing yard. For air 
receivers there were one locomotive air reservoir on the dock and 
one in the framing yard. The air pumps had to work so fast to 
supply air that a stream of water had to be kept running over 
their valves to keep them cool. It would require a 20 hp. boiler to 
supply steam for one of the air pumps working at such a speed. 
While these air pumps use a good deal of steam, they are very 
convenient, for they are light, easily moved and can be bolted up 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 965 

anjrwher© to a wall or post. The pneumatic borers were run with 
a pressure of 60 to 90 lbs., and gave great satisfaction. 

In the following paragraphs will be found a statement that in. 
boring by hand, each man averaged 80 ft. of hole per day bored 
through trestle stringers, presumably % or 1-in. holes, averaging 
less than 8 ins. deep. 

For cost of boring deep holes lengthwise in oak piles, see the 
index under "Timber Boring." 

In boring %-in. holes with a ship auger through 12-ln. Douglas 
fir, a man will ordinarily take 3 mins., which is at the rate of 
200 ft. in 10 hrs. 

Transporting Timber Short Distances. — Never allow carpenters 
to handle any considerable amount of timber. Provide common 
laborers for loading, carrying, etc. Rarely should men carry 
timbers on their shoulders or with lug hooks. Instead, lay run 
plank over which the timber can be pushed on a dolly, which is a 
little roller provided with a frame on which the timber is balanced. 
Often two dollies are used, one at each end of the timber. Even 




"^7 



Z?a//y 



Fig. 1. — Dolly with Handle. 

if the timber is light boards, do not permit carrying, but require 
the boards to be stacked up on dollies. 

I have found it advantageous to provide each dolly with a 
handle, as shown in Fig. 1. Then one man walks ahead pulling the 
front dolly by its handle, while another man follows at the rear 
pushing the handle of the rear dolly. The men walk tandem along 
the run plank until the place of delivery is reached ; then, if it 
is a wooden bridge floor, they swing the rear end of the stick 
around (still on the dolly) and dump the plank right where it is 
needed by the carpenters. In loading such plank onto dollies, each 
mart uses a lug hook. A 4 X 12 in. X 20 ft. plank weighed 250 lbs. 
Two men loaded, hauled, a distance of 60 ft., and delivered one 
plank every 1% mins., or at the rate of more than 30 M. per 10 hr. 
day, or about 45 tons of lumber were loaded and transported 60 ft. 
by two men. A heavier load could readily have been handled on 
the dollies, but one plank at a time was more economic, since the 
carpenters were thus relieved of all work except spiking. In that 
connection I may add that each plank was pinched up tight against 
the last plank in the floor by a man using a peavey. Another man 
started each spike with an ordinary hammer, and two men drove the 
spikes with spike mauls. 



966 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Formulas for Quantity of Materials In Trestles. — ^I have deduced 
the following formulas from bills of materials of standard trestles 
on the Northern Pacific Ry. 

High frame trestles are built in stories 25 ft. high. The follow- 
ing formulas give the amount of timber in a single-track frame 
trestle of any given height up to 125 ft. 

(1) M = L (220 + GH) for trestles up to 25 ft. high. 

(2) M = L (240 + 8iT) for trestles 25 to 50 ft. high. 

(3) M = L (240 + dH) for trestles 50 to 75 ft. high. 

(4) M = L (240 + lOfl") for trestles 75 to 125 ft. high. 
M — total ft. B. M. 

L = length of trestle in feet. 

H = height from ground to 4 ft. below base of rail. 
There are 164 ft. B. M. in the timber deck per lin. ft. of bridge, 
but the above formulas include this deck timber. 

There are 70 lbs. of wrought iron and 30 lbs. of cast iron per 
1,000 ft. B. M. of deck and half that amount per M. of bents. 
Hence 
(.5) W = L (20 + OAH) for trestles up to 75 ft. high. 

W = weight of iron in pounds, 70% of which is wrought and 
30% cast iron. 
For closely approximate estimates determine the profile area 
of an opening that is to be trestled, calculating the area (A) from 
the ground up to a line 4 ft. below the rail. Divide this area 
(A) by the length (L) of the trestle, and the quotient is the 
average height (JT). If it is desired to estimate quantities by 
profile area (A) direct, simply substitute for H in the above 

A 
equations its value — . 
L 
Equation (1) then becomes 
(6) M = 220 1/ + 6A. 

This has the same general form as my formula for the weight 
of steel in viaducts, which is given in the section on Bridges. 

For pile trestles, four piles per bent (bents 16 ft. c to c) and 
assumed penetration and cut off of pile amounting to 20 ft., we have 
H-j- 20 

(7) P = XL. 

4 

(8) 31 = 185 L for heights up to 15 ft. 

(9) M = 200 L for heights of 15 to 25 ft. 
(10) W = 16 L. 

P = number of lin. ft. of piles. 

H = height of trestle in feet from ground to 4 ft. below rail. 
L = length of trestle in feet. 
M = ft. B. M. 

W = weight of iron in pounds, 40% of which is wrought, 
30% cast, and 30% galvanized. 
The above formulas (1) to (4) for frame trestles are sufficiently 
accurate for all but very short trestles, but they give an excess 
of timber equivalent to the amount in one bent. 



PILING. TRESTLING. TIMBERWORK. 967 

The formulas for pile trestles, however, provides for one bent 
fewer than is usually driven, for it is customary to drive an extra 
bent at each end to act as a bullthead, and about 10 planks 
(4 X 12 ins. X 12 ft.) are placed as a sheeting back of each of 
these pile bulkheads, to hold back the earth fill. Hence one bent 
of 4 piles and about 500 ft. B. M. of bulkhead timber should be 
added to the quantities given by equations (7) and (8) for pile 
trestles, to be exact. 

In the section on Bridges, it will be found that the average 
height of trestles on the Great Northern and on the Northern 
Pacific Rys. in Washington was a little less than 20 ft. In which 
case H — 1^, and eq. (1) gives us 

M = (220 + 96) = 316 ft. B. M. per lin. ft. 

TF = (20 + 6.4) = 26.4 lbs. iron. 

Hence at $30 per M. for timber in place and 4 cts. per lb. for 
iron in place, the cost is $10.55 per lin. ft. of trestle. 

The following is the bill of lumber in a Northern Pacific pile 
trestle per 16 ft. length. 

Ft. B. M. 

6 stringers, 9 x 18-in. x 16-ft 1,296 

3 packing blocks, 4 x 18-in. x 6-ft 108 

1 spacing block, 4 x 6-in. x 6-ft 12 

14 cross ties, 8 x 8-in. x 12-ft 896 

2 guard rails, 5 x 8-In. x 16-ft 107 

1 cap, 12 X 16-in. x 14-ft 224 

2 lateral braces, 6 x 8-in. x 18-ft 144 

1 cleat, 2 x 8-in. x 10-ft 14 

2 sway braces, 3 x 10-in. x 20-ft 100 

Total 2,901 

This is practically the constant for heights {H) up to 15 ft, and 
is equivalent to 185 ft. B. M. per lin. ft. But above that height is 
customary to put a horizontal brace midway between the cap and 
the ground, and use four diagonal sway braces instead of two. 

Methods and Cost of Building a Railway Trestle. — A trestle on 
the Indiana, Illinois & Iowa R. R., near Streator, 111., was destroyed 
by a tornado in July, 1903. The right-of-way was quickly cleared 
by a large gang of trackmen and a new trestle built, using about 
half of the old timber, all of which had to be framed over again as 
the bents were made of different heights. The new trestle was 
854 ft. long, consisting of 60 bents spaced 14 ft. center to center. 
Of these bents 43 were double-deck bents, the upper bents being 
20% ft. high, and the lower bents averaging 21 ft. The remaining 
bents were single-deck. The force averaged 70 bridgemen (car- 
penters), and 190 trackmen (laborers), and a few teams. This 
force cleared away the wreckage, and built the new trestle com- 
plete in 7 days, not including ll^ days spent in getting men to 
the site of the work. There were 351,000 ft. B. M. in the new 
trestle, including ties, and the cost of clearing the site and building 
the trestle was $11.85 per M. for labor of bridgemen, trackmen and 
a few teams. The wages were probably about $1.50 per 10-hr. day 
for trackmen, and $2.50 for bridgemen. The new timber cost $27 
per M 



968 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The mortise and tenon is "a back number" on railway trestle 
work, so the principal tools used were the two-man cross-cut saw, 
the adz, and the ship auger. The sills were dapped %-in., and 
the ends of the posts were framed to 11% ins. square, ensuring a 
perfect joint. 

The posts were sawed off square, dapped into the cap and drift- 
bolted, toenailed to the sill with eight %-in. X 10-in. boatspikes in 
each post. 

A peg was driven and numbered to mark the center of each bent, 
and small stakes were set on each side to mark the location of the 
plumb legs and batter posts. The ground was then dug to a level 
surface around each of the four pegs, but no particular care was 
taken to dig the ground to the same level at all four pegs. Dif- 
ferences in level were made up by using blocks for cribbing under 
the sills. These blocks were leveled on top by digging earth out 
from under them, where necessary, which did away with adzing or 
shimming the sill. The blocks under each bent consisted of eight 
pieces 4 ft. long, two blocks under each post, giving a ground bear- 
ing of about 45 sq. ft. per bent. 

When a foundation of blocking and the lower sill were in place, 
the posts and cap for a bent were dragged by teams to the site of 
the bent and rolled over into position just ahead of the foundation. 
The sill was rolled over on its side ; the plumb posts were butted 
against the dapped places and toenailed, being centered from the 
grading pegs. The batter posts were laid near their proper places 
(but not toenailed), and the cap was drift bolted to all four posts, 
holes having already been bored in the cap. The cap and sill were 
held tight to the plumb post with chains and with "right and left 
screw-pulling jacks." Then the batter posts were crowded in at 
the bottom and toenailed to the sill. The bent being assembled, 
one sash brace and two sway braces were spiked across the upper 
face of the bent as it lay blocked up a few feet above the ground. 
Four %-in. X 8-in. boat spikes were used at each intersection. 
The bent was then ready to be raised. A set of double tackle blocks 
was made fast at each end of the cap and anchored to the cap of 
the preceding bent which had already been erected and securely 
braced. The pulling ropes ran through snatch blocks fastened to 
the sill of this preceding bent, and a team was hitched to each 
of the two pulling ropes. The team up-ended the bent easily. 
A subbing rope around the cap, and anchored to any convenient 
anchorage, prevented the bent from going too far and tipping over. 
And two temporary struts from the sill of the preceding bent to the 
sill of the bent that was being raised, prevented the bent from 
sliding while being raised. When erected, the bent was pinched 
over so as to be centered on the alinement stake ; then plumbed and 
tied to the preceding bent with sash braces and sway braces. The 
bents were plumbed by eye, or by lining the posts up with a plumb 
line string held at arm's length. It was necessary to plumb the 
bent from both sides. A small gang followed the erectors, putting 



PILING, T REST LING, TIMBERWORK. 969 

on the remaining sasli braces, sway braces, tower braces and 
A-braces. 

Teams were used for hoisting the framed timbers for the top 
series of bents, from tlie ground to the top of the lower series of 
bents, where they were assembled and erected practically as above 
described. To hoist the timbers for the top series of bents, a gin- 
pole was erected. The gin-pole was 40 ft. high, and consisted of two 
3 X 12-ln. pieces, 28 ft. long, with another piece spiked between 
them so as to give a total length of 40 ft. This gin-pole was 
securely chained to one of the lower bents. At first a series 
of snatch blocks was used in hoisting the timbers, but this proved 
too severe on the teams and double blocks were used to multiply the 
power. 

The 8 X 16-in. stringers were run out on the trestle on dollies 
pushed along run planks. They required but little framing. The 
ends were cut off so that the joint came over the middle of the cap, 
and the end of any stringer more than 15 1^ ins. deep was adzed 
off to that size, to give an even bearing for the ties. The stringers 
were then turned over flatwise, and piled three deep (breaking 
joint) and bored. Then they were lifted apart and 2-in. cast iron 
packing washers slipped in between, and the bolts were entered and 
tightened. Sections of stringers 200 to 300 ft. long were bolted 
together, and then turned over into position. To turn a section 
over, a stout lever, 10 ft. long, was chained to one end of the 
section. A set of double blocks and tackle fastened to the end of 
this lever quickly turned the section over. 

In boring the holes through the stringers each man averaged 
80 ft. of holes bored per day, that is 40 holes 2 ft. long. 

The ties were hoisted from the ground by teams, using gin-poles. 

The foregoing description has been prepared from data given by 
Mr. W. R Sanborn. 

Cost of a Timber Viaduct. — Mr. S. D. Mason gives the following 
data relating to a high timber viaduct on the N. P. R. R. in the 
Rocky Mts., near Missoula. The viaduct contained 970 M. of Nor- 
way pine, 75% of which was sawed by contract and the rest hewed. 
The saw mill was put up near the work and all the timber was 
framed at the mill. The viaduct was 866 ft. long, and 227 ft. 
high for a distance of about 150 ft. at the center. It consisted of 
8 timber towers supporting 7 Howe truss spans of 50 ft. each. On 
each side of these were M bents supporting straining beams of 30 
ft. span each. The timbers were erected by 2 to 4 gangs of 16 
men each, a stick at a time. The heaviest stick weighed 1,700 lbs. 
Both hors« and steam power were used for hoisting. The chords 
of the Ho;ve trusses consisted of two 6 X 12's and one 8 X 12. 
They were placed and the diagonal braces put in, beginning at the 
center, the chords being temporarily held by struts and guy lines. 
It was found impracticable to raise the trusses bodily. Fir angle 
blocks were used, but their subsequent shrinkage led finally to 
the building of new Howe trusses. Work was begun Jan. 1, 1882, 
and completed in 171 days. Laborers and carpenters received 



970 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

exceedingly high wages, $6 to $7.50 a day, which accounts for the 
high cost of $37 per M. for framing and erecting. At ordinary 
wages the labor would have cost about $12 per M. The erecting 
gangs struck for $10 a day when within 30 ft. of the top, and 
their wages were raised, but it is not stated how much. The fol- 
lowing was the cost of the viaduct : 

869 M., at $27 $23,463 

101 M., at $16 1,616 

87,120 lbs. wrought iron, at 5% cts 5,010 

29,940 lbs. cast iron, at 3 i/i cts 973 

117,060 lbs. hauled 80 miles, at 2% cts.. 3,220 

Wages of carpenters and laborers 36,336 

Salaries of engineers 3,137 

Traveling, office and sundry expenses 1,007 

Supplies for men 2,860 

Blocks, ropes, chains and wrenches 1,300 

40 horses, 90 days, at $1 3,600 

Hay and oats for same 2,700 

Rent of land and land damages 400 

Total, at $88.27 per M $85,622 

Cost of Building a Pile and Timber Approach to a Bridge Mr. B. 

L. Crosby gives the following cost data on the building of a timber 
trestle approach, 2,960 ft. long, to a double track bridge across the 
Missouri River, in 1893. The trestle was built by company men. 
In the trestle there were 1,438 M of yellow pine, 35,220 ft. of piles, 
and 97,552 lbs. of iron (70 lbs. per M of timber). The cost of un- 
loading, handling and driving piles, including all material and labor 
(except the cost of the piles themselves) was 13.7 cts. per lin. ft. 
The cost of unloading, framing and erecting timber, was $7.42 per M. 

Cost of Building a Trestle and a Howe Truss Bridge Under 
Traffic. — An old railway trestle was rebuilt under a traffic averaging 
one train per hour. The trestle was 300 ft. long and 50 ft. high at 
the center. The labor of rebuilding this trestle cost $9.90 per M, 
including taking down and piling up the old trestle timbers. There 
were 5 men and a working foreman in the gang; 2 men at $2 a day 
each, 3 men at $1.75, and 1 foreman at $60 a month. 

This same gang built a Howe truss railway bridge under traffic 
at a cost of $2 8 per M for labor. The cost of framing and placing 
30 M of oak ties and guard rails on three bridges was $12 per M, 
which was a very high cost. For comparative data see the section 
on Bridges. 

Cost of Wagon Road Trestles. — My records show the following 
costs of building a dozen or more trestles in the state of Washington. 
The trestles were for highway use, and had a 3-in. plank floor, 16 ft. 
wide, resting on 7 lines of 4 x 14-in. stringers. Bents were spaced 
20 ft. apart, three 10 x 10-in. posts to a bent dapped into and dow- 
eled to caps and sills. Sills were of hewed cedar 10x15 ins. Caps 
were 10 x 12 ins. x 18 ft. Sway braces were of 3 x 6-in. stuff spiked 
to the posts and sill. The supports for the hand rail consisted of 
4 x 4-in. posts, 4% ft. long, spaced 10 ft. apart and bolted to the 
outer stringers which in turn were drift bolted to the caps. The 
top or hand rail was of 3 x 4-in. stuff, and the hub rail was 2x8 ins. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 971 

There was no mortise and tenon work, and the framing was of the 
simplest type. The bents were framed flat on the ground and up- 
ended to place by using blocks and tackle operated by hand power. 
The flooring and stringers were conveyed to place by dollies. The 
work was done by subcontractors witli few carpenters, and in all 
cases was handled with excellent judgment and with rapidity. 

To frame and erect a trestle 60 ft. long, consisting of two bents 
and two bank sills, required 4 men only li^ days. This trestle 
contained 7 M, of which 5 M were in the floor system (floor and 
stringers). Three of the gang were laborers, at $1.50, and one was 
a carpenter, at $2.50, making the daily wages $7 for the gang, so 
that the cost of building this trestle was only $1.50 per M. This 
cost was distributed as follows: $4 per M for framing and erect- 
ing the bents and the hand railing; 50 cts. per M for laying the 
stringers and the floor plank. This laying of stringers and plank, 
where there is nothing to do but to deliver them on dollies, toenail 
the stringers to the caps, and spike the floor plank to the stringers, 
can be done very cheaply by common laborers skilled enough to 
drive nails. 

It is not necessary to notch the stringers in order to secure align- 
ment of the tops of the stringers for the plank floor, because in 
such timberwork perfection of alignment causes a needless waste 
of labor. 

A gang of 3 laborers, on another trestle, laid a floor system con- 
taining 15 M of plank and stringers in 1% days, at a cost of 50 cts. 
per M. 

On another trestle 260 ft. long, it took 4 men 3 days to lay 23 M 
of stringers and plank in the floor system, at a cost of nearly $1 per 
M. These men were much slower. 

On another piece of road work, where we used round timber for 
the posts and sills, a gang of 9 men and a team cut and delivered 
all the necessary timber from the forest, erected and sway braced 
the bents of three trestles, having a total length of 440 ft. in 12 
days. There were 7 framed bents, 12 pile bents (36 piles 20 ft. long, 
driven 5 ft.), and 6 mud sills in these 3 trestles. The piles were 
driven with a small horsepower pile driver. Seven of these men 
were laborers, two were carpenters and bosses. The timber in the 
bents was not accurately measured to determine the number 'of 
board feet, but the approximate cost, including the piles, was less 
than $16 per M for the bents. The cost of the sawed timber floor 
system was, of course, much less. I consider this an excellent rec- 
ord, and one not to be equalled except under the best foremanship 
and with willing, intelligent laborers. 

Cost of Trestles, Cross References. — For further data on trestles 
see particularly the section on Railways. Consult the index under 
"Timber, Trestles." 

Estimated Prices of Howe Truss Bridges. — The following were 
detailed estimates of cost at standard contract prices for building 
Howe truss single-track bridges in Washington (in 1906), according 



972 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to standard plans of the Northern Pacific Ry. All lengths are 
lengths over all. 

40 Ft. Pont Truss Bridge. 

15 M. timber at $16 + $2 frt. = $18 $ 270 

3,500 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts. deliv 105 

3,200 lbs. cast iron at 21/2 cts 80 

Total materials, $11.44 per lin. ft $ 455 

Labor and Falsework. 

Labor to frame and erect 15 M. at $15 $ 225 

12 piles (falsework) delivered at $3 36 

12 piles (falsework) driven at $2 24 

4 M. timber (falsework) second hand, at $6.... 24 
4 M. timber (falsework) erected and taken 

down, $10 40 

Miscellaneous expense 50 

Total labor and falsework, $10 per lin. ft $ 400 

Abutments. 

2 pile abutments at $250 $ 500 

100 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 150 

Total abutments, $16.25 per lin. ft $ 650 

Grand total at $37.50 per lin. ft 1,505 

60 Ft. Pony Truss Bridge. 
Materials. 

24 M. at $18 $ 432 

7,200 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 216 

6,800 lbs. cast iron at 21/2 cts 170 

Total materials, $13.60 per lin. ft $ 818 

Labor and Falsework. 

Labor and frame and erect 24 M. at $15 $ 360 

Falsework, materials and labor 200 

Total labor and falsework, $9.20 per lin. ft...$ 560 

Abutments. 

2 pile abutments, at $250 $ 500 

100 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 150 

Total abutments, $10.80 per lin. ft $ 650 

Grand total, $37.60 per lin. ft 2,028 

70 Ft. Pony Truss Bridge. 
Materials. 

29 M. at $18 $ 522 

10,300 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 309 

12,000 lbs. cast iron at 2 1/2 cts 300 

Total materials, $16.16 per lin. ft .$1,131 

Labor and Falsework. 

Labor to frame and erect 29 M. at $15 $ 435 

Falsework, materials and labor 225 

Total labor and falsework, $9.33 per lin. ft $ 660 

Abutments. 

2 abutments at $250 $ 500 

100 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 150 

Total abutments, $9.30 per lin. ft $ 650 

Grand total, $34.50 per lin. ft 2,416 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 973 

100 Ft. Through Bridge. 
Materials. 

51 M. at $18 $ 918 

21,600 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 648 

20,000 lbs. cast iron at 2 Ms cts 500 

Total materials, $20.60 per lin. ft $2,066 

Labor and Falsework. 
100 lin. ft. erected at $8 $ 800 

Abutments. 

2 abutments at $300 $ 600 

300 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 450 

Total abutments, $10.50 per lin. ft $1,050 

Grand total, $39.16 per lin. ft 3,916 

120 Ft. Through Bridge. 
Materials. 

63 M. at $18 $1,184 

28,500 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 855 

25,400 lbs. cast iron at 2 1/2 cts 635 

Total materials, $22.30 per Hq. ft $2,674 

Labor and Falsework. 
120 lin. ft. erected at $9 $1,080 

Abutments. 

2 abutments at $300 $ 600 

300 cu. yds. at $1.50 450 

Total abutments, $8.38 per lin. ft $1,050 

Grand total, $40 per lin. ft 4,804 

130 Ft. Through Bridge. 
Materials. 

72 M. at $18 $1,296 

34,000 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 1,020 

29,000 lbs. cast iron at 2 % cts 725 

Total materials, $23.40 per lin. ft $3,041 

Labor and Falsework. 
130 lin. ft. erected at $10 $1,300 

Abutm,ents. 

2 abutments at $300 $ 600 

300 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 450 

Total abutments, $8.1 per lin. ft $1,050 

Grand total, $41.50 per lin. ft 5,390 

150 Ft. Through Bridge. 
Materials. 

89 M. at $18 $1,502 

45,000 lbs. wrt. iron at 3 cts 1,350 

40,000 lbs. cast iron at 21/0 cts 1,000 

Total materials, $26.30 per lin. ft $3,852 

Labor and Falsework. 
150 lin. ft. erected at $12 $1,800 

Abutments. 

2 abutments at $350 $ 700 

300 cu. yds. riprap at $1.50 450 

Total abutments, $7.70 per lin. ft $1,150 

Grand total, $47.30 per lin. ft 7,102 

The standard pile abutment contains 14 piles for spans under 80 



974 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. . 

ft., 16 piles for 80 to 130-ft. spans, and 20 piles for 130 to 160-ft. 
spans. Obviously the cost of piles will vary with the length. It is 
customary to assume a 20-ft. penetration. In addition to the piles 
there were 2,500 to 4,000 ft. B. M. of timber per abutment, and 160 
lbs. of iron per M of this timber. 

It will be noticed that the cost of Howe truss bridges on pile abut- 
ments does not vary greatly per lin. ft. of span, the principal rea- 
son being that the abutments constitute so large a part of the cost. 

See the section on Bridges and on Railways. 

Cost of 160-ft. Span Howe Truss Bridges and Cribs. — In 1894 I 
designed, and built by contract, two highway teridges over different 
points on the Noaksack River, Washington. Each bridge had a 16-ft. 
roadway, a clear span of 160 ft., and a depth of truss of 30 ft. at 
the center. The bridge was designed to carry 100 lbs. per sq. ft. 
■of roadway. The trusses were a modified type of Howe truss, having 
upper chords that were not horizontal but sloped up from both end 
posts to an apex at the center, like a roof truss. This design very 
materially reduced the amount of iron, which was an important 
factor. Each chord was made of three parallel timbers, each 6 x 14 
ins., bolted together. Panels were 20 ft. long. The floor was of 
3-in. cedar plank, for lightness and durability. The rest of the tim- 
ber was Washington fir. The bridges rested on pile abutments, 
which were protected by log cribs filled with field-stones. Each 
bridge contained 40 M of timber, of which 23 M were in the trusses 
and braces, and 17 M in the floor system. 

No piles were driven for falsework, although the river was 4 to 6 
ft. deep and swift ; but two-post bents were put up just back of 
each panel point. Bents were made of round timber, and erected 
by first dropping into the water pairs of long-legged saw horses on 
each side of the proposed falsework, and laying run planks on the 
horses for men to walk on. A falsework can thus be built with 
great rapidity and cheaply, and in spite of the weight coming upon 
the posts of each bent the settlement in the gravel bottom was very 
slight, and easily taken up by wedges under the lower chords. There 
is always danger, however, that a sudden flood will undermine the 
falsework, and this happened at one of the bridges, causing it to fall 
during construction. 

No upper falsework, except a light staging at each end post and 
at the center, is needed with this type of truss, provided long sticks 
of timber can be secured; for with chord sticks 62 ft. long (in a 
bridge of this size) it is possible to lift, first one end, then the other, 
of the upper chord sticks and support them upon the light staging 
at each end, until the diagonal struts are placed. 

The trusses must be first framed and bolted together, flatwise 
on the ground, then unbolted and erected piece by piece. The tim- 
bers were pushed out onto the falsework on dollies, and lifted 
with block and tackle, using a gin-pole where necessary ; all this 
handling being by hand without a hoisting engine. Although the 
following record of low cost will be hard to equal, it serves to 
show what can be done with efficient labor under a good bridge 
foreman. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 975 

Cost of 160-Ft. Span Bridge. 

40 M. timber, at $7 on cars $ 280.00 

40 M. timber hauled 3 miles, at $2.50 100.00 

3,970 lbs. Iron rods; 662 lbs. bolts; 769 lbs. gib 
plates; 326 lbs. drift bolts; total 5,727 lbs., 

at 3^ cts 186.10 

14 cast iron angle blocks, 1,316 lbs., at 2% cts. 36.20 

613 cast iron washers, 613 lbs., at 21/2 cts 15.30 

Lag screws, nails, etc 9.90 

Freight on iron 14.50 

Total bridge materials delivered $ 642.00 

30 abutment piles, 30 ft. long, at 5 cts. per ft. 45.00 

Labor. 

Framing trusses, 6 carpenters 7 days, at $2.50. . $ 105.00 
Getting out timber for falsework and building 

driver 40.00 

Driving 30 piles, 6 men and 2 teams, 9 days. . 150.00 

Building two log cribs 75.00 

Erecting lower falsework, 8 men, 3 days 48.00 

Erecting bridge, 4 carpenters and 6 laborers, 7 

days 133.00 

Laying floor and handrails, 4 carpenters and 4 

laborers, 1 day 16.00 

Loading, hauling and placing 70 cu. yds. of 

field-stones in cribs (%-mile haul)... 70.00 

Total $ 637.00 

Foreman, at $4 per day 160.00 

Grand total labor on bridge and abutments..? 797.00 

Summary 

Bridge materials delivered $ 642.00 

Piles delivered 45.00 

Labor 637.00 

Foremanship 160.00 

Tools, ropes, etc. (one-half charged to each 

bridge) 100.00 

Total cost of one bridge and abutments. . . .$1,584.00 

This is less than $10 per lin. ft. of bridge. 

Deducting the cost of material and labor on the two pile abut- 
ments and their cribs, we have left, $1,200 as the cost of one bridge 
alone. 

If we analyze the labor we find that the wages of the foreman 
amounted to 20% of the total labor expenditure. This is a high 
percentage, but one often exceeded on small works of this char- 
acter where delays due to bad weather or lack of materials, add up 
very rapidly when the foreman is paid by the month for handling a 
small gang of men. 

It will be seen that the carpenter work of framing the 23 M 
(exclusive of the floor) cost $4.50 per M, to which should be added 
about $1.00 per M for foreman. Erecting the bridge (exclusive of 
17 M of floor) cost $133 after the falsework was built, or nearly $6 
per M (4 erectors being carpenters, at $2.50, and 6 laborers, a,t 
$1.50), to which should be added $1.50 for foreman. This makes a 
total of $10.50 per M for framing and erecting the 23 M in the 
bridge trusses, to which must be added $2.50 per M for foreman, 
and $2 more per M for erecting falsework, if we distribute the 



976 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

labor cost of erecting the falsework over the 23 M. The falsework 
cost must be estimated for every bridge separately. In this case it 
was unusually cheap. 

The cost of placing the 17 M of flooring on the bridge was less 
than $1 per M, for there was practically no sawing, iadzing or boring 
to be done — simply running the timber out to place on dollies, and 
spiking it. This seems an exceedingly low cost, but similar records 
will be found on other pages. Perhaps no better example will be 
found in this book to show the necessity of separating plain timber 
work from framed timberwork in analyzing timberwork costs. 

The cost of the pile driving was high per pile not only because the 
driving was very hard, but because of the small number of piles 
in each abutment, and because of the cost of moving across the 



^ .- — -^ 




Fig. 2. — Log Culvert. 

river and erecting staging for the driver to rest upon at each abut- 
ment. 

The cribs around the piles were made of hewn timber taken from 
the forest near by. Each crib averaged 6 ft. high, 10 ft. wide, and 
30 ft. long, containing about 6 M of timber. The cost of cutting this 
timber, hewing and erecting it, was $6 per M, wages of men being 
$2.50 a day. To this about $1.50 per M. should be added for fore- 
man. 

A third crib, built for another bridge abutment, was 10 ft. high, 
12 ft. wide, and 35 ft. long, containing about 12 M of hewed timber. 
It took 5 men 4 days, at $2.50, to cut the timber for and build this 
crib, which is equivalent to about $4 per M and to this $1 per M 
should be added for foreman. 

For actual cost of Howe truss railway bridges, see the section on 
Bridges. 

Cost of Log Culverts. — In building roads and railways through 
timbered country, it is generally good practice to build most of the 
culverts of logs. Log culverts are frequently floored with logs 
for the full length of the culvert, but they may be built with log sills 
spaced 4 ft. c. to c, and projecting 1 ft. beyond the walls, as indi- 
cated by the dotted lines in Fig. 2. 

The ends of a log culvert are stepped up, as in Fig. 3, 1 = L — 2D. 
Hence the "average length" is L — D. 

To estimate the lin. ft. of logs in a paved culvert like that in Fig. 
2, add 2 ft. to the inside horizontal dimension to get the length of 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 



977 



logs in pavement and in cover, which is 6 ft. in this case. Then 
double tliis length and add double the inside lieiglit ; tlie sum will 
be tlae total lineal feet of 12-in. logs per lin. ft. of "average length" 
of culvert. In a 2 x 4 culvert (Fig. 2), this gives (2X6) + (2X2) 
= 16 lin. ft. of logs. 

There are 0.3 lb. of %-in. drift bolts required per lin. ft. of logs 
(or 25 lbs. per M when squared timbers are used). 

The bidding price is usually about 12 cts. per lin. ft. of logs in 
place, plus 3 cts. per lin. ft. for hewing two sides, exclusive of the 
price for the iron. On the Great Northern Railway (517 miles) in 




Fig. 3. — Log Culvert. 

Washington, the average size log culvert was 3 x 3% x 43 ft., or 750 
lin. ft. of logs per culvert, and I estimated the average contract 
price in place to be : 

Per. lin. ft. logs. 

Logs in place $0.12 

Hewing 1% sides at 1% cts. per side 0.02 

0.33 lbs. iron drift bolts at 3 cts 0.01 

Excavating 0.04 cu. yds. at 25 cts 0.01 

Total $0.16 

See the sections on Railways and on Bridges. 

Materials Required for Timber Box Culverts. — Culverts made of 
sawed timber are usually designed much lighter than log culverts. A 
3 X 4-ft. opening will have wall pieces 8 ins. thick (8x12), cover 
8 ins. thick (8x12), subsills 4 ins. thick (4x12) spaced 4 ft., 
c. to c, and floor 2 ins. thick (2x12), making a total of 90 ft. 
B. M. per lin. ft., and requiring 25 lbs. of drift bolts per M. 

Cost of a Wooden Reservoir Roof on iron Posts. — ^A reservoir at 
Pasadena, Cal., was roofed over In 1899, at a remarkably low cost. 
I am indebted to Mr. T. D. Allin for the following data : The 
extreme dimensions of the reservoir were 330 x 540 ft., and 166,000 
sq. ft. were roofed. The roof was supported by 551 iron posts made 
of 2-in. water pipe, capped at the bottom and set in cement. On 
the top of each of these posts a wooden corbel, 6x6 ins. x 2 % ft.. 
Was fastened by boring a hole 4 ins. deep in the corbel and driving 
the pipe into the hole. Each post, about 20 ft. long, was up-ended 
by hand, after the corbel had been driven on, plumbed and tempo- 



978 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

rarily stay-lathed. Posts were spaced 15% and 18 ft. apart. Oh the 
posts were laid floor beams made of two 2 x 10-in. plank, overlapped 
at the ends and spiked together, forming a continuous beam 
4 X 10 ins. A gang of 7 men, using movable scaffolding for plac- 
ing and spiking these floor beams, averaged 1,500 ft. of floor 
beams per day. On these beams were laid 2 x 8-in. stringers, 
16 ft. long. The stringers were overlapped 4 ins. and spiked, and 
were spaced 6 ft. centers. On the stringers were laid 1 x 12-in. planks, 
forming the roof. These planks were cut to 12-ft., 18-ft. and 24-ft. 
lengths, the planks being laid in forms so as to facilitate accurate 
cutting without individual measurement of each plank. Similar 
forms were used for cutting the planks used in the floor-beantis.. The 
stringers did not require accurate cutting. All the timber was rough, 
merchantable Oregon pine. The cost of this roof, covering 166,000 
sq. ft., was as follows: 

260 M. Oregon pine, at $18.70 $4,862 " 

9,373 ft. of 2-in. pipe 987 

Nails and spikes 203 

Millwork on 551 corbels 27 

Cement for footings 6 

Engineering 151 

Labor, including superintendence 1,004 

Total, 166,000 sq. ft, at 4.36 cts $7,240 

It will be noted that the labor cost was about $4 per M. Mr. 
Allin informs me that about 75% of the work was done by laborers 
and 25% by carpenters. The laborers received $1.75 for 9 hrs., and 
the carpenters, $2.50 for 9 hrs. The work was done during hard 
times and quite a number of the laborers were really carpenters. 
Carpenters were used on the erection work and on work around the 
sides of the structure where neatness was required. 

More recently Mr. Allin has completed covering three more reser- 
voirs in a similar manner, the only change in design being the spac- 
ing of joists 4 ft. apart instead of 6 ft. He believes that the extra 
expense is justified because there is less warping of the boards. 
Wages are now (1905) $4 per 8 hrs. for carpenters, and §2 for 
laborers, and prices of materials are higher, so that it costs 6 cts. 
per sq. ft. to cover a reservoir. 

For other data on reservoir roofs see the section on Waterworks. 

Cost of a Crib Dam. — Mr. J. W. Woermann gives the following 
cost data for two crib dams across the north and the south chan- 
nels of Rock River, at the head of Carr's Island, near Milan, 111., 
built in 1894. The north dam is 598 ft. long; the south- dam, 764 ft. 
long. The two dams are connected by a levee 1,000 ft. long. The 
dams are on a rock foundation, and designed to withstand a head of 
4% ft. The dam is a crib of 6 x 8-in. pine timbers, with a rock 
filling. The main part of the dam is 13% ft. wide, with an apron 
6% ft. wide, making a total base of 20 ft. A filling of clay and 
quarry refuse is placed against the cribwork on the up-stream side. 
The main dam and the apron are covered with 4-In. oak plank, and 
the up-stream face of the dam with two rows of 2-in. pine sheet- 
piling. From the crest of the dam to the apron the fall is 3 ft. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 979 

An area below the north abutment was stripped for a quarry 
(June, 1894), and the 800 cu. yds. of stripping, togetlaer with 300 
cu. yds. of riprap, were used for cofferdams for the north dam. 
The cofferdams were made as follows: Cribs, 16 ft. square, were 
built in line, spaced 14 ft. apart. The cribs were built in shallow 
water by boring holes in the ends of each timber and dropping the 
timbers over long upright bolts at each corner of the crib. The 
top of these cribs was sheeted with 4-in. oak plank and weighted 
down with bags of sand. Timbers, 6 x 8-in., the ends of which were 
supported by adjacent cribs, were then shoved down into the water. 
This furnished a cofferdam 130 ft. long, and riprap and quarry strip- 
ping dumped against the face of the dam could not be washed away. 
The 4-in. oak plank was then removed and used in the permanent 
work. Subsequently the riprap, which was placed on the down- 
stream side of the cribs, was removed and used in the dam. The 
quarry stripping was placed on the up-stream side of the cribs. The 
areas enclosed by cofferdams were 50 to 200 ft. long, and were kept 
dry with hand pumps. The water in the river was so shallow that 
wagons were used to deliver all the materials used in both coffer- 
dams and main dams. 

The carpenter work on the south dam was begun Aug. 7 and fin- 
ished Aug. 22, working 8 hrs. a day, including Sundays. For this 
dam about 75% of the rock was quarried from the river bed without 
requiring explosives. During the construction of the coffer-dam for 
the south dam the force was 14 teams and 50 laborers (for a few 
rush days there were 130 laborers), and they were engaged from 
July 24 to Aug. 4. During the erection of the cribwork for the 
main dam (16 days) the force was 16 carpenters and 50 laborers, 
about one-third of the laborers assisting the carpenters in carrying 
timbers, boring, driving bolts and spikes. The number of teams 
was the same throughout the work. 

The total amount of timber in both dams was 330,190 ft. B. M., 
distributed thus : 

Feet B. M. 

North dam. South dam. 

Longitudinal timbers (pine) 47,230 73,550 

Transverse timbers (pine) 28,350 46,950 

Sheet piling timbers (pine) 7,950 14,610 

Plank in cooing (oak) 33,540 42,840 

Plank in apron (oak) 15,870 19,300 

Total 132,940 197,250 

The cost of the labor of putting this timber into the dams was 
$5.80 per M. 

The rock filling in the north dam is 1,240 cu. yds. ; in the south 
dam, 2,350 cu. yds. The iron used was: 

North dam. South dam. 

Anchor bolts, lbs 1,010 320 

Drift bolts, lbs 6,050 9,610 

Boat spikes, lbs 4,750 6,050 

"Wire nails, lbs 300 400 

Total, lbs 12,110 16,380 



980 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. \ 

The cost of labor on the two dams was : 

North dam. South dam. 

Hauling materials $ 284 

Building coffer-dams $ 730 1,055 

Preparing foundation 493 818 

Carpenter work on dams 949 965 

Quarrying rock, tilling cribs and 

grading above dams 1,966 1,971 

Engineering, watching and miscel- 
laneous 362 402 

Total $4,500 $5,495 

This makes the total cost of labor $9,995 on the two dams. The 
total cost was as follows : 

Labor $ 9,995 

Rent of land 217 

111 M. oak 2,919 

218 M. pine 3,087 

28.490 lbs. iron 805 

Explosives 151 

Total $17,174 

Cost of Timber Cribs for Dams, Etc.* — Maj. Graham D. Fitch 
gives the following: 

Timber cribs were built in connection with the building of the 
lock described on page 989. 

The work was done on the Upper "White River, Arkansas, by Gov- 
ernment forces, common laborers receiving $1.50 per 8-hr. day. 

Guide Cribs. — At the head and foot of each lock wall permanent 
guard or guide cribs were placed. The upper river crib is a solid 
crib, containing the line of the river wall. It is 150 ft. long and 
8 ft. wide on top. The inside face is vertical from the top to 1 ft. 
below the upper miter sill, below which it is stepped, as is the outer 
face, so that the width of the base 30 ft. below the top is 20 ft. 
The lower part of the crib work connects with the lock wall, but 
above a level 2 ft. below the upper miter sill there is a gap 10 ft. 
wide between the crib and the lock wall for the passage of drift. 
The top of the crib is level with the coping. 

The lower river crib is 150 ft. long and is similar to the upper 
crib except that there is no gap between the crib and the lock walls, 
and that the top of the crib is not level with the coping throughout, 
that portion farthest down stream being 5 ft. below the coping in 
elevation. 

The land cribs are in line with the lock walls, the upper one being 
66 ft. long and the lower one 20 ft. The cribs were built of 
10 X 10-in. timbers, framed and drift bolted together, pine being used 
below pool level and oak above. The cribs are filled with one-man 
stone, large selected stones being set on edge with their flat faces 
against the side openings, the top being covered with large, well- 
shaped stones set level with the timbers. 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 283. 



PILING. TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 98] 

The cost of the upper land crib was as follows : 

Per M. ft. 
Material. Unit cost. Total, in crib. 

Lumber, pine. 30 M. ft. B. M $18.20 $ 546 $80.20 

Riprap, 602 cu. yds 74 445 14.83 

Iron, 2,350 lbs 0026 63 2.10 

Total materials $1,054 $35.13 

Labor. 

Excavating 45 cu. yds $ 1.89 $ 85 $ 2.83 

Insp. of timber, 30 M. ft 39 12 .40 

Riprap, 602 cu. yds 008 5 .16 

Building and filling, 30 M. ft 15.42 463 15.43 

Backfill, 180 cu. yds 525 95 3.16 

Total labor $ 660 $21.98 

Grand total (30 M. ft.) $1,713 $57.10 

The labor items in the above work that can be further summarized 
are as follows : 

Labor time Work done per 
Work done. in days. man per day. 

Excavating, 45 cu. yds 46 7/8 .957 cu. yd. 

Building and filling, 30 M. ft 259 6/8 .115 M. ft. 

Backfilling, 180 cu. yds 44 4/8 .404 cu. yd. 

The cost of the lower land crib was as follows : 

Per M. ft. 
Material. Unit cost. Total. in crib. 

Lumber, pine, 9.3 M. ft $18.15 $169 $18.15 

Riprap, 145 cu. yds 74 107 11.51 

Iron, 413 lbs 026 11 1.12 

Total materials $287 $30.78 

Excavation labor. 

Earth 92, rock 15, 107 cu. yds $ 3.26 $242 $26.02 

Building and filling, 9.3 M. ft 275 29.65 

Insp. of timber, 4 M. ft 39 2 .21 

Inspection of riprap, 65 cu. yds. . .008 ... .... 

Total labor $519 $55.88 

Grand total (9.3 M. ft.) $806 $86.66 
The following is the cost of the lower river crib : 

Per M. ft. 

Material. Unit cost. Total. in crib. 

Lumber, oak, 14.8 M. ft. B. M $16.82 $ 249 $ 5.39 

Lumber, pine, 31.3 M. ft. B. M 14.97 469 10.16 

Riprap, 1,014 cu. yds 74 714 15.46 

Iron and spikes, 5,420 lbs 132 2.86 

Fuel 21 .45 

Total cost materials $1,585 $34.33 

Labor. 

Excavating, 980 cu. yds $ 0.039 $ 39 $ 0.84 

Framing and placing timbers, 46.2 

M. ft 15.60 721 15.60 

Filling with riprap, 1,014 cu. yds. .447 455 9.85 

Inspection of lumber, 8 M. ft 39 3 .06 

Inspection of riprap, 90 cu. yds. . . .008 .72 .02 

Total labor $1,219 $26.37 

Grand total (46.2 M. ft.) $2,804 $60.69 



982 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the upper river crib was as follows: 

Material. Unit cost. Total. in crib. " 

Lumber, oak, 15.6 M. ft. B. M $20.12 $ 314 $6 60 

Lumber, pine, 32 M. ft. B. M 14.90 477 10 02 

Iron and spikes, 1,620 lbs 028 46 93 

Riprap, 1,315 cu. yds 74 973 20^47 

Total cost materials $1,810 $38.02 

Labor. 

Excavation $ 50 .... 

Framing and placing timbers, 47.6 

M. ft $10.32 $ 491 

Filling with riprap, 1,135 cu. yds. .31 410 

Total labor $ 951 $19.98 

Grand total (47.6 M. ft.) $2,761 $58.00 

The average costs of crib materials may he summarized as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Average cost of riprap, delivered $ .74 

Average cost to place , . .436 

Average cost in place 1.176 

Per M. ft. 

Average cost of crib timber, delivered $13.82 

Average cost to place timber 9.29 

Average cost of crib timber in place 23.11 

The above costs include field supervision and subsistence, but do 
not include freight on timber, which is about $1 per M ft. 

Crib Dam. — Dam No. 1 was a timber crib structure placed normal 
to the axis of the river and resting against the buttress tjf the 
upper river lock gate, so as to have the whole length of the lock 
chamber in the lower pool. The dam was 324 ft. long. For the 210 
ft. next to the lock it is founded on rock, the remainder of it resting 
on gravel. The width at the foundation is 48 ft., and the height 
above the foundation varies between a maximum at one place of 27 
ft. (on rock) and a minimum of 19 ft. next to the old abutment. 
The cribs are of yellow pine except the slope timbers and the face 
stringers, which are of white oak. All timbers are 10 x 10-in. scant- 
ling and are drift bolted together at their intersections. The up- 
stream face of the dam is vertical to within 2 ft. of. the top, whence, 
to prevent catching drift, it slopes to the crest (a 12 by 12-in. 
comb stick), having a slope of 1 on 4. The down-stream face sloped 
from the crest for 8 ft. with a slope of 1 on 4 and was stepped, 
having two steps each 8 ft. wide and an apron 16 ft. wide, the three 
vertical intervals being four courses of 40 ins. each. The upper 
slope was laid closely so as to be water tight ; the timbers on the 
down-stream side of the crest were spaced 1 in. apart. A short 
section of the dam about 9 ft. in length was in 1900 built inside 
the lock cofferdam up to the level of the apron. No further work on 
this dam was done until August, 1902, when work was recommenced 
by excavating with a dipper dredge. The dam was built in three 
separate sections, which were partially completed a short distance 
up-stream, the bottoms being built to suit careful soundings pre- 



PILING, T REST LING, TIMBERPVORK. 983 

viously taken, and then towed to position and the building con- 
tinued. Only every other pen was filled witli stone until the last 
section was in place and weighted. Triple-lap sheet piles, 9 by 12 
ins., were driven to rock on the upper side of the dam for 110 ft. 
out from the abutment where the dam rested on gravel ; the remain- 
ing portion of the dam, which is on rock, was merely sheeted with 
double-lap li^-'n. plank. The lower side of the dam for 120 ft. 
from the abutment was also sheet piled for the purpose of holding the 
gravel. The dam was backfilled to within 4 ft. of the eave for 
about 20 ft. up-stream, partly with gumbo and partly with gravel. 
Below that portion of the dam on gravel a brush mattress covered 
witli 2 ft. of stone was laid. 

The cost of this dam was af follows : 

Excavation. 
Materials. 
Fuel and oil $ 9S 

Labor. 
1812/8 days 367 

Total $463 

Framing and Placing Timbers. 

Materials. Unit cost. Total. Per M. ft. 

Oak, 132.8 M. ft. B. M $19.81 $2,632 $ 5.07 

Pine, 387.3 M. ft. B. M 13.71 5,320 10.23 

Iron, 25,297 lbs 025 655 1.25 

Hauling lumber, 147.4 M. ft. B. M... 1.18 173 .33 

Fuel, oil, etc 173 .33 

Boat spikes, 12 kegs 8.65 104 .20 

Miscellaneous 12 .02 

Total cost of material, 520.2 M. ft. 

B. M $17.43 $9,069 $17.43 

Labor. 
Frame and place, 520.2 M. ft., B. M..$ 8.84 $ 4,599 $ 8.84 

Grand total $13,668 $26.27 

The labor time in days for framing and placing the 520.2 M. ft. 
B. M. was 2,392%, and the average amount framed and placed per 
man per day was 217 ft. 

Driving Sheet Piles. 

Per M. ft. 
Materials. Unit cost. Total. Piling. 

Oak, 25.2 M. ft $19.81 $ 501 $19.81 

Boat spikes, 2 kegs 8.50 17 .67 

Total materials, 25.2 M. ft $20.48 $ 518 $20.48 

Labor. 
Driving, 25.2 M. ft $22.54 $ 570 $22.54 

Grand total $1,088 $43.02 

The total labor time for driving the 25.2 M ft. of sheet piles was 
315% days, the work done per man per day being 80 ft. B. M. 
driven. 



984 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Filling (7,984 Cu. Yds.) 

Per cu. yd. 
Materials. Unit cost. Total. Pilling. 

Riprap, 7,984 cu. yds $0.74 $5,908 $0.74 

Coal (hauling), 47.1 tons 50 23 .003 

Labor. 
Filling, 7,984 cu. yds 425 3,508 .428 

Grand total $9,439 $1.18 

The total labor time for filling was 1,999 days, the average work 
done per man per day being 4 cu. yds. of filling. 

Puddling (8,640 Cu. Yds.). 

Per cu. yd. 

Material. Unit cost. Total. Puddling. 

Fuel and oil $ 148 $0,017 

Riprap, 60 cu. yds $0.74 44 .005 

Labor. 

Digging and placing 8,640 cu. yds 277 $2,395 .277 

Grand total $2,587 $0,299 

Repuddling (1904). 

Labor, 4^50 cu. yds $0,336 $1,529 $0,336 

Cost both years, 13,190 cu. yds 4,116 .312 

Total. Per lin. ft. 

Dam, 324 lin. ft $28,774 $88.81 

Per cu yd. 
Dam, filling 7,984 cu. yds $3.60 

Summary of Dam No. 1. 

Total. Unit cost. 

Excavation $ 463 

Framing and placing timber, 520.2 M. ft... 13,668 $26.27 

Sheet piles, 25.2 M. ft 1,088 43.02 

Filling, 7,984 cu. yds 9,439 1.18 

Puddling, 8,640 cu. yds 2,587 .299 

Repuddling (1904), 4,550 cu. yds 1,529 .336 

Protecting apron and end of dam after 

flanking of abutment (1903) 1,212 

Changing shape of old dam from step to 

slope (324 lin. ft.) 6,177 19.06 

The cost of Dam No. 2 is given in equal detail in Engineering-Con- 
tractingj but it will suffice here to say that each man framed and 
placed 250 ft. B. M. per day, at a cost of $7.62 per M, there being 
€00 M all told. 

Foundation Crib. — The crib was T shaped in plan, 'following the 
general outline of the dam abutment. The length of the river face 
was 136 ft., its width was 12 ft. at the up-stream end and 16 ft. 
at the down-stream end, and 24 ft. near the middle for a distance 
of 37 ft., beginning 46 ft. from the up-stream end,. The portion 
of the crib underlying the stem of the abutment was 20 ft. wide 
and 60 ft. long from face to end ; it entered the bank 36 ft. The 
crib, which was constructed of 10 by 10-in. squared timbers, was 
built afloat and with interior pens varying "In size from 5 to 10 ft. to 
10 by 12 ft. After having been settled in place it was filled with. 
"one man" stone up to 2 ft. below extreme low water (6 ft. below 
water level at the time), the filling averaging 11 ft. in depth. Be- 
fore this filling began, however, the distributing boxes for the grout 
Were placed. These consisted of open-ended square boxes (8 by 8 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 985 

Ins. Inside) of 2-in. plank perforated with 1%-in. holes spaced zigzag 
1 ft. apart down the sides. They were long enough to reach just 
above a loosely laid floor on the top timbers and were set about 10 
ft. apart throughout the crib. The cost of these boxes is given 
under grouting. After the grout boxes had been placed and tlie 
crib filled with rubble 9-in. triple-lap sheet piling was driven with 
a steam hammer along the outside of the crib from a point opposite 
the downstream edge of the apron to the up-stream end of the crib, 
and thence around the end and along the up-stream face of the stem. 
The other faces of the crib were sheeted with double-lap 1-in. plank 
driven by hand mauls. The sheet piling was also for the purpose 
of preventing leakage under the abutments, otherwise the double 
sheeting of 1-in. plank would have answered throughout. The 
sheet piling and plank sheeting were well spiked to the top timbers 
of the crib. Gravel and earth were then deposited around the crib 
up to the water level for a double purpose : First, to prevent the 
grout from forcing its way through the sheeting, and second to 
serve as a cofferdam when the time came to pump out the crib. 
The cost of this foundation crib was as follows : 

Foundation Crib. 

Per M. ft. 

Material. Total, of crib. 

Lumber, pine, 65.3 M. ft. B. M. at $11.36 $ 742 $11.36 

Lumber, hauled, 50.3 M. ft. B. M. at $1.25 63 .96 

Iron, 5,123 lbs., at $0.023 119 1.82 

Miscellaneous materials 100 1.53 

Total cost of materials $1,024 $15.67 

Labor. 

Framing and placing, 65.3 ft, 981 2/8 days.. $1,859 $28.47 

Grand total $2,834 $44.14 

The average work done per man per day was 66.6 ft. B. M. of 
timber framed and placed. 

Sheet Piles and Sheeting. 

Per M. ft. 
Materials. Total, in place. 

Lumber, oak, 18.8 M. ft. B. M., at $15.79 $ 299 $10.40 

Lumber, pine, 9.9 M. ft. B. M. at $13.99 139 4.82 

Lumber, hauled, 9.9 M. ft. B. M., at $1.25 12 .86 

Spikes, 800 lbs., at $0.031 25 .42 

Total cost of materials $ 475 $16.50 

Labor. 
Driving, 28.7 M. ft., 334 days $ 730 $25.43 

Grand total $1,205 $41.93 

Filling With Riprap. 

Material. Total. Per cu. yd. 
Riprap, 876 cu. yds., at $0.74 $ 648 $0.74 

Labor. 

Filling and placing, 118 days $ 235 $ .27 

Inspection of riprap, 10 days 18 .02 

Grand total, 876 cu. yds. riprap $ 901 $ 1.03 



986 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The average work done per man per day was 6.84 cu. yds. of rip- 
rap placed. 

Cost of a Coffer-dam and Aqueduct. — In 1840, on the Erie Canal, 
when skilled laborers were paid $1 per day of 11 hrs. worked (and 
stonecutters received $2.25 a day — carpenters' wages not stated), 
a cofferdam (built by contract) containing 157,500 ft. B. M. of 
timber and plank was built with 830 days of skilled labor and a few 
carpenters. This is equivalent to 190 ft. B. M. per man per day. 
If wages had been $2 per day, this would have meant a cost of 
$10.50 per M. 

In building (by contract) an aqueduct trunk or flume, supported 
by masonry arches, the timber gang consisted of 2 carpenters to 
every 1 skilled laborer. There were put in 892,400 ft. B. M. of 
timber, of which 260,300 ft. B. M. were framed. This required 3,153 
days of carpenters and laborers. The average day's work for each 
man was: 

Ft. B. M. 

Framing 648 

Putting in the work 324 

If wages had averaged $2.60 per day (2 carpenters to 1 laborer) 
this would have meant a cost of $4 per M for framing and $8 per M 
for putting in the work, or a total of $12. 

Cost of Four Caissons. — Mr. B. L. Crosby gives the following on 
the construction of four piers for a double-track bridge across the 
Missouri River, for the St. Louis extension of the St. L., K. & N. W. 
R. R. The foundation work was done by company labor. The 
masonry piers were founded on pneumatic caissons, each 30x70 ft. 
outside measure, excepting one which was 24 x 60 ft. The caissons 
were 16 ft. high, including the iron cutting edge, and surmounted 
with a timber cribwork. This cribwork was 24 ft., 45 ft., 58 ft. and 
64 ft. high, respectively, on the four piers. All the caissons, except 
one, were built on launching ways on the north side of the river, 
just above the bridge line. These launching ways were con- 
structed by driving piles, which were capped by 12 x 12-in. timbers 
running up and down stream, and then the 12 x 12-in. way timbers 
were drift-bolted . to the caps. The ways had a slope of 3 ins. 
to the foot toward the river, and extended far enough out to allow 
the caisson to float before being clear of the timbers. Piles were 
cut off under water with a circular saw, and the drift-bolts, which 
had been started into the caps before they were sunk, were driven 
by a ramrod working through a gas-pipe over the drift-bolt. To 
remove a sand-bar at the site of one of the piers, a steamboat was 
anchored to piles over the pier site, and by the revolution of its 
paddle wheels washed out a hole 7 to 10 ft. deep. Barges were placed 
each side of the caisson, and heavy timbers bolted across the caisson, 
and extending out over the barges. The caisson was towed to its 
site, and when it struck a sand-bar, air was pumped into the caisson 
to raise it so as to clear the bar. In sinking the caisson a Morrison 
sand-pump and a Morrison clay-hoist were used. The greatest depth 
reached below low water was 101 ft., and laborers in the caisson 
received $3.50 a day of 2 or 3 hrs. (working 1-hr. shifts) at this 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 



987 



great depth. The pneumatic plant used in sinking consisted of two 
No. 4 Clayton duplex compressors, having steam and air cylinders, 
each 14-in., with a 15-in. stroke; a Worthington duplex pump, 
18%xl0>4xl0 ins., and a small dynamo and engine. This plant 
was set up on the steamboat whose boilers furnished the power. 
There was also a duplicate plant, which was used part of the time, 
supported on a pile platform. There were several hoisting engines, 
a pile driver boat provided with a derrick for Jiandling timbers in 
building up the cribwork on the caissons. The concrete used to fill 
the cribwork was 1:2:4 Louisville cement, and 1:3:6 Portland 
cement. 

In these four caissons and cribs there v;ere 1,609 M of yellow pine. 
The cost of framing and building the caissons was $21.93 per M. 
Tliis includes cost of launching ways, and of material and labor 
of all kinds; except the cost of the timber itself. It also includes 
a'l handling and towing. Carpenters were paid $2.50 and laborers 
■'i.TS per day. 

There were placed in these caissons 13,285 cu. yds. of concrete 
equiring 16,035 bbls. of Louisville cement and 4,759 bbls. of Port- 




'fPlcrnk, 6 &. longr 
4^ Fnrmes. 2it CtoC. 

Fig. 4.— A Small Scow. 



fend cement. The cost of this concrete (broken stone was used) 
was $5.36 per cu. yd. 

The average cost of caisson and concrete filling, including cutting 
edges, shafting, etc., was 34.2 cts. per cu. ft. ; the average cost of 
sinking 9.17 cts. per cu. ft., this average being materially increased 
due to some rock excavation on one pier where the average cost of 
caisson sinking was 12.33 cts. per cu. ft. The average cost of cais- 
sons was $178 per ft. sunk, ranging from $116 per ft. on one to 
$259 per ft. on the one where rock was encountered. "Work on the 
first caisson was begun July 30, 1892, and it was launched Aug. 20. 
It reached bed rock Jan. 2, 1893, at a depth of 89 ft. below low 
water. The first engine passed over the completed bridge Dec. 27, 
1893. 

For much more detailed costs of caisson work see data in the 
section on Bridges. 

Cost of Two Small Scows. — For use in river work, two small 
scows were built as shown in Fig. 4. Each scow was 2 ft. deep, 6 ft. 
wide, and 32 ft. long. It consisted of four parallel frames made by 
spiking 2 x 6-in. hemlock to form rough trusses. These frames were 
2 ft. apart, and to them rough hemlock sheeting plank was spiked. 



988 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

making deck bottom, sides and ends of a closed box. All the joints, 
except the deck, were calked with oakum and tarred. Thus very 
cheap and watertight scows were made. They were strong enough 
to be used for a floating pile driver, by bolting the two scows side 
by side ; but they were not quite large enough for this purpose 
and the leaders of the pile driver had to held with guy ropes, which 
was a great nuisance. Nevertheless, this rough and light construc- 
tion proved good enough in every other respect for river work where 
no logs or other heavy objects could batter the scows. The cost 
of these two scows was as follows : 

3 M. rough hemlock, at $11 $33.00 

15 lbs. oakum, and necessary pitch 1.50 

1 keg nails 2.00 

12 days' labor, at $2 24.00 

Total for two scows $60.50 

This is equivalent to $30 each for the scows. One carpenter, at 
$2.50, assisted by one laborer, at $1.50, did the work, which cost $8 
per M. During the winter the scows were hauled out of the water, 
and next spring re-calked with 8 lbs. of oakum, requiring the labor 
of one man for 14 hrs. Each scow was readily loaded on a wagon 
for transportation. 

Cost of a Semi-Circular Flume. — Mr. William H. Hall is authority 
for the following relating to the work on the Santa Ana Canal of 
the Bear Valley Irrigation Co., in San Bernardino County, California, 
in 1894. Wooden stave pipe and a semi-circula'^ stave flume, in- 
vented by Mr. Hall, were largely used, and cost data are given. 
The flume is 5% ft. in diameter, semi-circular, made of dressed red- 
wood staves 1% ins. thick held by binding rods or hoops (2 ft. 8 ins. 
apart) passing through 4 x 4-in. wooden cross-yokes. The flume 
rests on sills or bolsters (10 ft. apart) cut to fit its curved bottom, 
and these sills are supported on concrete blocks or on wooden trestles 
according to the locality. A gang of 10 laborers and 5 carpenters 
and a foreman built the flume. Not a nail was used in its con- 
struction, wages were high, being $2 a day for laborers, $3 a day 
for carpenters, and $4 a day for team and driver. The cost of erect- 
ing the flume, exclusive of trestle work, was $5.75 per M, but this 
does not include shop work, delivei-y and calking. The cost of 
delivering the lumber in wagons was $2.50 per M and subdelivering 
it on dollies was $2.50 per M more, as the work was in a rough 
country; hauling costing 37% cts. per ton mile by contract. The 
cost of making the sills, and yokes, and dipping all the lumber in 
coal tar, and calking after erection, came to $3.25 per M, including 
all timber in the flume, exclusive of trestles. Hence the total labor 
cost, including delivery and subdelivery, was $14 per M. The lum- 
ber was bought for $28 per M. 

The cost of framing and erecting timber trestles to support this 
flume was $13 per M, the rough pine itself costing $19 per M; the 
cost of delivering was presumably $5 per M. The work was half 
over before the men became trained to their work, and at no time 
were they very active or efficient. 



PILING, T REST LING, TIMBERWORK. 989 

The total amount of dressed redwood for the flume staves was 312 
M, which required 214,000 lbs. of wrought and cast iron for bands, 
bolts, etc., or about 700 lbs. per 1,000 ft. B. M. This iron cost 5^4 
cts. per lb. At these high prices the cost of the finished flume was 
about $5 per lin. ft., of which $2.50 was for the flume alone and 
$2.50 for the trestle supporting it. 

Cost of a Wood Flume, Klamath Irrigation Project.*— The flume is 
4,303 ft. long, and has an inside width of 11 ft. and inside height 
of 5 ^ ft. ; it rests on concrete piers with rubble-stone foundations, 
and is built of red fir lumber. Of Class 1 lumber, for the frame- 
work of the flume, 442,000 ft. B. M. were purchased at $15.50 per 
thousand, delivered. Measurement after construction, however, 
showed only 438,000 ft. B. M. in place, and thus indicated a waste 
of 4,000 ft. B. M., or a little less than 1%. Of Class 2 lumber, for 
lining the flume, 60,000 ft. B. M. were purchased at $30.50 per thou- 
sand, delivered, and 227,000 ft. B. M. at $19 per thousand, making 
a total purchase of 287,000 ft. B. M. Measurement after construc- 
tion showed 284,200 ft. B. M. in place, thus indicating a waste of 
2,800 ft. B. M., or about 1%. 

The concrete piers and stone foundations were built by force 
account. The piers, 1,091 in number, are 18 ins. high, 24 ins. square 
at the base, and 12 ins. square at the top, and rest on rubble founda- 
tions 3 ft. square. 

The total costs on which the tabulated unit costs are based are 
$21,000 for the flume proper and $6,995.88 for the foundations; in 
addition, however, there were costs, not distributed in the unit 
costs, of $174.96 for a spillway and $347.54 for miscellaneous ex- 
penditures, making a total cost for the whole structure of $28,518.38, 
or $6.64 per lin. ft. of flume. 

— Per M ft. B. M. 

Labor: Class 1. 

Superintendence $ 0.46 

Carpenter work 5.97 

Distributing timbers 63 

Miscellaneous 21 

Material: 

Lumber delivered 15.64 

Bolts and washers 36 

Nails and spikes 94 

Engineering and inspection.. 2.91 



M.— 
ass 2. 


Flume 
per lin ft. 


1.02 

4.83 

.63 

.17 


$0.11 
.93 
.11 
.03 


21.60 

".'94 
2.91 


3.02 
.04 
.16., 
.50 



Totals for flume proper... $27.12 $32.10 $4.90 

Piers and foundations 1.62 



$6.52 
Cost of Lock Gates.t — Maj. Graham D. Fitch gives the following: 
The gates for the lock described on page 570 are of the standard 
form, namely, mitering gates of the girder type with straight back 
and front. They are horizontally framed and without quoin or 
miter posts, the main timbers extending from edge to edge of the 



^Engineering-Contracting , May 26, 1909. 
^Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 281. 



990 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

gate and the ends, which are built up solid with filling blocks, being 
shaped to fit the hollow quoin and miter, respectively, thus avoiding 
the weakness of beams jointed into vertical heel and toe posts. The 
rise was taken as 1/6 of the span, which is equivalent to a miter 
angle of 18 degrees 26 minutes. 

The gates are of white oak, 20 ins. thick throughout, each arm 
consisting of a built-up beam composed of two 10 by 10-in. timbers 
bolted together with 1-in. bolts and extending in one length from 
toe to heel. The tops of the gates are flush with the tops of the 
lock walls, so that the lock can be used until the walls are sub- 
merged. The lower gates, which are 29 ft. 5 ins. in height, are built 
solid for 10 ft. from the bottom. For the upper gates these figures, 
become 15 ft. 5 ins. and 20 ins., respectively. By making the lower 
portion of a gate solid, the gate may be made thinner, thus reduc- 
ing under pressure. The upper portions of the gates are paneled ; 
the arms are all made of the same scantling as below, but are 
spaced inversely as the maximum loads ; the arms are separated by 
five blocks (including the two at the heel and toe), and the inter- 
vals are closed with a sheathing of 2-in. oak plank made watertight 
by calking. The beams are held together by seven pairs of long 
1%-in. bolts running vertically through the center lines of the main 
timbers as well as through the filling blocks in the upper part of the 
gate. The weight of the gate is taken up by two diagonal tie straps 
of 3 % by % -in. wrought-iron eyebars provided with turnbuckles ; 
one end of each eyebar passes over a pin in the journal strap and 
the other over a similar pin held in place near the lower end of the 
toe by a stirrup strap and a nose strap. The bottom beam is fitted 
at the quoin with a cast-iron heel piece which rests on a forged 
steel pivot shrunk into a cast-iron pivot plate having sufficient 
bearing. This bedplate is bolted to the concrete. The top gudgeon 
is a 3 -in. steel pin supported at both ends by journal castings, be- 
tween which the collar works. In order that the leaf may, in open- 
ing and closing, swing clear of the quoin without friction, the rota- 
tion axis of the pivot and gudgeon is on the up-stream side of the 
center of figure of the hollow quoin when the leaf is closed, the 
eccentricity being 1% ins. The up-stream half of the toe is 
rounded off so that the surface of contact when the gates are mitered 
shall fall upon the down-stream timbers of the built-up beams. 
Thus the compression due to the end reactions is thrown on the 
down-stream timbers where it will relieve the tension from the 
direct loading, and is removed entirely from the up-stream timbers 
to avoid increasing the compression from the direct loading. 

The anchorage for the gates consists of four wrought-iron bars 
with cast-iron washers or anchor plates embedded in the concrete 
and connected in pairs at their exposed ends to two heavy castings. 
The anchorage connections fit in a recess below the coping and are 
covered with a cast-iron plate. 

The method of building and placing the lock gates was as 
follows : 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 991 

A small hand-power derrick was erected on a level spot so as to 
command the ways, which were built of heavy timbers laid perfectly 
level about 2M! ft. from the ground and close enough together to 
support without deflection the weight of an entire gate. On each 
side of the derrick were placed two sets of ways, between which 
ran a track for carrying tlie timbers. The gate timbers were de- 
livered as needed to the derrick and placed on the ways, the built- 
up beams framed and bolted, and the heel and toe worked to pat- 
tern. The arms and blocks were then juxtaposed in position so as to 
get the alignment of the long bolts and then separated for the holes 
to be bored. This was a tedious procedure, as no matter how care- 
fully the measurements for the holes were made it was found im- 
possible to bore all of them in the different pieces so as to avoid 
slight errors of alignment ; hence burning the holes out with long 
rods of hot iron had to be resorted to. The gate was then assem- 
bled, the bolts inserted and tightened, the irons fitted on, the heel 
and toe worked to pattern, and each arm and block numbered to 
avoid any displacement later. The gates were then taken apart and 
transported to the lock pit to be erected piece by piece, for which 
a land derrick was used. As each beam was put into position its 
top was given a heavy coat of white lead, and the position of its bolt 
holes tested by thrusting down an iron rod. After the gate had been 
thus built up to the required height, the long perpendicular bolts 
were raised by the derrick and put into place, the various irons 
fitted, the anchor bars and tie straps tightened, and the gate swung. 
The gates were then given two coats of red lead. 

The gates are operated by hand power. The maneuvering gear 
consists of a spar, to each end of which is fastened one end of a 
chain ; the bight of this chain is led through a cliain guide consist- 
ing of two sheaves to a chain capstan worked by a crank. The 
gate is opened or closed according as the chain is pulled in one 
direction or the other. 

As wooden lock gates subject to varying lifts, unless made too 
heavy at low water, are too buoyant at high water, it is necessary 
at the approach of floods to ballast them, which was done by filling 
the panels with large stones. 

The miter sills, which provide an elastic cushion for the bottom 
of the gates, consist of 12 by 12-in. timbers well bolted to the 
miter wall, as they may sometimes be subjected to a lifting pressure 
from the gates, and when once started the upward water pressure is 
of course added. The miter sills are 2 ins. higher than the miter 
walls so as to act as a guard for the masonry. The miter sills are 
1 ft. below normal 4 ft. depth, so as to permit the pool level to be 
reduced without affecting navigation. The sills, like the gates, are 
of white oak and were set when the concrete was placed in the miter 
walls. The gates do not, when shut, extend over the sill, as is some- 
times the case, for a difficult joint then becomes necessary. In 
this instance the gates lap the sill by 5 ins., the under pressure 
being counterbalanced by the weight of the gates. 



992 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the gates and sills was as follows: 

Material: Unit cost Total. 

Lumber, oak, 35.7 M ft. B. M $41.37 $1,477 

Iron, wrouglit, 342 lbs 05 17 

Iron, wrought, 16,243 lbs 06 975 

Iron, wrought common, 153 lbs 023 4 

Iron, cast, 600 lbs 046 28 

Iron, cast, 5,354 lbs 045 241 

Steel, 615 lbs 065 40 

Journal castings and patterns 22 

Total materials $2,803 

Labor: 

Inspection of lumber, 33.9 M ft $ 0.3897 $ 13 

Hauling miscellaneous material 15 

Framing, 35.7 M ft 43.28 1,545 

Setting gates, 4 76.54 306 

Care, repair and adjusting since 1901, 4 887 

Total cost of labor $2,766 

Grand total $5,569 

The total labor time in days for framing was 684 4/8 and the work 
done per man per day was 53.1 ft. ; the total labor time for setting 
the four gates was 149% days. 

Cost of a Railway Box Car. — Mr. E. C. Spalding is authority for 
the following data on small box cars built in 1883. The car was 
probably designed to carry about 30,000 lbs., for its own weight 
must have been about 23,000 lbs. 
Material in Body: 

4,000 ft. B. M., at $20 $ 80.00 

700 lbs. wrought iron, at $0.05 35.00 

600 lbs. cast iron, at $0.03 18.00 

Nails 5.20 

46 lbs. draw-springs, at $0.09 4.14 

Tin for roof 12.60 

Paint 3.30 

Total material in body $158.24 

Labor on Body: 

20 days carpenter, at $2.25 $ 45.00 

2 days tinner on roof, at $2.00 4.00 

IVa days painter, at $2.00 3.00 

Total labor on body $ 52.00 

Material in Trucks: 

4,200 lbs. wheels; 1,400 lbs. axles $160.00 

64 lbs. brasses, at $0.22 14.08 

184 lbs. springs, at $0.09 16.56 

490 ft. B. M., at $20 9.80 

1,000 lbs. wrought iron, at $0.05 50.00 

1,300 lbs. cast iron, $0.03 39.00 

Paint 0.80 

Total materials in trucks $290.24 

Labor on Trucks: 

2% days carpenter, at $2.25 $ 5.63 

% day painter, at $2.00 0.50 

Total $ 6.13 

Grand total $506.61 



PILING. TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 993 

It will be noted that the cost of the labor on the box of the car 
was $45 for 4,000 ft. B. M., or $11.25 per M. The labor cost on the 
490 ft. B. M. in the trucks was practically the same rate. 

By reference to data in the section on Buildings, it will be found 
that the labor costs of frame buildings is about the same as above 
given for this box car. 

Cost of Making Bodies for Dump Cars — Some bodies for bottom- 
dumping cars were made to be mounted on ordinary hand-car trucks, 
and were used in filling a trestle. The car bodies were made hop- 
per shape, the sides being 4 ft. apart ; the ends were 6 % ft. apart 
it the top and sloping toward the center until they were 4 ft. apart 
fct the bottom. The height of the body was 20 ins., thus giving a 
struck-measure capacity of 33 cu. ft. Two doors, forming the bot- 
tom of the car, were hinged to the two ends of the car body with 
three 14-in. strap hinges to each door. These doors were each 18 ins. 
wide and 4 ft. long, and were closed by means of hoisting chains 
(%-in. iron) passing around a 2% -in. gas pipe winch which 
spanned the car from side to side. This 2% -in. gas pipe was 
stiffened by a 2 14-in. pipe slipped inside. It required 150 ft. B. M. 
of plank to make each car, and a carpenter (25 cts. per hr. ) with a 
helper (15 cts. per hr.) averaged one car in 7 hrs., which is at 
the rate of $10 per M. 

Cost of Making Tool Boxes. — ^A carpenter made two tool boxes 
of 1-in. matched pine boards in 10 hrs. Each box contained 130 ft. 
B. M., so that the labor cost was a little less than $10 per M, wages 
being 25 cts. per hr. 

Cost of Plank Roads. — Very often the contractor would be en- 
abled to haul much larger loads In wagons if he were to build plank 
roads up certain short steep ascents, or up out of the pit. The 
planks need not be spiked to the stringers. Plank for such roads 
should be 8 ft. long and 3 ins. thick. Contrary to general opinion 
cedar makes an excellent plank road, for its surface soon becomes 
a thin mat of wood fibers and dirt that protect the body of the 
plank. Either three lines of 4 x 6-in. or two lines of 3 x 12-in. 
cedar stringers should be bedded in the ground and the plank laid 
upon them without spiking. 

In the State of "Washington I found the cost of building the very 
best of these plank roads to be as follows: Three skilled laborers 
bedding three lines of 4 x 6-in. stringers in clay, laying and spiking 
3-in. plank, averaged 15,000 ft. B. M. per 10-hr. day. At $2.50 per 
day per man, the cost would be 0.50 per M. In sand these men 
averaged 18,000 ft. B. M. per day. They were hustling, as they re- 
ceived 50 cts. per 1,000 ft. B. M. for laying this road, plank being 
delivered alongside. 

Over such a road a team can pull as much as on the very best 
asphalt pavement. The "trick" about building a good plank road is 
to bed the stringers, not leaving them on top of the ground. The 
road then is firm and great loads can be hauled over it, so long as 
it is kept in good condition. 

Since in temporary roads the spiking may be omitted, and as 3 



994 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

matter of fact it should be omitted even on permanent roads, we see 
that the plank may be used over and over again for different jobs ; 
but if the road is worth laying at all it is worth laying well in the 
first place. 

Plank road work lends itself admirably to payment by the piece 
rate or by the bonus system. 

Piles. — Piles are sold by lumber dealers at 5 to 15 cents per lin. ft. 
of pile for all ordinary lengths, but very long piles bring high prices 
per lin. ft. Specifications usually provide a contract price per lin. 
ft. for "piles delivered" on the work ready to drive ; and another 
price per lin. ft. for "piles driven." The length of the "pile driven" 
is the full length of the pile left in the work after cutting off the 
broomed head, although occasionally it is specified to be the length 
of the pile underground. Hence care should be taken to make clear 
what is meant by the expressed "per foot of pile driven." 

The actual cost of driving a pile should be recorded in dollars and 
cents per pile, as well as in cents per lin. ft. of pile driven ; for 
costs vary less per pile than per lin. ft. This is evident when we 
consider that where the driving is easy a very long pile is driven in 
no longer time than is required for a short pile where driving is 
hard. 

I prefer to specify payment for "piles delivered" by the lineal 
foot, and for "piles driven," by the pile. 

Pile Drivers. — There are three types of pile drivers: (1) Free fall; 
( 2 ) friction-clutch ; and ( 3 ) steam-hammer. In the free-fall driver, 
the hammer is detached from the hoisting rope and allowed to fall 
freely upon the pile. In the friction-clutch driver, the hammer re- 
mains always attached to the hoisting rope, and, by means of a 
friction clutch on the hoisting engine, the drum is thrown into gear 
or out of gear at will. When the clutch is thrown out of gear, the 
hammer falls, dragging the hoisting rope after it. The Nasmyth 
steam-hammer is raised by steam acting direct upon a piston at- 
tached to the hammer. The hammer is raised about 3% ft., and 
allowed to fall by gravity. 

A steam-hammer strikes about 60 blows per minute. A friction- 
clutch hammer strikes about 18 blows per minute when the ham- 
mer falls 12 ft. ; and 25 blows per minute when the hammer falls 
only 5 ft. A free-fall hammer strikes about 7 blows per minute 
when the fall is 20 ft. and a hoisting engine is used. 

The free-fall hammer is much used where horses do the hoisting 
instead of an engine. In either case a lug on top of the hammer is 
gripped by a pair of "tongs," which are tripped at the desired 
height, allowing the hammer to fall. The "tongs" descend slowly 
by gravity helped perhaps by the man who has tripped them, and 
they automatically grip the hammer again. The "tongs" are also 
called "scissors" or "nippers." 

The two upright timbers that guide the hammer are called "leads," 
or "leaders," or "gins," or "ways." A common weight of ham- 
mer for a free-fall or a friction-clutch machine is 2,000 to 3,000 lbs. 

An "overhang driver" is a driver provided with leads that project 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 995 

8 to 20 ft. beyond the base of support of the drivei-. The horizontal 
beams that support the leads of an overhang driver are trussed ; 
and the weight of the engine on the rear of the trussed beams 
counterbalances the weight of the leads and the hammer on the 
front. A cheap driver of this type can readily be made for driving 
the bents of a pile trestle across a river, or other body of water, 
where a scow is not available for mounting the driver upon. The 
author has built such a driver with a 20-ft. overhang for driving 
falsework pile bents across a river. 

A "railway pile driver" is a heavy driver of the "overhang" type, 
mounted on a railway flat car. Sometimes these drivers are made 
self-propelling ; but frequently a locomotive is used in handling the 
driver. The leads are so made that they can be lowered when pass- 
ing under overhead bridges, etc. In working with an overhang 
driver, there Is always considerable delay, for as soon as the 3 or 
4 piles for a bent have been driven, they must be sawed off and 
capped with a 12 x 12-in. stick drift-bolted to the piles, before the 
beams or stringers can be laid to support the driver when it moves 
forward. 

A "scow driver" will drive more piles per day than a "railway 
driver," because this delay in sawing off and capping each bent 
does not occur. Moreover, the piles are floated alongside the driver 
ready for instant use. The scow itself is quickly shifted by means 
of ropes from suitable anchorages to the winch-heads of the engine. 

Excepting on railway work, land drivers (as distinguished from 
scow drivers) are seldom mounted on wheels running on a track; 
but are usually supported on rollers running on plank or timber 
runways laid down in advance of the driver. If the ground is very 
irregular, it must be either graded, or the timber runways for the 
driver must be supported by cribbing or blocking so as to give 
a level runway for the driver. The building of such a runway often 
retards the work of land-driving. 

Excepting where the driving is exceedingly hard, the hammer is 
actually at work but a small fraction of the day at best. The 
contractor should, therefore, exercise his wits to reduce the lost 
time. 

There are no very reliable data as to the relative effectiveness of 
the blows of steam-hammer drivers and friction-clutch drivers, but 
the following data by Mr. N. B. Weydert may prove of value : 

In driving piles in Chicago, piles 54 ft. long were driven 52 ft., of 
which 27 ft. were in soft clay, and 25 ft. in tough clay. Each pile 
averaged 13 ins. in diameter. Using a Nasmyth steam hammer, 
striking 54 blows per minute, with a weight of 4,500 lbs. falling S^^ 
ft., it required 48 to 64 blows to drive the last foot when a follower 
20 ft. long was used on top of the pile; but, without a follower, it 
is estimated it would have taken only 24 to 32 blows to drive the 
last foot. After a pile had stood 24 hrs. it required 300 to 600 blows 
of the hammer on the follower to drive it 1 ft. 

In the same soil, using a 3,000-lb. drop hammer falling 30 ft., 
and striking a follower 20 ft. long, it required 16 blows to drive the 



996 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

last foot; but with the same hammer falling 15 ft, it required 32 
to 36 blows on the follower to drive the pile the last foot. 

The piles were tested with a load of 50 tons each for two weeks 
and showed no settlement. 

The Steam Hammer vs. the Drop Hammer. — Some 50 years ago, 
when the Nasmyth steam hammer came into prominence as a pile 
driver, it was predicted by engineers who had seen it that the days 
of the rope hoisted hammer were numbered. Nor is it uncommon to 
read similar predictions even to this day. That the steam hammer 
weighing two tons and striking 60 blows a minute is a very effective 
machine no one can deny, but what appears to have been overlooked 
by many engineers is the fact that in nearly all driving of piles on 
land, a very small fraction of the working day of a pile-driving gang 
is spent in actual driving. This is particularly the case in building 
pile trestles with a railroad pile driver. 

Records that I have kept show very clearly how little time is 
ordinarily spent in pile driving on trestle work, using the ordinary 
railroad pile driver with a friction-clutch engine. Each trestle bent 
consisted of four piles driven about 10 ft. into Arm, dry earth, and 
bents were 15 ft. c. to c. It took about 20 blows of a 2,800-lb. ham- 
mer falling about 18 ft. to drive each pile, and, once the pile was in 
the leaders, these 20 blows were delivered in from 1 to 2 minutes, 
depending upon minor delays in keeping the pile plumb. The piles 
were not ringed. Hence we may say that in so far as the actual 
time of driving four piles was concerned, only 8 minutes were thus 
consumed per bent at the most. About 4 or 5 minutes were re- 
quired to get each pile into the leaders, thus consuming some 20 
minutes per bent. 

Tabulating the time consumed in performing each detail we have: 

Minutes. 

(1) Getting 4 piles into leaders 20 

( 2 ) Driving 4 piles 8 

(3) Straightening and bracing the piles 27 

(4) Leveling and nailing guide strips for sawing off . . 10 

(5) Sawing off 4 piles 12 

(6) Putting on cap and drift bolting it 13 

(7) Pulling 3 stringers forward from last bent 11 

(8) Putting in 2 more stringers that overhang 20 

( 9 ) Putting in 1 tie and spiking rail 4 

Total time on one bent 125 

Item ( 4 ) was unnecessarily long, due to the hair-splitting methods 
of the Y-level man, who was giving the cut-off. Even after the 
cleats to guide the saws were nailed on, he had them lowered %-in. 
Items (3) and (5) may frequently be reduced very materially, 
and always would be on contract work, but on work done for a 
railroad company, as this was, the end of the 10-hr. day will find 
only 4 to 6 bents built under the conditions here given. If, how- 
ever, we assume a bent of four piles built in 100 minutes, we see 
that only 8 minutes of that time will be consumed in actual driving. 
In other words, only three-quarters of an hour out of the 10 hrs. is 
spent in hammering the pile. This will doubtless be surprising to 
many engineers, and particularly to those who have been impressed 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 997 

by the speed of the Nasmyth steam hammers. Under a hustling, 
wide-awake contractor, the writer has seen 10 bents driven and 
completed in a day with a friction-clutch driver ; but even under 
such conditions the hammer was actually at work driving less than 
two hours. 

It seems quite clear from the foregoing discussion, that maln- 
tenance-of-way engineers should look not to improvements in the 
form of hammer mechanism, but rather to improvements in the 
mechanism and methods of handling the piles, caps, stringers, etc. 
Very much can be accomplished in this respect by having a well- 
organized force with a clear-headed foreman at its head. In the 
example just cited the item of straightening piles was exceedingly 
expensive in time, in that it consumed nearly half an hour. This 
was largely due to the fact that the foreman did not appreciate the 
importance of sawing the pile heads square. He simply put the piles 
into the leaders with the heads rough sawed as they came from the 
forest. In one case the pile had a large prong of splintered wood 
projecting above the partly sawed head. Haste never makes more 
waste than in neglecting to square the pile heads, and guide the pile 
properly while driving it. 

In this particular instance, since the driving was across dry land, 
the foreman should have secured a team with which to "snake" 
piles and timbers up alongside of or directly in front of the driver. 
Then the pile rope or "runner" could have been quickly hooked on 
to a chain already fastened around the pile or timber to be moved, 
with a saving of 50% in the time spent in getting material to place. 
It does not pay to make a team out of a pile driver and a gang of 
men. 

Instead of spending 13 minutes getting a cap to place and drift- 
bolting it, not more than 6 or 7 minutes need have been so con- 
sumed. Two men can cross-cut a pile in 4 or 5 minutes, hence with 
eight men on four saws, item (5) can be reduced at least one-half. 
Running around looking for saws, mauls, drift bolts, etc., is one of 
the greatest causes of delay. For this reason there should be a man 
whose duty it is to bring tools and put them away immediately after 
they have served their purpose. The two leader men on the driver 
might well attend to the tools. 

We see, by this method of timing, why the Nasmyth steam hzmi- 
mer has failed to displace the friction-clutch hammer on trestle 
work, and we see that if any improvement is desirable in driver 
design it is not in the hammer mechanism, but rather in the means 
of mechanically handling the timbers. Finally we see that organ- 
ization of the force is quite as essential as improvement in mechan- 
ism, while it possesses the decided advantage of costing nothing 
except what may be paid for a better quality of brain work. 

From this discussion it should not be inferred that the steam 
hammer has no field of usefulness, for it has. Its field, however, 
Ib in scow or land driving, where a great number of foundation piles 
are to be driven close together, and especially where a great num- 
ber of blows must be struck to secure the desired pile penetration. 



m HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Making Piles. — Two men can cut down and trim 17 oak 
piles per day, eacli pile being 20 ft. long. Where the men are paid 
$1.75 per 10 hrs., the labor cost of making the piles is practically 
1 ct. per lin. ft. To this must be added the cost of hauling and 
freight to the place where the piles are to be driven. 

For weight of piles, see the fore part of this section. 

Life of Pile Driver Rope. — ^Mr. George J. Bishop kept some rec- 
ords of pile driving on the C, R. I. & P. Ry. in 1897, to determine 
the life of manilla rope. The drum of the friction pile driver engine 
-was 14 ins. diam., also the sheave at the top of the leads, and the 
sheave at the front of the pile driver was 20 ins. The hammer 
-weighed 3,000 lbs. The rope was of three different makes, all 1% 
ins. diam. Common manilla 3-ply rope made the best showing. The 
length of rope was 125 ft. and its weight ranged from 74 to 95 lbs., 
averaging 85 lbs., or nearly 0.7 lb. per ft. The price of the rope 
was 6% cts. per lb. or $5.53 per average rope. Ten ropes were 
used up in driving 1,335 piles to an average penetration of 20 ft. 
Hence each rope averaged 133 piles, or a cost of 4 cts. per pile for 
rope. However, 5 of the ropes averaged only 101 piles each, and 
5 averaged 166 piles each. 

Cost of Driving Piles With a Horse Driver. — This work con- 
sisted in driving 219 piles, 2 ft. centers, to form the protecting 
toe of a slope-wall. The hammer weighed 2,000 lbs., and was raised 
with block and tackle by horses. Two teams were used alternately. 
As soon as the hammer was tripped, two men pulled back the ham- 
mer rope hand over hand, and hooked it on to the second team while 
the other team was returning. In this way the blows were deliv- 
ered almost twice as rapidly as when one team only is used. The 
driver was supported on wooden rollers sheathed with iron and pro- 
vided with sockets into which bars could be inserted for turning the 
rollers. The rollers rested on planks laid on the ground which was 
comparatively level and required no staying or grading to secure a 
level runway for the driver. Pine piles, 15 ft. long, were driven 
in a stiff clay to a depth of 13 ft. 

The average number of piles driven per 10-hr. day was 21, but 
the best day's record was 30. The cost was as follows per day: 

5 laborers, at $1.50 $ 7.50 

1 foreman, who worked 2.50 

2 teams and drivers, at $3.00 6.00 

Rent of driver 2.00 

Total, for 21 piles, at 85 cts $18.00 

The piles cost 10 cts. per ft. delivered; and the contract price 
was 24 cts. per ft. delivered and driven. 

On another contract under my direction, where piles were spaced 
10 ft. centers and driven 12 ft. into gravel along the sloping bank 
of a river, it was necessary to do more or less grading and block- 
ing up to secure a level runway for the pile driver. Four men and a 
pair of horses averaged only 6 piles per 10-hr. day, making the cost 
about $1.50 per pile for the labor of driving. This gang was too 
small, and worked deliberately. 



PILING, TRESTUNG, TIMBERWORK. 999 

Cost of Driving Foundation Piles for a Building — On this work, 
which consisted in driving long piles for the foundation of a building 
in Jersey City, a pile driver mounted on rollers was used. The lead- 
ers were 60 ft. long, and provided with two head sheaves, one for 
the hammer rope and one for the rope used in hauling and raising 
the piles. The hammer weighed 2,100 lbs. ; and the engine was a 
double-drum friction-clutch. The piles were of spruce 50 ft. long, 
and were driven their full length in soft clay. For the first 10 ft. 
the piles were driven without ringing. When the pile head 
reached the bottom of the leaders, a short wooden follower was used 
for the last 10 to 25 blows. The pile ring was then pulled off the 
pile by a short iron peavy lifted by the pile rope. The piles were 
stacked up in the street about 100 ft. away from the driver, and 
■were "snaked over," when wanted ; the pile rope being used for the 
purpose. For the first few blows the hammer had a fall of only 
5 ft., and about 25 blows per min. were delivered. But after that 
the fall of the hammer was 12 ft., and about 18 blows per min. were 
delivered. It required about 110 blows to drive a pile its full 50 ft. 
The time required to drive one pile was as follows : 

Minutes. 

Hooking on dragging pile to driver 5 

Hoisting pile and getting it in place 2 

Hammering pile 6 

Putting ring on pile 1 

Placing follower on pile % 

Removing follower from pile 1 

Removing ring from pile % 

Shifting pile driver 2 ft 1 

Total time per pile 17 

It will be observed that the hammer was actually engaged in ham- 
mering not much more than one-third of the total time. When 
everything was working smoothly 35 piles were driven in 10 hrs., 
but the output frequently fell below 30 piles in a day, due to sundry 
slight delays and accidents. 

The cost of operating the driver was as follows : 

1 engineman % 3.00 

1 man up the ladder 1.50 

4 men handling and guiding pile 6.00 

1 man sharpening piles 1.50 

1 foreman handling pile rope, etc 4.00 

% ton coal, at $6 2.00 

Total per day for labor and fuel $18.00 

Rent of pile driver 3.00 

Total, at 60 to 70 cts. per pile $21.00 

This does not include cost of delivering and removing the pile 
driver. 

The Construction and Cost of a SmalMPIIe Driver.* — Frequently 
a pile trestle must be built, and the number of piles to be driven may 
not warrant buying, or even hiring, a pile driver of ordinary size. 



* Engineering-Contracting, January, 1906. 



1000 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



th sucli cases' a small driver may be built at a nominal cost, and it 
will ^o very effective work where the piles are to be driven to a 
moderate depth. Such a driver (Pig. 5) was built by the managing 
editor of this journal some years ago, and a description of it will 
be given. 

The "leads," or "gins," that guided the hammer were made of 4-in. 
X 6-in. sticks, 30 ft. long. The hammer was of cast iron and 
weighed only 1,200 lbs. The rope that raised the hammer was 1-in. 
manilla. One end of this hammer rope was fastened to the "nip- 
pers"- that clutched. the lugs on the hammer. The other end of the 



■jcn 




H jo'o" H 

Side Elevation. 



Fig. 5. — Small Pile Driver. 



rope passed through a pulley and around a wooden drum 12 ins. 
in diameter. At one end of this wooden drum was fastened a 
wooden "bull wheel," 60 ins. in diameter. Another rope was wound 
around this "bull wheel," and a horse was hitched to the rope. The 
horse easily raised the hammer to the top of the "leads," where the 
"nippers" were automatically tripped, allowing the hammer to fall. 
The reader will note that only one pulley block was used. The use 
of a drum and "bull wheel" made it unnecessary to get any more 
blocks, and thus reduced the first cost ; but, what is even more im- 
portant, a "bull wheel" and drum does not consume the power of the 
horse in friction to any such degree as is the case where pulley 
blocks are used. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERJVORK. 1001 

The bill of lumber for the driver is as follows: 

Piece, in. in. ft. Ft. B. M. 

2— 4 X 6x30 (leads) 120 

1 — 6x6x4 (cross-piece) 12 

2 — 6x 6x16 (base) 96 

2 — 2x 4 X 32 (ladder) 43 

2 — 2x4x2 (ladder rungs) 24 

2 — 4 X 4 X 26 (swav braces) 64 

1 — 2 X 4 X 20 (long front sill) 13 

1 — 2 X 4x14 (short rear sill) 3 

1 — 12xl2x 4 (drum) 48 

30— 1x12 X 6 (bull wheel) 180 

Total 603 

About 24 bolts, % x 8 ins., were used, and a few pounds of nails. 
The wooden drum and "bull wheel" required more time to make than 
all the rest of the driver. The drum was shaped out of a 12-in. x 
12-in. stick, but was left square where the "bull wheel" was to be 
fastened on. At each end of the wooden drum, a wooden axle, 4 
Ins. in diameter and 6 ins. long, was cut out ; and these axles were 
fitted to wooden bearing blocks, and were well daubed with axle 
grease. The wooden "bull wheel" was made of five layers of 1 in. 
by 12 in. planlts spiked together ; one layer running one way, tl.e 
next layer in the opposite direction. First, three of these layers 
were spiked togetlier, and a 5-ft. circle was marked on them. Then 
with a key-hole saw the 5-ft. wheel was cut out. On each side of 
this wheel was spiked another layer of plank and sawed to a circle 
5 ft. 8 ins. diameter. These two layers formed the rims of the 
"bull wheel" and kept the "bull rope" from slipping off. 

Two carpenters and two laborers built this driver in two days, at 
a cost of $18 for labor. The total cast was: 

700 ft. B. M., at $20 $ 14.00 

Bolts and nails 2.00 

Labor 18.00 

1,200-lb. pile hammer 50.00 

1 pair nippers 5.00 

1 snatch block 3.00 

240 ft. of 1-in. rope 10.00 

Total $102.00 

The driver weighed 1% tons, exclusive of the hammer, and was 
easily loaded on a wagon. 

The cost of driving piles with it is given in the following para- 
graph. 

Cost of Driving Piles for Wagon Road Trestles. — It was neces- 
sary to drive piles for a number of wagon road trestles across 
ravines, which were often separated by several miles. A light pile 
driver that could readily be moved from place to place was built, 
as described on page 1000. 

Piles were driven in bents of three piles each, bents 20 ft. apart. 
In fairly hard ground the piles were driven only 5 or 6 ft. deep. 
Due to the irregularity of the ground, in nearly all cases it was 
necessary to build a light scaffolding on which to run the driver 
across each creek. This scaffolding was made of sticks cut from 



1002 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the forest alongside, and cost nothing except for labor, which is 
included in the cost of $1 given below. The young contractor would 
be apt to overlook this item of scaffolding, but it should always be 
remembered that a driver of this kind must have a level runway 
on which to work, and, if the ground is irregular, it must either be 
graded or scaffolding put up. Usually scaffolding is cheaper than 
grading. 

The crew consisted of 4 men and 1 horse. It would take them 
about 2 days to move the driver 4 miles over poor roads, and erect 
a staging upon which to drive a seven-bent trestle. Then they would 
average 10 piles driven per 10-hr. day. The cost of actual driving 
was about $1 per pile, wages being $10 a day for the crew; to 
which must be added another $1 per pile for lost time moving 
driver from one trestle to the next and building staging. This was 
the average cost on six trestles, 84 piles being driven. 

Cedar piles were largely used for this work, as the driving was 
light, and as the durability of cedar is greater than other woods. 
After driving the piles, 2 men would saw off the heads of 18 piles 
in 3 hrs., at 6 cts. per pile. These piles averaged 20 ft. in length, 
and with axmen at $2 a day each, they were cut down and trimmed 
for 25 cts. a pile, and hauled 3 miles over rough roads for 50 cts. 
more per pile. 

I found it economic to sublet the pile driving to a reliable car- 
penter who would work with his gang of three men, and earn good 
wages for himself and crew if paid $2 for driving each pile, includ- 
ing all moving and building of staging. The work just described 
was done in this way. Work handled thus generally insures activ- 
ity on the part of small gangs of men and reduces the charges for 
superintendence to a very small percentage. 

Cost of Driving Piles for Trestle Renewals.*— Mr. G. H. Herrold is 
author of the following work done on the Chicago Great Western 
Ry. in Minnesota. 

I have compiled the following statement [the complete tabulation 
of each day's work is given in Engineering-Contracting, but not 
reprinted here] from daily reports of the performance of pile driver 
working on pile bridge renewals during the 1905 season, to show 
the number of piles driven each day and the labor cost per pile, the 
total labor cost per day, the delays and the average labor cost per 
pile for the season's work. 

I have done this to show the great variation in the cost per pile, 
comparing one day's work with another, and yet the relative low 
average cost of the total work done, and, to determine a basis for 
estimating more closely the cost of pile renewals. 

A 3,000 lb. drop hammer was used; 25 bridges were opened, the 
work on each bridge varying from complete renewal to one bent 
renewal. Driver was supplied with piling by making shipments, by 
bridges, as far as possible, and one car load of assorted lengths, as 
extras, was kept in work train. 



^Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 23, 1906. 



PILING, T REST LING, TIMBERWORK. 1003 

Three hundred and ninety-one piles were driven in 32 10-hr. work- 
ing days, or an average of 12.2 piles per day, the maximum cost per 
pile for any day was $10.57, and the minimum cost was $1.28. Tlie 
cost per pile for the season was $2.88. The piles varied in lengths 
from 20 ft. to 40 ft., and were driven 9 to 21 ft. in the ground. 
The average daily expense was as follows : 

Per day. 

Pile driver crew, wages $21.00 

Work train, wages 14.50 

Total, 12.2 piles, at $2.88 $35.50 

In the 32 days' work, 80 hrs. were lost by delays due to traffic, 
etc., or about 25% of tlie working time. 

The character of the driving varied from shell rock (requiring^ 
cast shoes) quick sand, and indurated clay to perfect material. 

The train crew consisted of engineer, fireman, conductor, and 
brakemen. 

The pile driver crew consisted of a foreman, engineer, fireman 
and eight men. 

The men were cared for in boarding cars which were self-sup- 
porting. 

The following is a type of the daily performance report : 

David, Sept. 26, 1905. 
Division Engineer. 

Drove 16 piles Br. A188 and transferred piling in KC&MB 690 
to a local flat. Worked 10 men, expense $21.48. Delayed 2 hrs., 
40 mins., as follows: 40 min. by No. 274 ; 50 min. running for water ; 
30 min. by No. 203 ; 40 min. by No. 204. Will finish A188 to-mor- 
row, want orders. 

Pile Driver Foreman. 

Cost of Driving Piles for a Trestle, N. P. Ry — Mr. E. H. Beckler 
gives the following data on driving piles for a railway trestle and 
three truss bridges on the N. P. Ry., at Duluth, Minn., by contract 
in 1884. The work was all done in the winter, and about 2,340 piles 
were driven, of which 460 were in foundations. The trestle was 
5,000 ft. long. A pile driver, having leaders 65 ft. long, and a 2,600- 
Ib. hammer, was used. The piles were of Norway and white pine, 
the average length being 51 ft. From 50 to 150 blows were struck 
on each pile. With a 20-ft. fall the hammer struck 7 blows per 
min. The penetration was 10 to 42 ft. The average cut-off was 5 ft. 
for the trestle piles. The pile driven engine was mounted on the 
driver platform to give stability and for ease of moving. A 900-lb. 
follower was used in driving some of the piles, but it was found to 
reduce the penetration of each blow about 20%, and it did not save 
the heads of the piles from more or less shattering. 

Some piles Were driven butt down, but it added 25% to the cosi 
of driving ; and it was believed that the small end, being exposed 
Would decay faster than the butt end. Moreover, the area of the 



1004 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

small end was so small that the pile would not stand heavy driving 
without shattering. 

The cost of operating one pile driver was about $38 a day and 
from Dec. 11 to Mar. 5 the record of its work was as follows : 

Per pile. 

202 piles (32 ft. long), 19.2 piles per day $2.25 

134 piles (44 ft. long), 23.3 piles per day 1.65 

364 piles (60 ft. long), 25.1 piles per day 1.50 

379 piles (66 ft. long), 19.2 piles per day 1.95 

73 piles (65 ft. long), 22.5 piles per day 1.85 

These costs represent the cost to the contractor. 

As many as 30 piles a day for 4 consecutive days were driven. 
The average cost of driving these 1,152 piles, it will be seen, was 
nearly $1.75 per pile. 

The driving was done after the ice had formed in the bay, and 
the pile driver was supported by the ice during driving. 

The soil was 7 ft. of clay under which was sand. Before the work 
was begun, test piles were driven from a scow along the line of 
the trestle 300 ft. apart. This enabled the engineers to make out 
an accurate bill of pile timber for the work. 

It was found that Norway pine piles stood the driving in cold 
weather (as low as — 15° F.) much better than white pine; for, 
when wood freezes, it is brittle. 

The test piles were nearly all broken off several feet below the 
ground level, by the side thrust of the ice that formed to a thickness 
of 4 ft. after the piles were driven. Three test piles were pulled up 
by the ice, although they had been driven 40 ft. into mud. The 
combined strength of four piles in a bent was required to resist the 
lateral thrust of ice pushed by the wind. The ice was unable 
to lift the piles once the trestle was finished. 

Cost of Pile Driving, O. & St. L. Ry. — Mr. A. E. Buchannan gives 
the following data of work done, Oct. 22 to Dec. 17, 1889, on the 
Omaha & St. Louis Ry., by company labor. There were 46 days 
worked, the actual working time being 6 hrs. 52 mins. per day. 
The railway driver drove 1,267 piles in these 316 hrs. of which time 
14 hrs. were lost in lowering the leads 344 times, or 2^4 mins. each 
time. The average time to drive a pile, it will be seen, was 15 mins. 
The average depth driven was 14 ft. The work was on 41 different 
trestles, each averaging 101 ft. long. Wages were $2.40 for engine- 
men, $2.00 for fireman, and $1.50 to $1.75 for laborers. The cost of 
the 46 days' work was: 

Wages $1,684 

Fuel, etc 262 

Total, 1,267 piles, at $1.54 $1,946 

The poorest day's work was 11 piles; the best, 44 piles; the aver- 
age, 28 piles. 

Cost of Pile Driving, C. & E. I. Ry. — Mr. A. S. Markley gives the 
following data relative to the cost of driving 436 piles on 16 jobs, 



PILING, TRESTLING^ TIMBERWORK. 1005 

averaging 27 piles on each job. The work was done in 1902 for 
the C. & E. I. Ry., using a self-propelling railway pile driver made 
by tlie Industrial Works, Bay City, Mich. No locomotive was re- 
quired as the driver could run at a speed of 10 miles an hour and 
pull 5 cars on a level road. The leads were 47 ft. long; the ham- 
mer, 2,900 lbs. ; the hoisting rope, 2-in. ; and the engine 30-hp., 
double cylinder. The leads could be raised in 2 mlns. The engine- 
man received $2.50 a day; the fireman, $1.50; the rest of the men 
were laborers, except the foreman. The average cost of driving 
each pile was 75 cts. ; and each pile averaged 24 ft. long, although 
the range was from 14 to 42 ft. 

The Record for Rapid Driving on the O. & IVI. R. R. — As illus- 
trating what can be done under favorable conditions where men are 
rushing their work, a record given by Mr. L. C. Fitch, Engineer of 
Maintenance-of-Way, Ohio & Miss. R. R., is interesting. A pile 
driver crew drove 28 piles (7 bents of 4 piles each) in 3 hrs., at a 
cost of 30 cts. per pile. The piles averaged 21 ft. long and were 
driven 15 ft. into the ground. 

Cost of a Pile Trestle, Sheet Piles, Etc. — Mr. Henry H. Carter 
gives the following costs of building a trestle across a pond in Mass- 
achusetta The work was done by contract, occupying five months, 
beginning November, 1883, and ending April 9, 1884. The piles 
were driven in bents of 8 piles to the bent, bents 4 ft. apart, and 
capped with 10 x lO's 35 ft. long, notched down (dapped) 2 ins. on 
each pile. On the caps were laid four lines of 8 x 10-in. stringers, 
and on these were laid the ties for a double track road for con- 
tractor's dump cars. This trestle was filled with gravel, and after- 
ward all but the two outer piles in each bent were cut off 7 ft. below 
water and used as a foundation for a masonry conduit. The aver- 
age length of the 3,750 piles driven was 37 ft, about 25% of the 
piles being over 45 ft. long. With the hammer falling about 12 ft., 
318 of the piles penetrated less than 1 in. under the last blow (very 
hard driving) ; 950 piles penetrated 1.3 to 2.7 ins. under the last 
blow (hard driving) ; 2,016 piles penetrated 3 to 4 ins. under the 
last blow (medium driving) ; and 141 piles penetrated over 4 ins. 
under the last blow (easy driving). In general the piles were 
driven through several feet of very soft mud and 12 ft. into the 
hard bottom. The piles were driven by two floating pile drivers sup- 
ported on a raft made of timbers and empty oil barrels. The cost 
of the work was as follows : 
Making Pile Driver: 

Foreman, 7 days, at $3.25 $ 22.75 

Engineman, 7 days, at $3.25 22.75 

Laborers, 15 days, at $1.75 26.25 

Carpenter, 14 days, at $2.25 31.50 

Carpenter, 18 days, at $2.00 36.00 

Gins 124.00 

Floats 314.95 

Total making driver $578.20 

The cost of building this driver if distributed over the 3,638 piles 



1006 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

driven, amounts to nearly 16 cts. per pile. The other costs were 

as follows : 

Loading and Transporting Piles: 

Foreman, 96J4 days, at $2.00 $ 192.50 

Laborers, 449 days, at $1.75 785.75 

Horse, 104% days, at $1.50 157.12 

Sleds 3.50 

Total loading, etc $1,138.87 

Pile Driving: 

Foreman, 82 days, at $3.25 266.50 

Foreman, 1131/2 days, at $3.00 355.50 

Foreman, 95 days, at $2.50 237.50 

Engineman, 87 days, at $3.25 287.75 

Engineman, 1031/2 days, at $2.50 258.75 

Topman, 166 days, at $2.00 332.00 

Topman, 17 days, at $1.75 29.75 

Deckhand, 116y2 days, at $2.25 262.12 

Deckhand, 255% days, at $2.00 510.50 

Deckhand, 280 days, at $1.75 490.00 

Laborer, 20 days, at $1.00 20.00 

Carpenter, 177 days, at $2.25 398.25 

Carpenter, 172 days, at $2.00 344.00 

Freight on pile drivers 75.00 

Coal, 35 tons, at $6.40 224.00 

Use of plant, 180 days, at $1.50 270.00 

11 M spruce braces, at $14 154.00 

872 lbs. spikes in braces, at 3 cts 26.16 

Tools 120.00 

Total driving $4,661.98 

Piles: 
3,638 spruce piles (av. 37 ft. each), at $2.26. .$8,221.88 

Grand total (excl. driver) $14,022.53 

The loading and transporting of the 3,638 piles cost $0.32 per 
pile. The driving cost $1.30 per pile, the average number of piles 
driven being 20 per day. The cost of each pile averaged $2.26. The 
total cost of each pile driven was $4.04, including cost of making 
scow, interest on driver, labor, fuel and cost of pile. The use of 
plant at $1.50 a day is too low an estimate under ordinary con- 
ditions. 

The cost of the materials and labor for caps, stringers and ties 
(there were no sway braces) was as follows: 
Transporting Timber: 

Foreman, 19 days, at $2.00 $ 38.00 

Laborer, 89 days, at $1.75 155.75 

Laborer, 4 days, at $1.50 6.00 

Horse, 20 days, at $1.50 30.00 

Sled 1.50 

Total transporting timber $ 231.25 

Labor on Caps and Stringers: 

Foreman, 16 days, at $3.25 $ 52.00 

Foreman, 20 days, at $2.50 50.00 

Carpenter, 60 days, at $2.25 135.00 

Carpenter, 58 days, at $2.00 116.00 

Total labor on caps, etc $ 353.00 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1007 

Caps and Stringers: 

159 M spruce, at $16.10 $2,559.90 

12 M spruce bolsters, at $13.50 162.00 

3.6 M spruce plank, at $14.00 50.40 

10,490 lbs. bolts, at 2% cts 283.23 

3,830 lbs. bolts, at 3 cts 114.90 

88 lbs. spikes, at 3 cts 2.64 

Building derricks 5.00 

Tools 28.50 

Total labor and mtls. for caps and stringers. $3, 5 5 9. 5 7 

The cost of transporting timbers to the trestle ($231.25) applies 
not only to the 175 M of caps and stringers, but also to 24 M of ties 
and 27 M of sheet piling and wales, making the cost of transport- 
ing practically $1 per M. The other labor involved in placing the 
caps and stringers ($353) after delivery, is equivalent to $2 per M, 
making a total of $3 per M for the labor on the caps and stringers. 
The cost of placing the ties was as follows : 
Placing Ties : 

Laborer, 41/2 days, at $1.00 $ 4.50 

Laborer, 6 days, at $1.50 9.00 

Laborer, 51% days, at $2.00 103.50 

Total placing ties $117.00 

Ties: 

24.18 M spruce ties, at $14 $338.52 

540 lbs. spikes, at 3 cts 16.20 

Total labor and mtls $471.72 

From this it appears that the cost of placing ties was nearly 
$5 per M (or 21.3 cts. per tie) to which must be added $1 per M for 
loading and transporting. 

The cost of sheet piling was as follows : 
SJt6Gt Pilifio ' 

25.5 M sheet piling, at $18.60 $474.30 

1.2 M spruce wales, at $16.00 19.20 

205 lbs. spikes, at 3 cts 6.15 

Interest on pile driver, 16 days, at $1.40 22.40 

3 tons coal, at $6.40 19.20 

Foreman, 16 days, at $3.25 52.00 

Engineman, 16 days, at $3.25 52.00 

Topman. 16 days, at $2.00 32.00 

Deckhand, 16 days, at $2.00 32.00 

Deckhand, 40% days, at $1.75 71.31 

Carpenter, 32 days, at $2.00 64.00 

Total sheet piling $844.56 

The cost of driving the 25.5 M and placing the 1.2 M was nearly 
$13 per M. This sheet piling was 4-ln. tongued and grooved, driven 
for two culverts. 

The cost of sawing, dapping (notched 2 ins.) and fitting 280 caps 
for 280 pile bents of 6 piles to the bent was as follows: Cost to saw 
off piles, and fit caps, $2.95 per cap, or $2 per M (for each cap 
was 10x10 ins. X 18 ft.). The piles were sawed off at the bottom 
of a wet trench, and it cost 90 cts. per bent to saw away the earth. 
Carpenters received $2.50, laborers $1.25, and foreman $3.50 a day. 
The gang consisted of 1 foreman, 3 laborers and 4 carpenters. 



1008 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

These caps were covered with a platform of 4-in. spruce plank 
run lengthwise of the trench, laid to break joint, and spiked to the 
caps with 8-in. cut spikes. This platform was laid with a force 
of 1 foreman, at $3.50 ; 8 laborers, at $1.50, and 1 carpenter, at 
$2.50. The cost of laying 900 M was $7.40 per M. The contrac- 
tor doing this work failed. 

Cost of a Pile Docking — This work consisted in driving a row 
of oak piles, 25 ft. long and 5 ft. centers, to an average depth of 
10 ft. into gravel. The piles were sheeted on the rear with 3-in. 
oak plank laid horizontally and breaking joints. A waling piece, 
of 10 X 12-in. oak, was bolted along the front face of this docking, 
and anchored back to stone deadmen. The anchor rods were 1%- 
in., spaced 10 ft. apart. Back of this docking an earth fill was 
placed, but the following costs relate only to the timber work. 
A pile driver, mounted on rollers, and operated by a friction-clutch 
engine, was used. The daily cost of operation was as follows: 

7 men, at $1.50 $10.50 

1 foreman -. 3.00 

1 pair of horses 1.50 

Rent of driver and engine 3.00 

% ton coal, at $4 1.00 

Total, 10 piles driven, at $1.90 $19.00 

The piles were of oak and two of the men peeled and pointed 
them and square-sawed the heads. The horses were used to drag 
the piles up to the driver. There was some grading and scaffolding 
work necessary to provide a level runway for the driver. The 
foreman was not a good manager, and the cost was much higher 
than it should have been. On one day when the work was pushed 
and when conditions were favorable, 25 piles were driven. 

The labor cost of placing the sheet planking and wale piece was 
$4.50 per M, about 80% of the timber being the 3-in. planking. 
This work was done by common laborers working in pairs, at $1.50 
each per 10-hr. day. The piles were not always plumb and seldom 
spaced exactly, so that a measuring pole had to be used to fit 
each plank, and every plank had to be sawed separately by the 
men. Had the engineer so designed the work that the planks could 
have been set on end, like sheet piling, all this fitting and sawing 
of individual planks could have been avoided, with consequent re- 
duction in the cost. Moreover there would have been less wast- 
age of plank. Such a design would have necessitated two more 
small-sized wale pieces, but it would have made easy the removal 
of any single plank at any time for repairs due to rotting. In bor- 
ing the oak wale pieces and piles with a 1%-in. ship auger, a man 
would bore 12 ins. in 5 mins. It took 5 mins. for two men to cut 
off a 10 X 12-in. oak stick using a crosscut saw. 

It may be well to note that the plans called for the driving of 
3 X 8-in. oak sheet piling to a depth of 5 ft. by hand, using wooden 
mauls. It was found Impossible to drive these planks more than 
"2 ft. into the gravel without battering the heads to pieces. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1009 

Data on Driving Plumb and Batter Piles, New York Docks. — Mr. 
Charles W. Raymond gives the following data on the driving of 
piles for docks, Hudson River, New York City, prior to 1880 : Piles 
were driven with a scow pile driver, the scow being 3 x 20 x 42 ft., 
provided with leaders 50 ft. long. The engine was a 10-hp. friction- 
clutch hoisting engine, with double cylinders, 6x12 ins. The boiler 
was 15 hp. upright. A crew of 8 men worked 8 hrs. per day for 
the city, and drove 10 to 15 piles per day. The piles aver- 
aged about 65 ft. long, and were driven 55 to 60 ft. below 
mean low water, penetrating about 10 ft. of gravel and cobbles 
(6-in. and less) that were filled in over the dredged area before 
driving. Then the piles penetrated about 25 ft. of river muck, 
making a total penetration of 35 ft. There was no difficulty In 
driving through the cobbles and gravel without brooming the piles. 
All piles were sharpened, and their heads were squared. To indi- 
cate the kind of driving, two records of 50 piles show that 230 
blows of the hammer were required to secure a penetration of 38 
ft., or ISO blows to secure a penetration of 33 ft. The last foot 
of penetration required 13 to 14 blows of a 3,000-lb. hammer falling 
8 ft. (not freely, but with the hammer rope). 

A special driver, with leaders inclined 1 to 6, was used to drive 
batter piles, and the average number of piles driven per day was 
about half as many as in driving plumb piles, or 5 to 7 piles per 8- 
hr. day. The number of blows per batter pile was somewhat great- 
er than per plumb pile, but by no means enough greater to account 
for the slower driving, which was probably due to difficulty in 
getting the batter pile properly started. 

Data on Driving Piles for Docks, New York. — Mr. Eugene Len- 
tilhon states that in 1896 the following comparative records were 
made with a drop hammer and a Vulcan steam hammer : The driv- 
ing was for a dock on the Hudson River, New York City, and was 
very hard driving, the material being 10 ft. of cobbles underlaid by 
sand and gravel. The piles were spaced 3 ft. apart, and driven 
from scows. The drop-hammer, friction-clutch machine had a crew 
of 10 men. It required 175 blows of a 3,300-lb. hammer falling 10 
ft. to drive a pile; and 15 blows were struck per minute, hence the 
actual time of hammering a pile was about 12 mins. The piles 
were 55 to 60 ft. long and penetrated 21 to 28 ft. The crew 
averaged 12 piles per 10-hr. day. 

As compared with this crew of 8 men, using a Vulcan steam 
hammer, averaged 18 piles per 10 hrs. The machine weighed 8,400 
lbs., and the striking piston weighed 4,000 lbs. and had a drop of 
3% ft. It struck 60 blows per minute, and some piles required as 
many as 1,200 blows. Mr. Lentilhon does not make it clear why 
the steam hammer was more effective than the drop hammer. It 
is probable, however, that there were fewer delays in straightening 
up the pile during driving when a steam hammer was used. He 
states that there were two objections to the steam hammer, one of 
which was the frequent loss of the "cap" or "saucepan," or "hood," 
by dropping into the water, and the rapidity with which the "cap" 



1010 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



was worn out. Only 38 piles were driven with each cap before it 
was worn out. The second objection was the impracticability of 
•driving crooked piles. 

Cost of Pulling Piles, Driving Piles and TImberwork.* — In 1899 
the city of New York let a contract for making alterations to the 
temporary bridge over the Bronx River near "Westchester avenue, 
Bronx Borough. The contract price was $950. The work con- 
sisted of the tearing out of the old pivot pier, cutting off one span 
of the west trestle approach and adding one span to the east side. 
Fig. 6 shows the extent of the work. 

The old pivot pier was constructed of piles driven to rock through 
four or five feet of hard material, probably disintegrated rock. 
The piles were sway braced, were capped by 12 in. x 12 in. timber 




55'J"- 



Wesi- Approacfi 



EMOi-CONTf^. 




Fig. 6. 

and had a 6 in. deck on top of the caps. A fender rack about 90 
ft. long was also removed. This rack consisted of piles, 8 ft. center 
and timber, 3 in. x 12 in., bolted to the piles. 

The contractor's plant consisted of a pile driver and scow and 
a land driver operated from the scow. According to the terms of 
the contract all timber in good condition could be used over again. 
Work was begun June 14, and the weather was favorable for good 
work. 

The first work done was the tearing out of the old pile pivot 
pier and the fender rack. In this work the scow pile' driver was 
used in pulling the piles, about 45 piles being removed In this man- 
ner. Such of these piles as were in good condition were used in the 
new work. Ih addition one span of pile trestle was cut off in the 
west trestle approach, the timber being sawed off close to the 
ground. A total of about 10 M ft. B. M. was removed, the labor 
cost being as follows : 



*Elngineering -Contracting, June 13, 1906. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1011 

Hours. Rate, cts. Total. 

Foreman 48 45 $21.60 

Englneman 24 35 8.40 

Dock builders 96 271/2 26.40 

Watchman 30 15 4.50 

Total 10 M ft. at $6.09 $60.90 

It was necessary to excavate a small amount of mud in order to 
allow the pile driver to float in sufficiently near the pivot pier, and 
also. to allow the placing of the sway bracing as low as possible. 
The depth of the cutting was 3 ft. and about 30 cu. yds. of material 
was removed. The labor cost was as follows : 

Hours. Rate, cts. Total. 

Foreman 4 45 $1.80 

Bngineman 2 35 .70 

Dock builders 8 271/3 2.20 

Watchman 2 15 .30 



Total, 30 cu. yds. at 16.6 cts $5.00 

In driving the piles the scow pile driver and the land driver were 
used, the latter, however, was used only in driving the piles in the 
bank bents, 8 piles being so driven. In all 83 piles were driven. 
The piles were of spruce, about 25 ft. long, and were rather slen- 
der. They were driven through about 5 ft. of disintegrated rock, 
above which was soft mud, to solid rock. It took from 20 to 25 
blows of the hammer to drive each pile. The hammer was raised 
by a friction hoist, and fell with hoist cable attached. 

The labor cost of driving the piles is shown in the accompany- 
ing table. 

Labor Cost of Driving the Piles. 

Cost 

Hours. Rate, cts. Total. per pile. 

Foreman 82 45 $ 36.90 $0.44 

Engineman 41 35 14.35 .17 

Dock builders .171 27% 47.03 .57 

Watchman 40 15 6.00 .07 

Total $104.28 $1.25 

Labor Cost of Framing and Placing Timber. 

Cost per M. ft. 

Hours. Rate, cts. Total. B. M. 

Foreman 166 45 $74.70 $5.06 

Bngineman 88 35 34.80 2.36 

Dock builders 365 27y2 100.38 6.78 

Watchman 128 15 19.20 1.30 

Total $229.08 $15.50 

In framing and placing timber about 14,800 ft. B. M. of yellow 
pine lumber was used. Some of this was new and some was taken 
from the old work. The piles were cut off and capped, and the 
stringers and floor in the approaches and the deck of the pivot 
pier were placed. A railing was built on the approaches and the 
sway braces and fender rack were bolted into position. Little fram- 
ing was done. The labor cost of this work is shown in the accom- 
panying table. 



1012 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The total cost of the work is shown below : 
Labor: 

Tearing out old work $ 60.90 

Excavation 5.00' 

Driving piles , 104.28 

Framing and placing timber 229.08 

Total labor I399.2S 

Materials: 

53 piles at $2 $106.00 

Timber, 3.6 M ft. B. M. at $30 108.00 

Bolts, spikes, etc., 900 lbs. at 5 cts 45.00 

Total $259.00 

Operating Expenses: 

Towing $ 30.00 

Coal for pile driver, 2% tons at $4 10.00 

Repairs to plant 10.00 

Total operating expenses $ 50.00 

Total cost $679.00 

As stated previously the contract price was $950. 

Work of this character is generally expensive because of the 
small gang of dock builders employed. The engineman's wages 
and plant expense, therefore, form a large percentage of the total 
cost. 

Cost of Driving and Sawing Off Piles. — Mr. Eugene Lentilhon 
gives the following relative to a pile foundation for a concrete 
sewer, built by the New York City Dock Dept. The piles were 
driven by a scow driver with a 3,400-lb. hammer, which worked 65 
days. Wages were $2,30 for laborers, $3.50 for engineman, and 
$3.00 for dock-builders, per 10 hrs. The average was 8 piles 
driven per day, at a cost of $3.90 for labor of driving. The piles 
were sawed off 1 ft. below mean low water. The dock builders 
fastened small battens on opposite sides of a pile to guide the saw, 
and frequently two men during a good low tide sawed off 3 piles. 
The cost of sawing off was $1.28 per pile. 

Data on Driving With a Steam Hammer and Sawing Off Piles.— 

Mr. Sanford E. Thomson gives the following data on driving and 
sawing off piles for the Cambridge Bridge, at Boston, in 1901. A 
Warrington steam hammer, made by the Vulcan Iron Works, of 
Chicago, was used by the contractors. It weighed 9,800 lbs., and 
the striking part weighed 5,000 lbs. With 90 to 100 lbs. of steam, 
the hammer would strike 60 to 70 blows per minute, falling by 
gravity. The top of the leaders of the scow driver was 75 ft. above 
the water surface. After a pile was well down, an oak follower, 
14 ins. square and 30 ft. long, was placed on the pile to complete 
the driving, so that the pile head was left 18 ft. below the water 
surface. The average 10-hrs. work of a driver was 100 piles, but on 
one day as many as 212 piles were driven in 9 hrs. The piles 
were 40 ft. long and driven in hard clay. 

The piles were cut off 15 to 34 ft. below low water by a rotarjr 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1013 

saw mounted on another scow. A 40-hp. engine running at 150 
revolutions per minute was geared up to tlie saw shaft so as to 
drive the saw at about 450 revolutions per minute. A 42-in. saw 
was mounted at the lower end of a hollow vertical shaft 4 ins. in 
diameter and 60 ft. long. This shaft was supported by three pil- 
low-block bearings which were bolted to a spud 14 ins. square and 
60 ft. long ; so that when the spud was raised or lowered the saw 
shaft moved with it. The pulley on the saw shaft was arranged 
to slide on a spline or key, so that the shaft could be raised with- 
out raising the pulley. The belt from the pulley ran to another 
pulley mounted on a short vertical jack-shaft, provided with a 
bevel gear wheel meshing with another bevel gear wheel on a 
horizontal shaft driven by the engine. This horizontal shaft was 
geared to the engine with a link belt. This machine sawed off 600 
to 800 piles per 10-hr. day. The spruce piles were 10 ins. diameter. 
Cost of Driving Piles for a Swing Bridge. — A steel highway swing 
bridge, 240 ft. long, and 16-ft. roadway, was to be supported on a 
pier in the center of the river. The piles were Washington fir, 
driven to an average depth of 20 ft. in grrvel. The penetration 
under the last blow of a 2,400-lb. hammer, falling freely 27 ft., 
was 3 to 4 ins. A scow pile driver was used, and the force to 
operate it was as follows : 

Per day. 
1 engineman $ 3.00 

1 man tripping hammer 1.75 

2 men guiding pile 3.50 

2 men making ready the next pile 3.50 

% foreman . 2.50 

% ton coal, at $9 3.00 

Total per 10 hrs $15.25 

Rent of driver 6.00 

Total $21.25 

This force averaged 26 piles per 10-hr. day. The foreman super- 
vised another gang of men, so that half his wages were charged to 
this work. The piles were neither peeled nor sharpened, for I 
found no economy in so doing. There were 42 piles in the pier, 
and twice as many more in the pier protection bents upstream and 
downstream, which also served as falsework upon which to build 
the bridge. The piles in these bents were sawed off, capped and 
sheeted with plank. Two men with a cross-cut saw would saw off 
30 of the piles in the bents in 10 hrs., at about 12 cts. per pile. The 
cost of sawing off the piles below water for the pier is given in the 
next paragraph. 

Cost of Sawing Off 42 Piles Under Water. — It was necessary to 
cut off 42 piles, 4 ft. below extreme low water for the pier work 
just described. A gravel bar occupied the site of the pier, and, al- 
though the water was about 4 ft. deep over the bar at the time of 
pile driving, it was necessary to dredge this bar at least 4 ft. deeper. 
A kole 4 ft. deep, and 27 ft. square on a side, was dredged with an 
ordinary drag scraper equipped with long handles and hauled by 
the pile-driver engine. The men operating the scraper walked on 



1014 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a raft. It took 3% days of the pile driver crew above given, to do 
tliis dredging, at $21 per day, or $74. The 42 piles were driven 
in this hole, after driving 4 piles above the hole and sheeting them 
with plank to act as a temporary sheer dam to prevent the river 
current (3 miles per hr.) from filling in the hole with gravel dur- 
ing pile driving. The 42 piles were cut off about 8 ft. under water 
with a circular saw mounted on a shaft driven by the pile-driver 
engine. A saw, shaft, pulleys and belt were bought for this pur- 
pose and rigged up by the pile-driver crew. It took them 3 days to 
rig the saw and cut off the 42 piles. The hole had not been 
dredged deep enough and the gravel that had washed in dulled the 
teeth of the saw requiring frequent raising to resharpen it. More- 
over, the engine did not have sufficient power to drive the saw at 
high speed, and the piles were as much chewed off as sawed off. 
All these, however, are conditions apt to be met in similar work 
on small jobs. The 3 days' sawing cost $64, or $1.50 per pile. 

Data on Sawing Off Burlington Bridge Pier Piles. — Mr. C. Hudson 
gives the following description of the method used in sawing off 
several hundred piles for the Burlington Bridge pier, in 1868: 

The piles when driven, were sawed off by machinery. On each 
side of the pier, and a few feet away from it, a row of piles, per- 
haps 6 or 8 ft. apart, was driven. These were capped, and upon 
the cap was placed a traveler 12 ft. wide, arranged to be moved 
from end to end of the pier on these caps. Upon this traveler was 
another and smaller one, arranged to run upon it and across the 
pier. This last ti-aveler carried a vertical shaft in a properly braced 
frame. This shaft carried at its lower end a circular saw about 
36 ins. in diameter. The shaft could be raised or lowered as re- 
quired, and was driven by means of a beveled gear from a hori- 
zontal shaft on the little traveler. A long belt extended the whole 
length of the large traveler, around a pulley on this horizontal 
shaft, and another guide pulley, so arranged that the shaft was 
turned regardless of the position of the little traveler. An engine 
on a boat alongside the pier was the motive power. 

The little traveler was fed across the pier by means of a set 
of small blocks on each side, and a line which ran around a wheel 
shaft like. a ship's steering wheel. By this means the traveler could 
be moved either way, and could thus cut off a row of piles running 
one way, and then, by feeding back cut the next row, the large 
traveler having been moved back to reach it. In this way 12 or 15 
piles were cut off per hour. The efficiency of the saw under water 
is, of course, very much less than in the air. 

Cost of Pulling and Driving Piles for a Guard Pier. — The pile pro- 
tection, or guard pier, of an old draw bridge, across a tributary of 
the Hudson River, was removed and new piles were driven. I sub- 
let the work, and the following are the actual costs to the sub- 
contractor : 

The number of piles pulled was 200, and the time required was 
10 days. A scow pile driver was used, the engine being a friction- 
clutch machine, and the hammer weighing 2,200 lbs. To pull the 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1015 

piles, a pair of heavy triple-sheave blocks were used. The pulling 
was easy, the piles being only 10 to 15 ft. in rather soft ground. 
The dally (10-hr.) cost of operating the scow was as follows: 

Per day. 

1 captain of driver $ 2.50 

1 engineman 2.00 

3 men, at $1.80 5.40 

% ton coal, at $3 1.00 

Rent of driver 5.00 

Total, 20 piles pulled, at 80 cts $15.90 

This same crew then drove 200 new piles in 20 days, or 10 piles 
per day, at a cost of ?1.60 per pile. The piles were driven 15 to 
20 ft., and were 30 to 35 ft. long after cutting off. The slowness 
of the driving was largely due to delays caused by navigation at 
high tide, the channel being so narrow that the driver had to 
drop down with the tide to make way for boats to pass, and then 
pull back against the tide. On some days the driver was inter- 
rupted in this way as many as 8 times. 

After the piles were driven and cut off, a 6 x 12-in. wale piece was 
bolted on each side of the piles, entirely around the guard pier, 
the wale piece being 1 ft. below the top of the piles. Another 
(but single) wale piece was bolted to the piles, on the outside, at 
low water. To these wale pieces, 3 x 12-in. sheeting planks were 
spiked upright ; and two more lines of 6 x 12-in. walings were 
bolted through the sheeting and inside wale pieces, to hold the 
sheeting in place. The 1-in. bolts were countersunk. The timber 
for the wale pieces was yellow pine in 16-ft. lengths, and had to 
be scarfed with a 12-in. ship lap on each end, and drift bolted twice. 
This scarfing was expensive work, beside causing a 6% loss of tim- 
ber at the scarfs. If longer lengths than 16 ft. had been used, 
the cost of labor and the waste of timber would have been less. 
Beside the wale pieces and sheeting, there were 6 x 12-in. timbers 
bolted on each side of every fifth bent of piles ; and the center 
piles of the bent were capped, lengthwise of the guard pier, with a 
12 X 12-in. cap. There were nearly 30,000 ft. B. M. of yellow pine 
timber all told, which cost $23 per M delivered. 

For this timberwork the same crew was used as for pile pulling 
and driving, except that one more timberman, at $1.80, was em- 
ployed, malcing the daily cost $17.70. The crew averaged only 
1,300 ft. B. M. per day, at a cost of nearly $14 per M for framing 
and placing all the timber. They were slow workers, and there 
were delays due to navigation. 

Cost of Drawing Foundation Piles and Sheet Piles. — The following 
is a very brief abstract of a long illustrated article in Engineering- 
Contracting, May 8, 1907, by Mr. Charles M. Ripley, on the anchor- 
age of the Manhattan Bridge. 

Sheet Piling and Excavation. — The first work done was the exca- 
vation of the foundation pit and the driving of the foundation 
piles. This work was done by the J. & F. Kelley Co., as sub- 
contractors. Sheet piling 12 ins. thick and from 20 to 30 ins. 
wide was driven all around the anchorage and so as to give about 



1016 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

4 ft. clearance on the sides and at the front and to be close against 
the footing masonry at the rear. It was driven by a Vulcan steam 
hammer. There were about 860 ft. of sheeting around the pit; the 
depth of the sheeting being about 25 ft. we have then some 258 M 
ft. B. M. of lumber in the sheeting proper not -counting in waling 
or bracing. 

Exact figures of this work are not available for publication, but 
the sheet piling gang working with one driver usually consisted of 
one foreman at $4 per day, one engineer at $4 per day and five or 
six dock builders receiving $2.50 per day on land and $3.50 per day 
on water. An 8-hr. day was worked and about twelve sheet piles 
were driven per machine per day. Assuming an average depth of 
sheeting of 25 ft. we have 300 lin. ft. of piling driven per day, or 
about 3,600 ft. B. M., at a labor cost of: 

PerM. 
Total. Per ft. B. M. 

1 foreman at $4 $4.00 IVgc $1.60 

1 engineer at $4 4.00 li/^c 1.60 

6 dock builders at $2.50 15.00 5c 6.00 

Total $23.00 7%c $9.20 

The amount of excavation inside the cofferdam was approximately 
45,000 cu. yds. Taking the amount of sheeting given above as 258,- 
000 ft. B. M., we have 174 cu. yds. of excavation for every 1,000 ft. 
B. M. of sheet piling, or 5.75 ft. B. M. of piling per cubic yard of 
excavation. 

Foundation Piling. — The foundation piles were driven by a plant 
of four 3,500-lb. drop hammer drivers with 45-ft. leads. These ma- 
chines were mounted on skids and rollers in two horizontal 
directions and traveled across the work, driving a strip of piling as 
they progressed. In addition to the drop hammer drivers there 
were two steam hammer drivers similarly mounted, one a 5 -ton 
and one a 4-ton Vulcan hammer. Every sixth row of piles across 
the foundation pit was driven by light drop machines and was 
then capped with a 12 x 20-in. timber. Two of these parallel tim- 
bers formed the track for the drivers. Five rows of piles were 
driven from each track. 

In a few cases a water jet was used to assist in the driving. 
Altogether '4,430 piles were driven. The piles were an average of 
25 to 30 ft. long, 14 ins. in diameter at the banded end and 9 ins. 
in diameter at the point. The piles were driven to a refusal of a 
quarter of an inch and the work was so arranged that 16 piles were 
driven by each machine per 8-hr. day. 

The gang on each machine worked an 8-hr. day and was organ- 
ized as follows : 

1 foreman at $4 $ 4.00 

1 engineer at $4 4.00 

6 laborers at $2.50 15.00 

Total labor $23.00 

With each machine driving 16 piles the labor cost of driving per 
25 to 30-ft. pile was $1.43 per pile. It was found in this work 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1017 

that the steam hammer drivers were about 2% times as rapid aa 
the drop hammer drivers. 

Cost of Pulling Piles. — In 1S98 I had a contract for pulling piles 
from the bed of a river. Several hundred piles were pulled with 
a tripod machine, with gear wheels and triple blocks that multi- 
plied the power 270 times, as shown on page 1047. A rope passed 
from the drum of the machine to a 4-hp. hoisting engine, which 
was thus able to pull piles driven 27 ft. into the ground. It cost 
$100 to make two of these machines and about $300 more for blocks 
and tackle and repairs. 

The crew for each puller was 3 laborers, 1 boss and 1 engineman, 
so that the cost of wages and % ton of coal was $10 per day. 
About 700 piles were pulled with two machines, the average depth 
of pile being 12 ft., although many were 25 ft. The average day's 
work per machine was 15 piles making the cost of labor and fuel 
about 70 cts. per pile. The men worked in water up to their knees 
and were provided with rubber boots costing $100, which, with 
the $400 paid for machines and repairs, made $500, or about 70 cts. 
more per pile, or a total of $1.40 per pile. 

Chains that were wrapped around the piles in pulling were made 
of 114-in. iron, with a breaking strength of about 100,000 lbs. The 
strain was so great in pulling the longest piles that the chains 
were frequently broken.^ 

Cost of Blasting Piles. — Several hundred piles were removed by 
blasting, in addition to the 700 that were pulled as above de- 
scribed. The piles had been cut off at the water's surface many 
years before, and our contract required the removal of the piles 
at least 4 ft. below the surface of the low water, which was 
equivalent to about 2 ft. below the bed of the river. Long ship 
augers were used to bore holes 1% ins. in diameter and 4^^ ft. 
deep, down the core each pile. Each laborer averaged 7 such holes 
bored per 10 hrs. in white oak piles, or 30 ft. per day. The cost 
per pile for boring and blasting was : 

Labor boring, 15 cts. per hr $0.21 

1 lb. of 70% dynamite 0.20 

% lb. of 40% dynamite 0.08 

5 ft. of fuse 0.03 

leap 0.01 

Total per pile $0.53 

Each pile was loaded with two sticks of 70% dynamite and one 
stick of 40%. This charge would cut off the largest pile and hurl the 
butt 75 ft. in the air. Occasionally a very tough pile would be 
splintered, and had to be pulled. This added cost of pulling aver- 
aged 10 cts. more per pile, which might have been avoided by 
making all three sticks 70% dynamite. 

Cost of Driving and Pulling Test Piles.* — A pile was driven every 
50 ft. across the Hackensack River, N. J., to test the nature of the 
bottom. Three 90-ft. piles were used, and were pulled after driving. 



'Engineering-Contracting, July 18, 1906. 



1018 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the work includes the cost of pulling as well as driving. 
A scow driver was used, and the work was done at cost plus 10% 
for superintendence. The total number of feet penetrated by the 
piles was 634, or about 57% ft. as an average of the 11 piles, 8 of 
which were driven to rock. The material penetrated was mud, sand 
and clay. 

The work occupied 4% days, of which 1% days were spent in 
transporting the driver to the site of the work and removing it from 
the work after completion. The cost was as follows: 

Foreman, 4% days at $4 $ 18.00 

Machine men, 45 days at $3 135.00 

Watchman, 4 nights at $3 12.00 



Total $165.00 

Add 10 per cent for profit 16.50 



Total $181.50 

This is at the rate of 30 cts. per lin. ft. of penetration for driving 
and pulling, but it does not include the cost of coal. Coal was 
probably less than % ton per day, or say $10 for the whole job, or 
less than 2 cts. per foot 

The cost of materials was as follows: 

3 piles, 90 ft. long, at $25 $75.00 

2 spruce piles, 52 ft. long, for use as followers, at $4 8.00 

4 pile bands, at $2.50 10.00 



Total $93.00 

Add 10 per cent for profit 9.30 



Total $102.30 

This is equivalent to about 16 cts. per lin. foot of pile penetra- 
tion. The total cost was therefore : 



Labor . . 

Coal 

Materials 



Per ft. 


Per 


Penetration. 


Pile. 


$0.30 


$16.50 


.02 


0.90 


.16 


9.30 



Total $0.48 $26.70 

It will be noticed that there were 10 men and 1 foreman on the 
driver, which is an unusually large number ; and it will also 
be noted that the wages paid the "macihine men" were very 
liberal. 

Since only 3% days were actually spent in driving, the aA^erage 
day's work was 3 piles driven and pulled. If an ordinary scow 
driver crew of 6 men at $2, and 1 man at $4, had been employed, 
the daily wages would have been $16. To which add $2 for coal 
and $6 for rental of plant, making a total of $24 per day for driv- 
ing and pulling 3 test piles, or $8 per pile. Even $8 per pile 
would be a high cost for such work, when done by contract, if the 
cost of moving the driver to and from the site of the work is not 
included. 

In view of the valuable information gained at small expense by 
driving test piles, it ic surprising that engineers do not oftener test 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1019 

the bottom of rivers In this way before drawing plans and speci- 
fications for bridge foundations, trestles, etc. When a contract has 
been awarded for foundations, the first thing that the contractor 
wants to do is to order his piles. The engineer usually refuses to 
furnish a bill of materials until enough piles have been driven to 
determine the character of the bottom. This delays the whole work, 
and adds materially to the contractor's expense. Moreover, it usu- 
ally results in a change of specified lengths of piles, and a corre- 
sponding change in the ultimate cost of the job. The time to drive 
test piles is before the award of a contract, not afterward. 

Cost of Driving Piles for a Shore Protection.* — Mr. Daniel J. 
Hauer gives the following: 

The work was done by contract. The piles were for the founda/- 
tion of a reinforced concrete shore protection, consisting of a 
pilaster spaced on 12-ft. centers and a curtain wall 6 ins. thick cast 
between the pilasters. Two piles were driven for each pilaster, thus 
making a space of 12 ft. between each set of piles. The two piles 
were 18 ins. center to center. This spacing is somewhat unusual, 
as foundation piles are seldom driven on more than 6-ft. centers, 
which means more piles to drive with less moving. There was 
nothing difficult in the driving, and no great obstacles to over- 
come. The work was along the shore of a tidewater bay, and 
except in a few places out of reach of the water. Only once for 
an hour or so was the work stopped by high tide. Nearly half of 
the work was through marshes, the rest of the driving being in 
stiff clay. But little cribbing had to be done, the runways being 
placed on blocks on the ground. "Where any grading had to be 
done to allow the machine to be rolled ahead, it was done by other 
forces, and has not been included in the costs given. 

The piles were not sawed off, but were driven by a follow head to 
the proper depth, which was 0.6 ft. below mean low water, the 
foundation pit having just been excavated. This was made possible 
by the fact that the piles were not capped, but the heads of the 
piles were imbedded in the concrete. The piles were delivered within 
ea.sy reach of the machine by teams, this being done by another 
contractor. 

The lengths driven varied from 10 to 30 ft., less than 5% being 
the last named length, while many were only 15 to 20 ft. long, 
more than half being but 10 ft. The average length was 12% ft. 
The pile driver had leads 33 ft. high, which were bolted to a bed 
frame of 12 x 12-in. timbers, 5 ft. wide and 24 ft. long, upon the 
other end of which sat the 10-hp. hoisting engine, it being a single 
cylinder double drum engine with two winch heads. One drum 
operated the hammer fall and the other the pile hoisting line. The 
top of the machine was guyed by two lines run to anchors a hun- 
dred feet or more away on either side, and run through a block 
on the head, the other end of the line being fastened to a davit 
on the bed frame ; this allowed of the guys being easily slackened 



* Engineering-Contr acting , July 27, 1906. 



1020 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

or tightened. The bed frame rested on two steel rollers with holea 
in the end to take bars in order to roll the machine. The hammer 
weighed 2,000 lbs. 

The machine was old and in a dilapidated condition. The fittings 
around the boiler and engine leaked both steam and water ; the 
leads were badly racked ; towards the end of the job the hammer 
frequently jumped out of them. The rollers, too, were old ones, 
and, besides being cracked, one had a flat side on it, so as to pre- 
vent it rolling easily. All these things materially delayed the work 
at times and added much to the expense of operating the driver. 
The condition of the boiler and the indifferent engineers who ran it, 
coupled with the fact that most of the work was done in the winter 
season, made the consumption of coal and water large. 

The cost of such a plant new at the present time, including ma- 
chine ropes, small tools, blocks and anchors, would not be over 
$1,200. Thus, if a plant rental of $5 per day was charged against 
the job, with work for the outfit for 100 to 120 days in the year, 
the entire cost of the plant would be cleared in two seasons. This 
charge seems to the writer to be ample, but it is customary to hire 
such a plant for $10 per day for short jobs. 

The work will be divided into two parts, as this division will allow 
of a comparison of costs, driving the piles under two different fore- 
men, also under different weather conditions ; the first being done 
in excellent weather in the autumn, the second during the winter 
months. The rates of wages were also different for the men. The 
foreman and engineer were paid weekly and were not allowed over- 
time, as they lost no time. The work was seldom stopped even 
during stormy weather, their daily wage, prorated from the weekly 
rate, is used. In example No. 1 the wages paid were as follows : 

Foreman $2.50 

Engine runner 2.00 

Pile driver men 2.25 

Laborer 1.50 

In example No. 2 the daily wages were : 

Foreman $2.50 

Engine runner 2.00 

Pile driver men 2.00 

Laborers 1.50 

Cart and driver 3.00 

Example I. — These piles were driven during good autumn weather. 
The foreman was competent and attended to his work. The ma- 
chine was brought to the site of the wall on a scow, which was 
beached, and the engine, leads and so forth skidded off and the parts 
of the machine assembled. This, with the building of a camp, con- 
sumed three days, and the labor items are included in the cost of 
the pile driving. This foreman drove 473 piles, their average 
length being 15 ft. The engine used 325 lbs. of coal each day of 
10 hrs., the coal costing on board of the scows $3.50 per ton. Both- 
water and coal were brought to the work on scows, a tow costing 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1021 

$15 per trip, the tug bringing a load and returning with the empties. 
A laborer carried the coal and water ashore from the scow in a 
row boat and delivered it at the engine. One man was kept at this 
continually, and he is listed in the cost under coal and water la- 
borer. The monthly rental of two small scows at $50 per month 
is given under "scows and tugs." In listing the cost each item 
was kept separate and is as follows, per pile driven : 

Per pile. 

Foreman $0,151 

Engineer 0.121 

Pile driver men 0.830 

Labor preparing piles 0.106 

Coal and water laborer 0.090 

Scows and tugs 0.272 

"Watchman 0.052 

Total labor $1,622 

Coal, 325 lbs. daily 0.055 

Plant (int. and deprec.) 0.320 

Total $1,997 

The piles were squared on the end and prepared to be put in 
the leads by one man, who had no trouble in keeping this work 
ahead of the driving. One man attended to the water and coal, 
while seven men placed the piles in the leads, guided it down, placed 
the runways and assisted in moving the driver ahead. To accom- 
plish this an anchor was placed in the ground ahead to act as a 
dead man, and with a line run from it to the winch head on the 
engine, the machine was pulled ahead on the rollers, the crew as- 
sisting with bars. 

For the entire job an average of 17 piles were driven each day, 
but as three days were consumed in starting, and three addi- 
tional days were used in moving the machine as explained later, the 
average number of piles driven for each day of driving was 21. 
The average length of the pile was 15 ft. They were delivered 
in longer lengths and sawed into two pieces of the desired length. 

After working a number of days the pile driving work was 
stopped on account of the necessary excavation not having been 
made, and it was decided to move the machine back to the start- 
ing point and drive piles in the opposite direction in order to build 
more of the shore protection. The machine was turned around 
and moved in the manner as described above for a distance of 1,300 
ft. Although the contractor was paid full account for this, yet the 
cost has been included in the figures given above. The time con- 
sumed in moving was three days, and the cost for labor, plant, coal, 
etc., was as follows: 

Labor $65.25 

Plant rental 15.00 

Coal 1.70 

$81.95 

This makes a cost per pile of 17.3 cts. for moving. 

During the course of the job it was necessary to move the water 



1022 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and coal scows along the shore, so the water and coal tender could 
reach them quickly to get his supplies. The cost of this work 
is given under pile driver men, and was not separated from the 
other work. 

The foreman, as stated, was a competent and intelligent one, 
and handled his men with some thought. He endeavored to keep 
up his runways and make the work light for his men, realizing 
that more work was accomplished in this manner. 

In addition to the cost per pile, a record was kept of the cost 
per lineal foot of pile driven, which was : 

Per lin. ft. 

Foreman $0,010 

Engineer 0.009 

Pile driver men 0.057 

Preparing piles 0.007 

Coal and water laborer 0.006 

Scows and tugs 0.020 

Watchman 0.003 

Total labor $0,112 

Coal, 325 lbs. daily 0.004 

Plant (int and deprec.) 0.022 

TotaJ $0,138 

Example II. — After the winter weather had set in, the neces- 
sary excavation having been made, the work was resumed. A new 
foreman was put in charge of the job. After moving the machine 
from where it was last used to the new site, the driving com- 
menced. This move was also paid for by the railroad company. 
The distance was 2,500 ft. The driver was rolled 100 ft. onto an 
emblnkment, where an ox team could be brought to it, was 
knocked diwn and hauled by the yoke of oxen hitched to a timber 
cart. The bed frame and engine making one load, the leads 
another, and the hammer, ropes and small tools making a third 
load. The machine was then set up for work. The time consumed 
was five days, a day and a half of which time the ox team worked. 
Fifty dollars were paid for their services. Tlie total cost of moving: 
was: 

Labor $ 74.75 

Plant rental 25.00 

Coal 4.37 

Ox team 50.00 

$154.12 

This cost is also included in the cost of driving as given below. 
The average length of the piles driven was 11 ft. For. the actual 
number of days of driving the average number driven per day was 
15, while for the whole time the average number was IS. Scows 
were not used for coal and water, but the water was hauled from a 
well about half a mile distant, and the coal from another job a mile 
and a half away. A one-horse cart was used for this purpose, a 
laborer serving the engine from the supplies so hauled. The cost 
per pile was: 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1023 

Per pile. 

Foreman .,....$0,194 

Engineer 0.150 

Pile driver men 0.864 

Labor preparing piles 0.182 

Coal and water laborer 0.110 

Carts 0.110 

Watchman 0.013 

Total labor $1,813 

Coal, 500 lbs. dally $0,070 

Plant (int. and deprec.) 0.380 

Total $2,263 

The cost per lineal foot of pile driven was as follows : 

Per lin. ft. 

Foreman $0,014 

Engineer 0.013 

Pile driver men 0.078 

Labor preparing piles 0.016 

Coal and water laborer 0.010 

Carts 0.027 

Watchman 0.005 

Total labor $0,163 

Coal, 500 lbs. daily 0.005 

Plant (int. and deprec.) 0.035 

Total $0,203 

A comparison of the costs of these two examples of similar work 
is extremely interesting. The weather was favorable in the first 
case, but the rate of wages for pile driver men were higher and 
the average length of pile was longer, yet every item of cost was 
larger in the second example. The size of the crew was the same, 
but instead of one man preparing the piles two men did this work, 
which about doubled the cost ; but this extra man made one less 
man working with the machine ; yet that cost is increased. This 
and the other labor costs being enlarged is due to less work being 
done each day. The larger consumption of coal was due to the 
weather being colder and to bad firing, as will be noted later. 
Taking into consideration the wages the increased cost of Example 
II over I should have been little, if any. 

The foreman in the last work was incompetent, yet a shrewd fel- 
low. A representative of the contracting firm only visited him a 
few times a week, and then rarely stayed with him more than an 
hour. The foreman took advantage of this, and by "grand stand 
plays" stood well with the firm, yet shamefully neglected his work ; 
in fact, he and his crew "soldiered." 

A record was kept of the time used in doing the various kinds 
of work each day, and in order to illustrate how it is possible for 
a foreman to rob his employer this record is reproduced for sev- 
eral days : 

December 27. — Moving runways ahead and placing them, 2 hrs. ; 
rolling machine, 3 hrs. and 25 mins. ; boiler foaming, so it would 
not steam, 30 mins. ; driving piles, 4 hrs. and 10 mins. Total time 
worked, 10 hrs. and 5 mins. Crew: Foreman, engineer, 10 men. 



1024 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cart and driver, 2 men preparing piles, 1 man coal and water. 
Foreman and 2 nien went away at 8:10 to see that some timber was' 
not afloat; came back at 9:45. (This was not necessary.) 

January 8. — Moving runways and placing them, 50 mins. ; rolling 
machine, 1 hr. and 35 mins. ; driving piles, 1 hr. and 45 mins. ; 
boiler foaming, so it would not steam, 30 mins. ; out of steam 
through negligence of engineer, 20 mins. ; 5 hrs. consumed in fixing 
machine, such as tightening bolts and rods, adjusting lines, most of 
which was unnecessary ; 1 hr. should have adjusted everything 
that needed it. Total time worked, 10 hrs. Crew: Foreman, engi- 
neer, 11 men, cart and driver, 1 man coal and water, 2 men pre- 
paring piles. 

January 15. — ^Waiting for steam from 7 o'clock until 10 :35, 3 hrs. 
and 35 mins., during which time runways were placed; rolling ma- 
chine, 1 hr. and 15 mins. ; waiting for steam in afternoon, 30 mins. ; 
making a follower, 1 hr. (the writer has frequently made one in 
10 mins.). Total time worked, 9 hrs. and 30 mins. (30 mins. stolen 
by whole crew). Foreman away from work, 1 hr. Crew: Fore- 
man, engineer, 8 men, cart and driver, 1 man. on water, 2 men pre- 
paring piles for 2 hrs. 

These are records picked at random, and no comment is needed 
regarding them, save that if accurate cost data are kept on work 
such rascality and incompetency could not occur. Another feature 
that added to the cost of Example II was that the foreman, instead 
of heading his machine in the direction in which he was moving, 
had the back end first, which prevented him from using an anchor 
and the winch head of his engine in moving the driver, as the other 
foreman did. Because he was used to moving a machine backward, 
owing to the fact that with such a driver the piles are frequently 
left standing above the surface of the ground, he could not see that 
when the piles were driven below the surface it was an advan- 
tage in moving ahead to have his machine with the leads in that 
direction. Even when he was advised to prod his machine properly 
he ignored the advice, and before finishing the job he had to turn 
the machine, as the last piles were driven so close to a high bank 
there was not room enough to take the driver between the piles 
and the bank. This turning cost $14.70 for the labor, as it con- 
sumed 6 hrs. of time. 

The following shows how the time of the crew was spent for a 
week, the cost of each item of work being given. The week was 
picked at random and is in many ways representative. The total 
cost of labor was $148.97, divided as follows: 

Fixing runways $ 12.04 

Rolling machine 18.96 

Preparing piles 22.00 

Serving coal and water 8.25 

Hauling coal and water 16.50 

Waiting for steam 8.81 

Fixing machine, etc 32.96 

Driving piles 25.75 

Time loafing • 3.70 

$148.97 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1025 

Although this work was mismanaged many lessons can be learned 
from it. 

Cost of Driving Wakefield Sheet Piling, Chicago, III.*— The matter 
of constructing intercepting sewers for the purpose of diverting 
sewage into the Chicago Drainage Canal was talten up by the City 
of Chicago in the latter part of 1897. In August, 1899, bids were 
received for the construction of the south arm of that sewer system. 
All these bids were rejected, and in 1901 the city undertook the con- 
struction of this section of the system, employing day labor, and 
having all work done under the supervision of its own engineers. 

We shall give a brief description of the manner and methods 
of driving the piling for Section G, which extended from 39tl'i to 
51st streets, and for Section H, between 51st and 63d 
streets. As this was the city's first experience in con- 
struction work on a large scale, it was necessary to secure an 
entirely new plant. Accordingly, the city built, with its own labor, 
a turntable drop hammer pile driver, for use on Section G. The 
driver had a hammer weighing 3,000 pounds, and was equipped with 
a 7 X 10-in. double-drum hoisting engine and a duplex steam 
pump for jetting. The machine cost $2,200. 

As the sewer for a distance of about 2,500 ft. would be under the 
shoal water of the lake, and for the rest of the distance very close 
to the water's edge, it was necessary to use sheeting during construc- 
tion, which would be practically water tight. Accordingly, Wake- 
field sheet piling was used, the lumber employed in its construction 
being 2 ins. x 12 ins. x 20 ft. Norway and Georgia pine, surfaced 
one side and one edge. For miost of the work Southern pine was 
used. In practice, however, it was found that Norway pine would 
stand 50% more blows under a drop hammer, and, in consequence, 
Norway sheet piling was used where there was difficult driving. 

About 12 ft. below city datum the clay line was found; imme- 
diately above this was a layer of fine blue sand mixed with short 
clay. This stratum when loose and wet acts very much like quick- 
sand. Above this stratum was ordinary lake sand. The sand was 
very solid and compact, owing to the action of tlie waves of the 
lake, but with the exception of gravel spots the seepage was small, 
considering the nearness to the lake. The first sheeting was driven 
nearly to the bottom of the proposed excavation ; but later it was 
found that sheeting driven 4 to 5 ft. into the clay would do suffi- 
ciently well. In order to have the sheeting left to a sufficient height 
above the line of the lake for protection against high water, tides, 
etc., 20 ft. of material was used with some exceptions. 

In the bracing, 10-in. x 12-in. x 22-ft. stringers and 10-in. x 10-in. 
X 20-ft. braces were used. Three sets of stringers and braces were 
found sufficient for most of the distance. In some places, however, 
It was necessary on account of bad ground and swelling clay, to re- 



*Engineering-Co7itracting, March, 1906. 



1026 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

inforce both stringers and braces. Throughout the entire work, 
2-in. Dunn screw-braces were used. 

In construction, the top set of stringers and braces followed the 
scraping and leveling. The distance between the sheeting was 22 ft. 
for the 16-ft. conduit and 21% ft- for the 15% -ft. conduit. A clear- 
ance of about 9 ins. between the sheeting and sewer brickwork was 
allowed. 

As was stated previously the city had built a turntable driver for 
use on this section of the work. In the operation it was found prac- 
tical to swing the driving apparatus about once every day. Ordi- 
narily about 50 ft. of sheeting in each direction was driven on one 
side, and then 50 ft. in each direction on the other side. A water 
jet for jetting to the clay was used with marked success. Ordi- 
narily, after jetting to the clay and getting the piling into position, 
four or five blows of the hammer were sufficient. In many cases 
isolated rocks, about 1% ft. in their largest dimensions, were found 
from 2 ft. to 8 ft. below the surface; these were disposed of by 
jetting a large hole beside them. The piles were held in place 
during driving by a %-in. buck line, attached to the front drum of 
the hoisting engine, and leading through the sheaves attached to 
the pile driver and sheeting in place, to and around the pile to be 
driven. In making each Wakefield pile, 50-penny wire spikes were 
used. Half-inch carriage bolts were tried as fastenings, but it was 
found that the carpenters could make at least twice the number of 
sheet piles when 50-penny wire spikes were used. Eight to ten 
spikes were used per pile. The pile-driving crew followed the gang 
setting the top braces ; and, on straight work at least, it was 
planned to have a distance of about 400 ft. between the pile driver 
and the excavating derrick, because when the driving was too near 
there was trouble with seepage water from the jet. 

In ordinary driving, the crew averaged about 90 pieces of sheet- 
ing for 8 hrs. This is equivalent to 45 ft. of trench sheet piled. 
The largest day's work was 120 pieces of sheeting placed. On some 
days, however, when such obstructions as piers were encountered, 
not more than 12 pieces of sheeting were driven ; this occurred once 
perhaps in 300 to 400 ft. 

The pile driving crew consisted of the following: 

Per day. 

1 foreman, $100 per month $ 4.16 

1 engineman, $4.80 per day 4.80 

1 fireman, $2.50 per day 2.50 

2 carpenters, $3.60 per day 7.20 

4 laborers, $2.50 per day 10.00 

1 jet man, $3.00 per day 3.00 

1 ladder man, $3.00 per day 3.00 

2 winch men, $3.00 per day 6.00 

Total $40.66 

1 ton coal 2.90 

Total, 10.8 M, at $4.03 $43.56 

As about 45 ft. of trench was sheet-piled per 8 hrs., the labor 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1027 

cost per linear foot of sewer amounted to $0.90. The labor cost per 
pile was 45 cts. The bill of materials required for the average 
amount placed in an 8-hr. day was as follows : . 

10.8 M ft. B. M. 2 ins. x 12 ins. x 20 ft. timber 

at $22 $237.60 

900 spikes, at $2.65 per 100 23.85 

Total materials $261.45 

Adding the total labor cost and the total cost for matev-ial we 
have $305.01 as the total cost of 90 piles. From the above it will 
be seen that the cost per pile amounts to $3.38, of which $0.47 was 
for labor. The cost per 1,000 ft. B. M. of piling was about $28. 

Another pile driver was built by the city for the construction of 
tlie sheet piling in that section of the intercepting sewer between 
51st and 73d streets, known as Section H. This machine was also 
constructed on a turntable and could be swung from one side of the 
trench to the other. In order to secure a good foundation bearing 
for the runways and rollers the span of the lower bed was made 34 
ft. The driver was equipped with a 7 x ] 0-in. double-drum engine, 
had 40 ft. leads and a 2,500-lb hammer. A jet pump, with water 
tank, 20 ft. jet tube and other appliances were also among the 
equipment. 

As in the first case, the sheeting was of the ordinary Wakefield 
pattern, made up of 2-in. x 12-in. plank, fastened together, however, 
by 60-penny spikes. The method of driving this sheeting was as fol- 
lows: The top set of stringers and braces were put in place for 
100 ft. to 200 ft. in advance, and about 18 ins. below the surface 
of the street ; a second set of stringers, parallel with the street, 
made up of 4-in. x 12-in. plank, was put in about 5 ins. outside of 
the main stringers and on the same level as those inside, for the 
purpose of keeping the sheeting in line. All braces and timbers 
were then covered with sand to prevent their being washed out 
by the water jet. The sheeting used was IS ft., 20 ft., 22 ft. and 24 
ft. long, depending on the depth of the clay. The top of the sheet- 
ing was driven to about 1 ft. below the street grade, and the lower 
end was from 2 ft. to 4 ft. in the clay. For each pile a hole was 
jetted to the clay line, and as soon as the jet tube was pulled out, 
a pile was dropped into place and pulled over the tongue of the 
previous pile. Excellent alignment was obtained by using a "buck 
line" to hold the sheeting in place while being driven. In this 
case the "buck line" consisted of an old cable having a loop at one 
end to go over the head of the pile, the other end of the cable, 
after passing through a couple of snatch blocks, being attached to 
the hoisting engine. 

From 75 to 110 piles were driven in eight hours, the number de- 
pending somewhat on the character of the ground ; 85 piles, how- 
ever, were considered a fair day's work. 



1028 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The pile driving crew and their rate of wages were as follows : 

Per day. 
1 foreman, $100 per month $ 4.16 

1 jet man, $3.50 per day 3.50 

2 ladder men, $2.50 per day 5.00 

2 winch men, $3.00 per day 6.00 

1 pile man, $2.75 per day 2.75 

1 engine man, $4.80 per day 4.80 

1 fireman, $2.75 per day 2.75 

4 laborers, $2.50 per day 10.00 

2 carpenters, $4.20 per day 8.40 

Total labor per day $47.36 

1 ton coal 2.90 

Total, 10.2 M, at $5 $50.26 

An average of 85 piles per day were driven, which is equivalent 
to about 42.5 ft. of trench piled. This was at the rate of $1.11 per 
foot of trench for the labor cost. The labor cost per pile was 55 
cents. The bill of material required for 85 ft. of piling was as fol- 
lows : 

10.2 M ft., 2 ins. x 12 ins. x 20 ft. timber, 

at $25 $255.00 

850 spikes, at $2.65 per 100 22.52 

Total $277.52 

From the above it will be seen that the total cost for material 
and driving was $3.85 for each pile, of which $0.55 was for labor. 
The labor cost per 1,000 ft. B. M. of piling was about $32. 

Cost of Piling, Cross References. — Data on wooden piling will be 
found in the sections on Bridges, Railways, Sewers, etc. Data on 
concrete piles will be found in the section on Concrete, and on 
steel piles in the section on Steelwork. Consult the index under 
Piles. 

Estimating Cost of Brush Revetment. — A very effective method 
of protecting the banks of a river from scour is a revetment con- 
sisting of a brush mattress on that part of the bank below extreme 
low water and a stone slope wall, or hand placed riprap, on the 
part of the bank above low water. Brush when always submerged 
never rots, but it is useless to carry it much above low water for 
It soon decays. Such brushwork is a sort of timberwork, and is 
therefore placed in this section of the book. 

Engineers very commonly record costs of revetment in the terms 
of the lineal foot of bank as the unit, and, while such a unit is de- 
sirable, it is more important to reduce the costs of the mattress 
either to the square (100 sq. ft.) or to the square yard as the 
unit, for widths of mattresses vary greatly. So also should the 
cost of the slope wall or slope pavement be reduced to the square 
yard and the cubic yard measured in place in the slope wall. While 
data are given in the following pages as to the cost of slope wall 
paving, the reader should consult the section on Masonry for more 
complete discussion and data. 

In making roughly approximate estimates it may be well to re- 
member that rough slope wall paving seldom costs more than $2.00 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1029 

per cu. yd. in place (unless stone must be brought long distances), 
and tliat a thickness of 9 ins. ordinarily suffices, thus giving a cost 
of 50 cts. per sq. yd., but wlien stone is secured near tlie work may 
not cost 30 cts. per sq. yd. 

Brush mattresses can ordinarily be made and ballasted with 
stone for about the same cost per square yard as a rough stone 
slope wall, that is for 50 to 60 cts. per sq. yd., as a rather high 
cost, to 30 cts. per sq. yd. as a low cost attained only when brush 
and stone for ballast are near at hand. However, rough estimates 
of this kind need not be made, since the following pages give all 
details. 

Cost of Brush Mattress and Slope Wall, Missouri River. — Mr. W. 

R. De Witt gives the following relative to bank revetment built in 
1901, on the Missouri River, by the company forces of the Chicago 
& Alton Ry. In general the work was similar to that done by the 
Government. 

The river bluffs were first graded to a slope of 1:2, using a 
water jet. A barge carrying a force pump, delivered water through 
a 4-in. hose at 100 lbs. per sq. in., to a 1% or 1% in. nozzle. The 
nozzle is fitted with a lever and swivel, the pin of which is dropped 
into a piece of iron pipe previously driven in the ground at the 
top of the bank. This gives the nozzleman full control. Two labor- 
ers shift the hose. When the upper banlt is graded and most of 
the earth thrown out into the river current, the nuzzle is moved 
down the slope near the water surface, and the grading continued 
under water. The gang thus engaged is as follows: 

Per day. 

1 engineman $ 2.75 

1 fireman 1.50 

1 watchman 1.25 

1 nozzleman 2.25 

2 laborers, at ?l-25 2.50 

Total . .$10.25 

Fuel and supplies 2.25 

Grand total, 800 cu. yds., at IVa cts $12.50 

I have assumed the individual wages, but the totals are as given 
by Mr. De Witt. 

This crew graded 100 lin. feet, of bank about 50 ft. wide (about 
800 cu. yds.) per 10 hr. day. Hence it costs $1.25 per lin. ft. for 
grading, which is an amazingly low cost. 

The grading was followed closely by the work of weaving a 
willow brush mattress 86 ft. wide, 82 ft. of which were under wa- 
ter when it was sunk. Two barges 20x50 ft. were lashed end to 
end, and a platform and set of ways built on them. Another barge 
loaded with brush furnished the supply of willows. The weaving 
is done on the inclined ways. When the top of the ways is reached 
the men lift the mattress and allow the boat to drop down stream 
until the edge of the mattress is at the foot of the ways, and so on. 

The brush is 1 to 2 ins. diam. and 15 to 25 ft. long, and is 
woven in and out, bundles of willows being grouped together, as 



1030 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

in braiding hair. The stitch is lilie that on a cane seated chair. The 
mattress is 12 ins. thick, and has a selvedge on both edges. It is 
strengthened and held in place by wire cables. Five pairs of %-in. 
galv. cables run longitudinally (up and down stream), one cable of 
each pair under the mattress and one on top, and a single cable is 
run along the inshore selvedge. Similar pairs of cables are trans- 
versely at intervals 16 ft. 8 ins. (one under and one on top), and 
are carried up the bank and anchored to deadmen at the top. 
Where the longitudinal and transverse cables cross, an iron clip is 
used to fasten them together. The clip consists of two 7/16 in. 
bolts, each bent at right angles, and the threaded end of one bolt 
passing through a loop :n the end of the other, a nut on each serv- 
ing to bind them. Before fastening the clips, the slack is taken 
out of the cables with block and tackle. 

The gang engaged in making the mattress was as follows : 

1 foreman. 
10 laborers skilled in weaving. 
10 brush passers. 

3 hand brush to brush passers. 

5 laborers handling cables. 

3 laborers digging and filling holes for deadmen. 

1 water boy. 

33 total. 

These men averaged $1.50 each per day, or $49.50, and they 
built 90 lin. ft. of mattress, 86 ft. wide, or 7,740 sq. ft. per day. 
Hence each man averaged 235 sq. ft. per day, at a cost of $0.64 
per 100 sq. ft. 

A barge load of stone is swung across the mattress, and stones 
weighing 100 to 200 lbs. are distributed over it and it is sunk. A 
gang of 30 men empty a barge of 150 cu. yds. of stone in 3 hrs., 
which sinks 200 lin. ft. of mattress. This is at the rate of 16% 
cu. yds. of stone per man per 10 hr. day. 

The inshore edge of the mattress is then filled with spalls for 
the distance that is 3 ft. above low water and 3 ft. below low water. 

The slope wall paving is begun at a point 2 ft. above high water, 
and shingled down the slope, reversing the usual practice of be- 
ginning at bottom and moving up. The reason for this is that the 
stones thus lean away from the river, and they catch and hold all 
sediment as the river rises and falls. The stone is delivered in 
barges and wheeled in barrows up runways. The stones are so 
tilted that the wall is about 8 ins. thick at the top of the bank and 
12 ins. at the water's edge. The paved slope is 54 ft. long, and the 
following gang will pave 100 lin. ft, or 5,400 sq. ft., or 600 sq. yds. 

per day. 

Per day. 

4 pavers, at $2.50 $10.00 

28 men loading and wheeling, at $1.50 42.00 

Total $52.00 

The average thickness is 9 ins., hence 150 cu. yds. of stone are 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 1031 

laid by this gang per day, at a labor cost of 9 cts. per sq. yd., or 36 
cts. per cu. yd., or ipl per 100 sq. ft. The worli is very rough, no 
stone dressing being required, as is evident from the fact that each 
of the 4 pavers lays 38 cu. yds. per day. 

Over the pavement is spread a 2-in. layer of spalls or crushed 
stone, filling all cracks to prevent washouts from surface drainage. 
The following was the average cost of 8,250 lin. ft. of bank revet- 
ment. 

Grading Bank: 

Labor $0.10 

Fuel, etc 0.03 

Total grading bank $0.13 

Weaving Mattress {S6 ft. wide) : 

0.6 cords brush at $1.75 deliv $1.05 

8 lbs. %-in. galv. cable at $0.04 0.32 

% iron clip at $0.05 0.03 

0.06 deadmen (12x12 ins. x 4. ft. ) at $1 0.06 

Labor 0.55 

Total weaving mattress $2.01 

Ballasting Mattress: 

0.75 cu. yds. stone at $1 deliv $0.75 

Labor 0.07 

Total ballasting mattress $0.82 

Paving Bank (5^ ft. wide): 

1.5 cu. yds. stone at $1 deliv $1.50 

Labor 0.52 

Total paving bank $2.02 

Spawls on Pavement: 

0.47 cu. yds. spawls at $0.50 $0.24 

Labor 0.15 

Total spawls $0.39 

General Expense: 

Administration $0.18 

Care of plant 0,07 

Current repairs to plant 0.02 

Hire of plant 1.00 

Surveys 0.05 

Ice 0.03 

Towage, other than brush and stone 0.08 

Total general expense $1.43 

Grand total $6.80 

Add 10% for contingencies $0.68 

Total for estimate $7.48 

The plant consisted of a grading boat, a small steam boat, a 
mattress boat, and six barges (25x100 ft.) if all material la 
transported by steam, as was the case here. 

Cost of Brush Mattress and River Bank Revetment. — Mr. Charles 
Le Vasseur is authority for the following. : On the Mississippi 
River brush mattresses are now used only to protect that part of a 
bank that is under water, usually for a width of 250 ft. Then the 



1032 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bank above water level is graded to a 1 : 1 slope by a water jet, 
and paved roughly with stone. The brush mattress is woven by 
men working on scows, the scows extending out into the river 250 
ft. The scows are provided with "ways" on which the mattress 
rests, and, by pulling the scows along as the mattress is woven, a 
continuous mattress is launched into the river along the shore. 
The brush is made into small bundles (10 or 12 ins. diam.), or 
fascines bound with No. 12 wire (no brush being over 3 ins. diam.), 
and these are laid side by side and bound with % in. steel wire, 
woven in and out, being drawn taut by a block and tackle. On top 
of the mattress ara placed rows of poles, 16 ft. apart, extending up 
and down stream. They are lashed to the fascines with No. 7 sili- 
con bronze wire every 5 ft., and at intermediate points with steel 
wire. These poles prevent the stone ballast from slipping off the 
mat when it is sunk on a steep slope. Rook is wheeled onto the 
floating mat in barrows on run planks from stone barges. The 
materials and labor per 100 sq. ft. of mattress are: 

1.5 cords brush. 

0.08 cords poles. 

0.75 cu. yd. stone. 

3 lbs. No. 12 galv. wire. 

6 lbs. % in. galv. wire strand. 

4 lbs. 5/16 in. galv. wire strand. 
1 lb. % in. galv. wire strand. 
1.35 clamps, 5/16 in. 

0.16 clamps, % in. 

0.9 day labor building and sinking. 

It costs about $6.80 per 100 sq. ft. of this mattress, or about $17 
per lin. ft. of river bank, the mattress being 250 ft. wide. In addi- 
tion it costs $1.25 per lin. ft. of bank to grade, with a hydraulic jet, 
the bank above the water edge. The hydraulic grader is a barge 
carrying a pumping plant discharging 2,000 gals, per min. under 
pressure of 170 lbs. (125 lbs. at the nozzle) through a 4 in. base 
to (1% or 1% in.) nozzles. This grading Of the upper bank is not 
done till the mattress is sunk. Then the upper bank is paved with 
0.3 cu. yd. of stone per sq. yd., at a cost of $10 per lin. ft. of bank. 
This makes the total cost $28.25 per lin. ft. of bank. 

In grading the bank the nozzle is handled by men on top of the 
bank, directing the jet downward, and it cuts the slope as true as 
if it had been planed. 

Cost of Brush Revetment Ballasted With Concrete.* — The Depart- 
ment of Engineering of the State of California is now using a type 
of flexible revetment as a protection to river banks that is quite a 
departure from the kind previously employed by the department. 
The method that was formerly used was to make a mattress of 



* Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 24, 1909. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1033 

brush fascines usually woven with wire or cable, and weighted 
down with loose rock laid on top of the mattress. If the slope of 
the bank below the water line, where it could not be graded, was 
steep, no rocks would lie in the mattress. Should erosion take place 
at the lower edge of the mattress, the latter would drop down, the 
rocks roll off and then the rush would rise with the water, be torn 
loose and carried away. 

The type of revetment now constructed by the Department of 
Engineering developed from a plan originated by Nathaniel EUery, 
state engineer, and was successfully used by him in bank protection 
work along the Eel river in Humboldt county, California. 

The plan consists of a mattress composed of brush fascines 8 to 
12 ins. in diameter and about 20 ft. long, bound with wire. These 
fascines are laid double, breaking joints, and woven over and under 
with three galvanized wire "strands" or cables, % in. in diameter. 
Galvanized anchor cables, % to 1 in. in diameter, are laid on the 
slope extending from the barge floating in the stream to upon or 
over the levee to a safe point where a line of concrete blocks is 
sunk in the soil and connected by a % to %-in. diameter galvan- 
ized cable. These anchor cables are fastened to the line attaching 
together the line of "deadmen," or as called by the department, an- 
chor blocks. The anchor cables are spaced about 8 ft. centers and 
are attached on the water end to a line of cable passing through 
heavy concrete blocks made on the barge. These concrete blocks 
are called by the department sinker weights. After this skeleton of 
cable and concrete work is set and ready, the mattress is woven 
on top of these cables and the mattress is tied or lashed to the 
anchor cables beneath the mattress every 6 ft. After the mattress 
is woven to its desired width another cable % in. in diameter and 
galvanized, is drawn down over the mattress directly over the an- 
chor cable. It is fastened to the anchor cable at 6 or 8-ft. intervals 
through the brush. The ends of this top cable are fastened to the 
anchor cable on the land end by a cable clip just above the brush 
mat and the water end is made long enough to reach the sinker 
block where it is fastened. Also, just at the water edge of the mat 
the anchor cable and the top cable are fastened together. 

Above the water the mattress is woven in place on the ground 
which has been prepared by grading to a uniform slope. "When 
the water's edge is reached the weaving takes place on the cables 
suspended over the water by placing planks on the cables. The 
barge is held off shore by spars or struts which are held taut by 
shore lines to the barge. Aflter the mattress is completely woven, 
blocks of concrete 2 or 3 ft. square and from 6 to 12 ins. thick are 
placed on the mattress, the size and distribution of which depends 
upon the figured buoyancy of the brush and the force of the cur- 
rent to be resisted. These blocks are molded in place on the mat- 
tress and thoroughly fastened on the top cable usually with a turn 
or knot of the cable firmly embedded in the concrete. When the 
mat is thus made ready the barge is shoved away, permitting the 
structure to sink and conform to the bank slope. The mattress so 



1034 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

made will, because of its flexibility, conform to the variations in the 
slope of the bank below the water where it could not be graded. 
Should the current cut under the edge of the mattress the weights 
will drop down, carrying the mattress down as the earth is washed 
away, and all — mattress and weighting — being secured by cables 
to the anchorage on shore, will continue to hang over the bank like 
a curtain. No weights can roll off and release the brush. 

This type of revetment was used on Sherman Island in two places 
where the shore had been eroded by waves, and successfully pro- 
tected the bank. The revetment on Sherman Island consisted 
of a mattr'^ss of willow brush in two sections, 176 ft. and 352 ft. in 
length, making a total length of 528 ft. The average width was 
75 ft., and the average thickness 16 ins. The superficial area was 
4,400 sq. yds. and the cubic contents 1,984 cu. yds. A total of 182 
cu. yds. of concrejte was used. The mattress was built from a barge, 
the upstream sections overlapping the pi'eviously laid section down 
stream. The work was done in 1908 by contract on the basis of 
cost plus 8 per cent. The cost of the work was as follows: 

Cost of Revetment. 

Total. 

Labor $ 224.70 

Brush 1,489.70 

Cable and clips 903.94 

Equipment 96.10 

Concrete 1,313.35 

Inspection 74.20 

Contractor's com 215.40 



Per 


Per 


Per 


cu. yd. 


sq. yd. 


lin. ft. 


$0,113 


$0,051 


$0,432 


.750 


.338 


2.865 


455 


.205 


1.740 


.048 


.022 


.182 


.663 


.301 


2.535 


.037 


.017 


.142 


.109 


.049 


.421 



Grand total $4,316.39 $2,175 $0,983 $8,317 

In addition, grading costing $75, or $0,017 per sq. yd. of mattress, 
was done. This makes the total cost of the revetment $4,391.39, 
or $1.00 per sq. yd. 

The item labor is for the mattress work and covers 715 hrs. of 
work, or 36 hrs. per cu. yd. of revetment, 0.16 hr. per sq. yd. and 
1.35 hrs. per lin. ft. Labor was paid $2.50 per day of 8 hrs. The 
item brush is for 1,983.99 cu. yds. of brush at 75 cts. per cu. yd. 
The item cable and clips in for 37,375 ft. of cable. The item equip- 
ment covers the following items : 

Barge hire and watchman $170.00 

Launch hire, 16 days 65.00 

Watchman, 17 days 37.50 

Moving barge, checking gravel, etc 13.85 

Material, telephone calls, etc 10.97 

Total $297.32 

This total was distributed over the revetment work proper and 
the concrete work. The barge hire and watchman for barge cost 
$10 per day and it cost $10 for tonnage to the barge. The item 
inspection covers surveys and inspection and was spread over the 
revetment work proper and the concrete. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1035 

The itemized cost of the concrete was as follows : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor, 995 hrs. $ 311.26 $1,729 

Cement, $1.27 per bbl 305.64 1.695 

Gravel, $1.25 per cu. yd 218.00 1.211 

Lumber and nails 84.07 .466 

Equipment 201.22 1.118 

Inspection 103.56 .575 

Contractor's commission 89.60 .498 

Total $1,313.35 $7,292 

Another flexible brush mattress was placed on Brannans Island, 
the work being done by contract on the basis of cost plus 8%. 

The revetment consisted of a mattress of willow brush in three 
sections, 2,620 ft, 187 ft, and 175 ft, respectively ; total length, 
2,982 ft. ; average width, 66% ft. ; average thickness, 14 ins. ; super- 
ficial area, 21,892 sq. yds. ; cubic contents, 8,586 cu. yds. This 
mattress was built from a barge, in sections 225 ft. in length, the 
up-stream sections overlapping on the previously laid section down- 
stream. The concrete used was 700 cu. yds. The unit cost of the 
work was as follows: 

Concrete. 

Total cost. Cost per cu. yd. 

Labor $1,287.01 $1,830 

Cement 1,161.29 1.659 

Gravel 864.35 1.235 

Lumber and nails 374.91 0.535 

Equipment 1,198.25 1.711 

Inspection 262.42 0.375 

Commission 382.86 0.547 

Total $5,553.09 $7,901 

Revetment. 

Total cost. Cost per cu. yd. 

Grading $ 229.59 $0,010 

Labor 1,411.33 0.064 

Brush 6,440.51 0.293 

Cable and clips 5,727.24 0.262 

Equipment 1,281.32 0.056 

Concrete 5,531.09 0.252 

Inspection 262.41 0.012 

Commission 1,197.89 0.055 

Total $22,081.38 $1,004 

At Merkeleys, a revetment was constructed to protect a river 
bank which had begun to cave badly. The work was done in 1908 
by contract on the basis of cost plus 8%. The revetment consisted 
of a matitress of willow brush in four sections, aggregating 774 ft. 
The average width was 40 ft. and the average thickness was 8 ins. 
The superficial area was 3,440 sq. yds. and the cubic contents 1,912 
cu. yds. The concrete amounted to 145 cu. yds. The method of 
construction was the same as at Brannans Island, previously 
mentioned. 



1036 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The unit costs of the work were as follows : 

Concrete. 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $ 332.17 |2.296 

Cement 289.58 1.997 

Rock 243.61 1.681 

Lumber, etc 213.75 1.474 

Equipment 196.75 1.357 

Inspection 46.75 .322 

Contractor's commission 101.00 .698 

Total $1,423.61 $9,825 

Revetment. 

Total. Per sq. yd. 

Labor $ 246.01 $0.0715 

Brush 1,434.39 .416 

Cable and clips 1,025.41 .2925 

Equipment 196.50 .0572 

Concrete 1,423.61 .4145 

Inspection 50.06 .0146 

Contractor's commission 299.00 .0872 

Total .,...$5,177.10 $1,501 

A similar revetmen/t was also constructed in connection with the 
work of closing a break in a levee on the Kripp Farm in the city 
of Sacramento. The work of closing the break in the levee was 
done by day labor, the state engineer's department hiring a dredge 
and crew at $160 per day of 22 hrs. The levee required to close the 
break was 1,600 ft. long, 24 ft. maximum height and 16 ft. wide on 
top, containing 102,489 cu. yds. of eai»th. The actual cost of build- 
ing the levee, including superintendence and inspection was 
$5,667.64, or 5% cts. per cu. yd. 

The revetment was built by contract on the basis of cost plus 
10%. It consisted of a mattress of willow brush, 710 ft. long, 40 ft. 
wide and 12 ins. thick. The superficial area was 3,400 sq. yds. 
and the cubic conttent was 1,172 cu. yds. The concrete used amount- 
ed to 100 cu. yds. The mattress was made on the bank and In 
place. The unit costs of the work were as follows : 

Concrete. 

Total cost. Cost per cu. yd. 

Labor $247.06 $2.47 

Cement 163.79 $1.64 

Gravel 135.00 1.35 

Lumber 41.53 0.41 

Equipment 139.28 1.39 

Inspection 25.00 0.25 

Commission 72.66 ' 0.73 

Total $824.32 $8.24 

Revetment. 

Total cost. Cost per sq. yd. 

Labor $ 174.18 $0,042 

Brush 921.05 0.272 

Cable and clips 548.92 0.162 

Concrete 824.32 0.269 

Inspection 148.00 0.044 

Commission 184.48 0.054 

Total $2,773.95 ioTsIs 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1037 

Cost of Brush Mattresses.* — Maj. D. Fitch gives the following: 
Brush mattresses, riprapped with stone, were used to protect the 
bank of the Upper White River, Arkansas, in connection with build- 
ing a timber crib dam. The cost of riprapping is given in detail 
in the section on Masonry, and the cost of the timber crib is given 
elsewhere in this section. Work was done by Government forces, 
laborers receiving $1.50 per 8-hr. day. 

The following was the cost of the protection mattress work: 

Protection Mattress (293 Sq. Yds.). 

Unit cost. Total. Per sq. yd. 

Riprap, 320 cu. yds $0.74 $237 $0,808 

Inspection of riprap, 320 cu. yds 008 3 .010 

Cutting and hauling brush, 169 cords... 1.669 282 .962 

Weaving and sinking, 293 sq. yds 1.344 394 1.344 

Total , $916 $3,124 

The total labor time for cutting and hauling 160 cords of brush 
was 150 days, the work done per man per day being 1.09 cords; 
the total labor time for weaving and sinking 293 sq. yds. of mat- 
tress was 223 days, the work done per man per day being 1.31 
sq. yds. ■ 

li50 Ft. Bank Revetment. — This work included the construction of 
200 brush mats, the grading of the bank and paving it with riprap, 
the cost of the various items being as follows : 

Per 
Brush Mattress: Unit cost. Total. square. 

Wire, etc .... $108 $0.54 

Riprap, 336 cu. yds.... $.74 248 1.48 

Cutting and loading brush, 289% days 531 2.60 

Weaving and sinking, 213% days 387 1.98 

Inspecting 336 cu. yds. riprap, 4 days.. 7 .... 

Total, 200 squares. $1,281 $6.40 

Work done per man per day was 0.93 squares wove and sunk. 
Summary for 450 ft. bank revetment: 

Total. Unit cost 

Brush mattress, 200 squares $1,281 $6.40 

Grading bank, 450 lin. ft 229 .51 

Riprapping bank, 1,044 cu. yds 1,000 .96 

A total of 450 lin. ft. of bank was graded, the total labor time 
being 123 days at a cost of $229 or $0.51 per lin. ft. Each man 
graded 3.6 lin. ft. of bank per day. 

Summarizing we get the following as the cost of the 450 ft. revet- 
ment: 

Brush mattress $1,281 

Grading bank 229* 

Paving bank 1,00* 

• Grand total, 450 lin. ft., at $5.58. $2,510 

Cost of Mattress and Slope Wall, M., K. & T. Ry.f— Mr. R. M. 
Garrett is authority for the following : 

The revetment put in by the Missouri, Kansas & Texas along the 

*Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908. p. 284. 
^Engineering-Contracting, March 31, 1909. 



1038 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Missouri River, for shore protection, is built like that along the 
Missouri River, which have been put in by the Missouri River Com- 
mission, and averages about 60 ft. in width. The first worlt put 
in by this company was during 1897, and extends from the east city 
limits of St. Charles down the river for 9,000 ft. A rock dike was 
first built out into the river, and a boom made of heavy timbers was 
anchored to the lower side of the dike, and laid parallel with it. 
From this boom the mat was started, having its full width at the 
beginning. The mat was first woven and sunk, and then the bank 
was graded by hydraulic power to a slope of 2 to 1, and then 
paved from the top down. 

In 1903, work was extended 3,000 ft. down the river, and was 
done in the same way as the first section, with the exception that 
the mat was anchored at the starting point with piles instead of 
the boom. 

In 1906, revetment was again extended 7,200 ft. On this last 
section the bank was graded to a slope of 2^4 to 1 in advance of 
weaving the mat, as considerable trouble had been experienced on 
former work, on account of material from the bank covering the 
mat, so that a connection between paving and mat could not be 
properly made. 

Grading on this section was done with a small hoisting engine 
on a barge, as follows: A derrick was erected on a barge, having 
a boom long enough to reach the top of the bank to be graded, 
a No. 3 wheeler scraper pan was pulled along this boom from the 
barge to the top of bank, by a mule on the bank, and was held in 
place by two men and filled, and then dragged down the bank by 
the hoisting engine. The beginning of the mat was anchored to 
deadmen on top of the bank about 200 ft. up-stream, and weaving 
was begun about 100 ft. back on the old mat, so that the full 
width of the new mat was gotten where the unprotected bank 
commenced. 

In 1908, 4,000 ft. of revetment was put on the north side of the 
river just above Boonville bridge. At Kingsbury, there is a 
siding on the west side of main line, and out of the south 
end of this track the spur was built to the river; this required 
a main track 6,500 ft. in length, and a spur track 900 ft. in 
length. Track was laid about 5 to 20 ft. from top of bank 
all along where revetment was to go in, so that rock could 
be unloaded and used with as little handling as possible. The 
bank was first graded to a slope of 2 % to 1 by teams ; the mat 
was then woven and sunk, and the slope paved from bottom up. 
It is the description of this last section that will be given, as the 
only differences between this and other works are those men- 
tioned. 

The bank was about 18 ft. higher than what was taken as the 
average low water ; the soil is mostly a very fine sand and very 
little gumbo ; the bank was clear of timber and brush, but there 
were several large snags where the mat was to lie that were taken 
out by sawing, blowing-out and using teams and line. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1039 

Shovelers first dug along the top of the bank and shoveled down 
all the perpendicular and overhanging points, so as to make it safe 
for a mule to walk along close to the edge ; then a two-mule team 
plowed two or three furrows as close to the edge of the bank as 
team could be gotten. The mules were then liitched to a "go-devil," 
constructed of two 2 x 10-in. plank 8 ft. long, fastened together at 
the front end and flared to about 4 ft. at the back end ; it re- 
quired one man to drive the mules and one man to welglit tlie 
drag. This was then run along the back side of furrows, and the 
loose earth shoved toward the river. After the bank began to slope, 
two or three "slips" (drag scrapers) were put on, and the bank 
brought to the desired slope. 

It will be seen that onb' about half of the material in slope is 
moved, as the excavation makes the fill and does not wash away, 
as it does when grading by hydraulics. It was found that with 
this material the filled portion was as solid as the natural surface. 
Grading was never carried further than 200 ft. in advance of 
weaving, as the barges from which the mat was being woven 
would protect the bank from the current for this distance. 

The mat was woven 60 ft. wide with a selvage edge on the out- 
stream side, and sunk parallel with the shore with the inner edge 
about 3 ft. above the average low water. The mat was strength- 
ened with five double rows of %-in. galvanized steel cable — 7 
strands of No. 11 wire — laid longitudinally one above and one 
below, and anchored with a double row of similar cable laid trans- 
versely every 15 ft. and fastened to deadmen, buried 3 ft. deep and 
located 15 ft. back from the upper edge of slope. At every inter- 
section of the longitudinal with the transverse rows, the four cables 
are fastened together with a %-in. U clip. The transverse rows are 
fastened to deadmen by wrapping one cable around the deadman 
twice and then fastening it to the other cable with two %-in. U. 
clip. The deadmen are pile butts about 3 ft. long, and the object 
in fastening the cable to them, as mentioned, is to allow the cables 
to slip when loaded, so that the same strain will be on both 
the under and upper cables. The willows were cut from bank of 
river about one mile above the mat, and were hauled by wagons, 
hauling about 1.6 cords to the load. The road was bad at times, 
and it required a snap team to pull out of the mudholes, but most 
of the time the road was in good shape. It required 0.6 cord of 
brush to 100 sq. ft. of mat ; average thickness of mat, about 18 ins. 

Weaving was started at a point at the upper end and gradually 
widened out to full width, anchors being placed for longitudinal 
cables in the top of the bank about 100 ft. above the upper end. 
The mat was woven with four small bags fastened together, so as 
to make the desired width. Fingers of skids were built on barges: 
out of 3 X 12-in. plank, 24 ft. long, and spaced 5 ft. apart, extend- 
ing from the water level on up-stream side to an elevation of 3 ft., 
above floor of barge at a point about 3 ft. back from down-stream 
side. Spools of cable were set under the down-stream ends of the 
fingers at the proper position for the under longitudinal cables, so 



1040 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

that cable would unwind as the barge was let down stream. The 
barge was anchored at the shore end to the track, and at the, upper 
end to the mat that bad been woven. The mat was woven on the 
barge as high as the fingers would permit, and cable and clip men 
Would pull the under cables through the mat by means of an iron 
hook about 2 ft. long, and the top longitudinal cables were run 
Under these, and all were fastened together with a % -in. clamp. 
The barge was then pulled from under the mat with a team, and 
anchor ropes slacked just enough so that about 3 ft. of mat would 
be left on fingers. Top longitudinal cables were cut off of reel on 
Shore in lengths of about 100 ft. and spliced together with a square 
knot on mat as the, work proceeded. 

The mat was sunk and held down with stone weighing from 30 
to 50 lbs., an average of 1.5 cu. yds. of stone being used per 100 
sq. ft. of mat. Rock for sinking was unloaded from cars onto 
shoulder of slope and wheeled in wheelbarrows out onto the barge, 
anchored lengthwise across the mat, and dumped along the edge 
of barge. The mat was sunk from the shore side out, so that it 
would settle away from shore and the transverse cables would 
tighten up. Sinking was kept at least 100 ft. back from weaving 
barge to prevent pulling the mat off of barge. When the water 
was higher than the proper elevation for the shore side of mat, it 
was sparred out, so that in sinking it would settle to its proper 
position. 

The rock for paving the slope was unloaded from cars onto slope 
and rolled down to the bottom; where paving was begun. Paving 
is 10 ins. thick, and was paved from the bottom up, care being 
taken to fill all the cracks with small stone. At the upper edge of 
paving, spawls were piled so as to keep the surface water from 
washing under the paving and starting it to roll. As long as the 
water was low, a good connection was gotten between paving and 
mat, but there were parts of this work that were paved during 
high water, and the rock slid in afterward, making repairs neces- 
sary. The work done on the first section in 1897 is in very good 
shape to-day. The mat has rotted where it has been exposed to the 
air, but the paving is in good condition. 

There have been some slides on the work done in 1906. At these 
places it was found that the rock was settling under the edge of 
the mat. These were places where the bank had washed after mat 
had been put in, and the mat does not lie up on the bank as it 
should. 

Considerable trouble has been experienced on account of the eddy 
caused by the end of revetment. At Boonville bridge, the revet- 
ment ends at an old rock dike, and no difficulty is expected at that 
point, but at all of the other places it has given trouble. At the 
end of the work done in 1906 it is probably more noticeable. The 
revetment at this place was ended at a place where the bank ex- 
tended out into the river 400 or 500 ft., and now the bank is 100 ft. 
further in than the revetment, and the revetment has been repaired 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1041 

twice on account of the river wasiiing behind the end, and allowing 
the rock to fall in. 

The cost of the Boonville revetment (4,000 lin. ft.) is as follows: 
Cost per linear foot for 60-ft. mat; banks 18 ft. above low water; 
laborers paid $1.50 per day; foreman, $4, and teams, $3.50. This 
does not include interest on investment or make allowances for 
rainy days and moving, but is the actual cost. The contractor's 
profit is included in the track work only : 

Per lin. ft. 

Grading bank, per lin. ft $0,130 

Weaving mat 0.410 

Sinking mat 0.110 

Paving slope 0.230 

Willows, including cutting, hauling and unloading, 

and price paid landowner 0.340 

Rock, at $0.75, delivered on site (2.3 cu. yds. to 

the lin. ft.) 1.730 

Unloading rock 0.120 

Spotting cars with teams , 0.004 

Hauling deadmen and cable 0.018 

Taking out snags 0.030 

Cable and Clips : 

1,260 — %-in. clips, at .06 $ 75.60 

746 — %-in. clips, at .035 26.16 

107,150 — %-in. cable, at 1.00 1,071.50 



$1,173.26 0.300 
Deadmen, 270, at 0.50 = $135.00 0.035 

Total $3,457 

Track, 7,500 lin. ft. : 

Labor, grading, including contractors' 

profit $1,581.90 

Labor laying 1,493.20 

Taking up 1,000.00 



$4,075.10 
Bridge across draw 460.00 



Total track, etc $4,535.10 1.140 

Grading spur to quarry 393.50 0.074 

Total per lin. ft $4,671 

Excluding the cost of grading the bank and the cost of the rock 
used in paving the bank (but including the rock used in ballasting 
the mattress), the cost of the mattress was as follows per square 

of 100 sq. ft. : 

Per square. 

Willows, 0.6 cord $0.57 

Weaving mat 0.68 

Sinking mat 0.18 

Rock for ballast, 1% cu. yd., at $0.75 1.13 

Unloading rock, ly^ cu. yd., at $0.05 0.08 

Spotting cars with team 0.03 

Hauling deadmen and cable 0.03 

Taking out snags 0.05 

Cable and clips 0.50 

Deadmen 0.06 



Total $3.31 

Tracks, bridge and spur, per 1% cu. yd. rock 0.80 



1042 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The last item (tracks, bridge and spur) lias been prorated to 
stone used on the mattress. 

The slope wall on the bank required 1.4 cu. yds. per lin. ft., being 
10 ins. thick and measuring 45 wide along the slope. The rock 
cost $0.75 per cu. yd. delivered on cars, $0.05 for unloading, and 
$0.16 for delivering and laying it on the slope, or a total of $0.96 
per cu. yd., not including the cost of the item of tracks, bridge and 
spur, which amounted to $0.53 per cu. yd. of rock, there being 9,200 
cu. yds. of rock in the slope wall and on the mattress. Adding this 
$0.53 we have a total of $1.49 per cu. yd. of slope wall, or 41% cts. 
per sq. yd. 10 ins. thick. 

It will be noted that the labor on the 7,500 lin. ft. of track cost 
as follows per lin. ft. : 

Per lin. ft. 

Grading $0.21 

Laying track 0.20 

Taking up track 0.14 

Total $0.55 

Cost of Brush Mattresses and Dikes.* — The following data relate 
to levee protection work at the West Pass Levee, in Mississippi. 
The work was done in 190'4 by Government forces, and consisted 
of the construction at the up-stream end of the levee of a paving 
covering the sloping end of the embankment and the side slopes for 
a distance of 100 ft. back from the end of the levee crown, to- 
gether with a paving 60 ft. wide on the natural ground surface laid 
continuous with the paving on the slopes. The work also included 
the construction of paving on the down-stream end of the levee 
slope, beginning 100 ft. back from end of crown on lake side, ex- 
tending around the sloping end, and continuing along the river slope 
for a distance of 555 ft., the ground surface adjacent to the paved 
slopes being covered with a mattress 85 ft. wide, built continuous 
with the paving. On the up-stream end the paving consisted of rip- 
rap laid close by hand with the larger voids clinked with spalls, 
except for the sloping end and the adjacent pavement, where the 
riprap was laid on a 3-in. layer of spalls. Around the outer edge 
of the paving was a trench 2% ft. deep filled with selected heavy 
riprap. The paving on the downstream end was similar to that 
described above, but was somewhat lighter. The riprap was laid 
on spalls around the sloping edges, but on the earth slopes for the 
remaining portions. Rock for the paving on the up-stream end 
had been unloaded on the river bank, 1,200 ft. from the end up the 
levee. A portion of the rock, however, were obtained from some 
temporary work done the year previous. The rock for paving and 
ballast at the down-stream end of the levee had been unloaded at 
a point about 700 ft. from the work, during the preceding high 
water. 

The mattress consisted of an upper and lower pole grillage with 
two layers of brush between, the grillage systems being connected 



*Engineering-Contracting , March 29, 1907. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1043 

by wires passing through the brush, and carried about 35 lbs. of 
riprap ballast to the square foot. In addition, to prevent a con- 
centrated flow through a borrow pit in the river side, the pit was 
crossed by a series of pile and brush dilies having their crests on 
a level with the natural ground surface adjacent. The dilies were 
anchored to planks buried to a depth of 2% ft. and resting on 
crossheads nailed to piles, which were set 6 ft. in the ground with 
post-hole diggers. Scour underneath the brush filling of the dikes 
was prevented by ballasted foot mats around the poles. 

Brush for the mattress was cut at a point about four miles from 
the work, and was hauled by teams to the canal bank, whence it 
was towed by a snagboat to the levee. This barge was also used 
for quarters for the cutting party. Piles for the dike were obtained 
in a willow flat about 7,000 ft. from the work. Brush filling for the 
dikes was obtained from the same willow flat, 80 cords being cut 
from the ground adjacent to the work and 100 cords from a point 
about 4,000 ft. north. 

The work was greatly handicapped by scarcity of labor, and, in 
addition, being low water while the towing was in progress, the flat 
fore shore of the willow flat held the barge some distance from the 
water's edge, necessitating a long carry and making this feature 
of the work slow and expensive. The lack of a proper number of 
barges, and of labor to load and unload them promptly, rendered 
it impracticable to keep the snagboat steadily employed in towing, 
though it was necessary to keep her constantly in commission. This 
still further increased the cost of brush and poles delivered at the 
mat. 

Part of the men employed in the work were paid $1.25 per 8-hr. 
day, and part were subsisted laborers, receiving $30 per month and 
rations; this latter amounted to 32% cts. per day, including the 
cook's and waiter's wages. Subsisted labor was principally used in 
cutting the brush for the mattress, and in loading and unloading it 
from wagons. About half of the loading and unloading of the 
barges was also done by subsisted labor. Teams including driver 
and wagons were secured at $3.90 per 8-hr. day for hauling at the 
place where the mattress brush was cut. For hauling at the down- 
stream end of the levee, $3.50 per day was paid for teams. Rock 
cost $2.18 per ton (.862 cu. yd.) delivered on river bank. The 
hauling for the paving at the up-stream end of the levee was done 
by contract at 50 cts. per ton (58 cts. per cu. yd.) and 33% cts. 
per ton (39 cts. per cu. yd), for the long and short hauls. 

The cost of stone paving at the up-stream end of the levee was 
as follows per square of 100 sq. ft. : 

Total. Per square. 

Superintendence $ 40 $ 0.096 

Labor, 163 days, at $1.25 204 0.492 

Hauling, 219 cu. yds. rock, 3,700 ft., at $0.58.. 127 O.SOr 

Hauling, 1,566 cu. yds. rock, 1,200 ft, at $0.39.. 605 1.461 

Rock, 1,785 cu. yds., at $2.53 4,519 10.915 

Total, 414 squares $5,495 $13,271 



1044 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following is the cost of stone paving at the down-stream end 
of the levee for 694 squares: 

Total. Per square. 

Superintendence $ 146 SO 21 

Labor, 320 days, at $1.25 400 576 

Hauling, 2,157 cu. yds., at $0.23 487 720 

Rock, 2,157 cu. yds., at $2.53 5,461 7.868 

Total, 694 squares $6,494 $9,356 

The cost of constructing the brush mattress at the down-stream 
end of the levee was as given below for 1,162 squares : 

Total. Per square. 

Superintendence $ 182 $0,156 

707 days, at $1.25 877 0.754 

108 days, at $1.00 108 0.093 

Subsistence, 108 days 35 0.030 

Hauling, 1,743 cu. yds. rock, at $0.23 393 0.338 

Rock, 1,743 cu. yds., at $2.53 4,414 3.798 

Brush, at mattress, 1,139 cords, at $2.61 2,976 2.561 

Poles, at mattress, 2,560, at $0.20 503 0.433 

Wire, 1,100 lbs., at $0.023 26 0.022 

Nails, 600 lbs., at $0.021 13 0.011 

Staples, 360 lbs., at $0.022 8 0.007 

Total, 1,162 squares $9,535 $8,203 

In addition a small scraper force was employed for five days in 
smoothing the portion of the borrow pit to be mattressed and in 
sloping off the bank between the pit and levee berm. Stumps left in 
the pit were grubbed out. The total cost of this grading and 
grubbing was $198 or $0.17 per mattress square. 

The cost of the 1,414 lin, ft. of brush dikes is shown in the fol- 
lowing tabulation : 

Total Per lin ft 

Superintendence $ 36.00 $0,025 

Labor building dikes: 

73.1 days, at $1.25 91.40 0.065 

46 1/6 days, at $1.00 46.60 0.033 

Subsistence, 46 1/6 days 15.00 0.010 

Piles, 480, at $0.07 33.00 0.023 

Brush, 80 cords, 600 ft. haul, at $0.76 61.00 0.043 

Brush, 10 cords, 4,000 ft. haul, at $0.98 98.00 0.069 

Lumber, 6 3^ M ft. B. M., at $2.86 82.00 0.058 

Nails, 175 lbs., at $0.021 4.00 0.000 

Total, 1,414 lin. ft $467.00 $0,326 

The approximate distribution of cost of the brush and poles used 
in mattress construction was as follows : 

Brush, Poles, 
per cord, per pole. 

Cutting privilege $0.02 

Cutting 0.25 $0.02 

Labor, loading and unloading, haul to bank 0.11 0.01 

Team hire 0.28 0.02 

Loading and unloading barges 0.68 0.06 

Towing 0.44 0.03 

Labor, loading and unloading, haul bank to mattress 0.12 0.01 

Team hire 0.19 0.01 

Superintendence 0.18 0.01 

Subsistence 0.34 0.03 

Total : $2.61 $0.20 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1045 

The distribution of cost of hauling the rock used In mattress con- 
struction was as shown below : 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor, loading and unloading wagons $0.07 

Team hire 0.14 

Superintendence 0.02 

Total 10.23 

Cost of Clearing Land. — The cost of clearing the margins of In- 
dian Lake, N. Y., for 35 miles, was about $12 per acre for 1,160 
acres. Men were paid $1 a day and board ; and the board cost 
about 50 cts. a day. Foremen (1 foreman to 20 men) were paid 
$35 a month and board. Bach acre, it was estimated, ran from 50 
to 75 cords of wood. Each laborer averaged one-fifth acre cut per 
day, including some piling, but no burning of the timber ; so that 
the cutting cost $7.50 per acre. There was no large merchantable 
timber, all having been cut down years before. The growth W£i3 
mostly small pines, balsams and various hardwoods. 

In the work for the filter beds at Brockton, Mass., 1894, there 
were 18.8 acres cleared and grubbed, of which 14.4 acres were 
standing pine. The trees varied from 6 to 24 ins. In diameter; and 
there were about 3 trees per sq. rod, or 480 per acre. When cut up, 
about 35 cords of wood per acre were obtained. The total cost of 
pulling and disposing of stumps was $112 per acre, or 23 cts. per 
tree. Wages of laborers were $1.50 a day. 

A very common price for clearing and grubbing forest land In 
the eastern part of America is $50 an acre, when wages are $1.50 
a day. 

For contract prices see the section on Railways. Consult the 
index under "Clearing." 

Design of Stump Pullers. — The following is a very brief abstract 
of two articles on grubbing stumps in Engineering-Contracting, 
March 25 and April 8, 1908. Several different types of stump pull- 
ers are illustrated in detail and their use described, but I give here 
only two, which are not so well known, but which I have made and 
used with success. 

A style of stump puller, known as the sweep stump puller. Is 
shown in Fig. 7. Its operation is simple yet very effective. One 
end of the sweep S rests on the ground, and the other end ia 
mounted on a wagon wheel. The sweep is an 8 x 10-in. timber 
24 ft. long, and at the free end, B, there is attached a single or 
double whiffletree, as described. The arrangement at the fixed end, 
A, is somewhat more complex and may well be described in detail. 
About 3 ft. from the end is an eyebolt, I, to which is fastened an 
anchoring chain attached to a convenient stump or "dead man," P. 
On each side of the eyebolt, and almost 4 ins. from it are attached 
hookbolts, hi and Tis, and still further away two similar bolts, ha, 
hi. The stump pulling wire cable is fastened to a short chain, K, 
and then carried over on A from F and attached to a pile or stump 
as shown. The chain K is hooked to the bolt hi. 

In operating it the lever is drawn in the direction of the arrow, 



1046 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



causing a strain on the pulling cable. The horse is driven ahead 
until the sweep has the position shown by the dotted lines, and 
when this position has been reached a short length of chain indi- 
cated by the dotted line K is hooked at one end to the pulling chain 
and at the other end to the hook bolt Tio. The horse is then turned 
and driven in the opposite direction, putting a further strain on 
the pulling chain and slacking the chain K so that it can be short- 
ened and hooked up again when the horse has moved the sweep to 



• 50-ft. or more ■ 




Fig. 7. — Stump Puller. 



the position shown by the left hand set of dotted lines. The horse 
is then started on its forward trip, then back again, and so on, 
pulling alternately on chains K and Ki and putting, ultimately, an 
enormous strain on the stump or pile. 

An idea of the power exerted is gained from the following brief 
calculation. If the distance between the king bolt of the whiffle- 
tree and the bolt / is 20 ft., and if hi and Tia are 4 ins. (% ft.) 
from I, the pull of the horse is multiplied 3 X 20 = 60 times. A 
horse capable of pulling 500 lbs. would then put a strain of 
500 X 60 = 30,000 lbs. on the chain E and Ki. Then in the triangle 
a be, ab represents 30,000 lbs. and ac represents the pull on the 
stump, which must always be greater than 30,000 lbs. to an amount 
depending upon the inclination of the A frame ; if the batter of the 
A frame is 1 in 3 the pull on the stump will be 40,000 lbs. As a 
matter of fact, one horse cannot maintain a 500-lb. pull, and a team 
must be used where such a pull is necessary. 



PILING, TRESTLING. TIMBERWORK. 



1047 



Very large stumps can be pulled with this simple device and a 
team of horses. 

From the figrures given it is evident that heavy chains and cables 
must be used or else there will be frequent breaks. 

One set up of the machine can be used to pull a large number 
of stumps or piles, since it is necessary to move only the compara- 
tively light A frame. With a long cable, to give a good reach to 
the machine, there should be used take ups, else considerable time is 
consumed in taking up the slack of the cable. The crew to operate 
this style of machine consists of a foreman, three laborers and one 
team, the cost varying from $10 to $15 per day. This machine and 
the one shown in Fig. 8 were both used by one of the editors of 
this journal for pulling piles, the machines being adapted for either 
pile or stump pulling. 



Triple-BocKs 
llMcmiiallope 




Fig. 8. — Stump Puller. 



The legs of the tripod shown in Fig. 8 were 8 x 8-in. timbers, 
10 ft. long. The rope is reeved through a set of triple blocks and 
carried to the 4-in. chain. The speed wheel and pinion are re- 
spectively 20 ins. and 4 ins. in diameter. This arrangement gives 
a powerful strain on the chain or cable fastened to the stump. The 
stumps can be pulled by hand power or horses, or a line can be run 
from the 12-in. drum to a small hoisting engine and the machine 
operated by it. This whole outfit, though, must be moved for each 
stump that is to be pulled. 

For the cost of this tripod machine and the cost of pulling piles 
with it, see page 1017. 

Cost of Removing Stumps In Clearing Land.* — Removing stumps 
by hand is a slow and costly method when the stumps are of small 
size and is out of the question for the large stumps of fir and other 



*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 22, 1909. 



1048 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



trees up to 5 and 6 ft. in diameter. In the last condition the prin- 
cipal up-to-date methods are burning, blasting and pulling or some 
combination of these. Burning is considered the best way to remove 
pine stumps which have a large amount of turpentine, as this 
greatly assists in the process, and the long, deep roots of these 
trees are a great hindrance in pulling. In regard to burning these 
stumps Mr. Ferris, of the Mississippi Station, says: 

"The common method * * ♦ is to dig a hole about 12 ins. 
deep with spade or post-hole digger on one side of the stump, aa 




Fig. 9. — Machine for Boring Stumps. 



close to it as possible, and to use this as a furnace for firing the 
stump. In digging these holes it is necessary that -the dirt be re- 
moved from as much of the surface of the stump as possible, so as 
to allow the fire to come in direct contact with the side of the 
stump for at least 6 ins. An ordinary turpentine dipper on a suit- 
able handle makes one of the best implements for removing this 
dirt." 

This is a rather slow process, but may be greatly hastened by 
boring a slanting hole through the stump from the opposite side to 
the fire hole. For boring, the Mississippi Station has used the 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 



1049 



Bimple machine shown in Fig. 9, inventcl by J. "W. Day. It is thus 
described : 

"A 2-in. ship auger is welded onto one end of a %-in. iron rod 
6 ft. long. Four inches from the other end of this rod a collar is 
welded and the end of tlie rod passed through an iron box fastened 
to a movable frame about 18 ins. square. A bevel gear is then 
fastened to the extreme end of this rod either by a key or set 
screw and works into a second gear of tlie same kind fastened on a 
horizontal shaft. This horizontal crank shaft is made of 1-in. iron 
rod bent at one end to form a handle, with a fly wheel fastened 
on the opposite end. It works through two boxes fastened to 
the movable frame and slides down the main frame as the auger 
bores into the stump. The upper end of the machine is elevated 
about 5 ft. and stands on two cart wheels, on which it is easily 
rolled from stump to stump or from field to field by a single indi- 



ftmwe&fiKK 



/a '^uee/iMOiS-^ lij I 




Fig. 10. — Blast Holes in Stump. 



vidual. This elevation of the frame helps to brace it against the 
stump in boring, raises the crank shaft to a height at which it can 
be most easily turned, causes a slight pressure to be constantly ex- 
erted against the auger, and makes it possible to bore the hole diag- 
onally into the stump. At the extreme upper end of the frame is a 
small windlass with ropes attached which is used for pulling the 
auger out of the stump." 

This machine was used to aid in clearing 2.3 acres of land which 
had been cut over about seven years before. The sapwood had de- 
cayed, but the balance of the stump above ground and all below was 
sound. On this plat there were 158 stumps that required boring. 
These averaged 13.6 ins. in diameter, and the length of hole bored 
averaged 19.7 ins., the total cost being less than $8 an acre, figur- 
ing labor at $1.50 per day. 

For burning the large stumps of fir, etc., in the Pacific Northwest, 
a quicker method is used, which consists of boring two intersecting 
holes, as in Fig. 10, and burning by starting a fire at the inter- 



1050 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

section with tlie aid of redhot coals or a piece of iron heated to a 
white heat. After the part marlied A is burned out the flre is 
maintained by filling- the space with bark and litter. "While the 
method first described generally results in burning the stump low 
enough to allow of cultivating over it in the case of pine stumps, 
the method used on the western trees leaves the larger stringers 
with their smaller roots to be pulled out by steam or puller, or 
"they may be entirely burned by digging away the earth and roll- 
ing a small log alongside of the root." 

Other methods of burning are to split the stump with a small 
charge of powder and then kindle a fire in the hole thus made, and 
charcoaling or pitting. The latter, which consists essentially of 
keeping a smoldering fire around the base of the stump, is reported 
to be very economical for large stumps. Mr. Ferris says "remov- 
ing stumps by this method [boring and burning] has been decidedly 
cheaper than by any other method tried, as it requires only a 
small expenditure for machinery, practically no repair bills, and 
can be operated by a single individual." 

It is stated that in the section reported on by Mr. Thompson 
scarcely anyone undertakes to clear even a small tract without the 
use of powder. Powder is also used on the pine stumps of Missis- 
sippi, the common method being to bore a 1%-in. hole from the 
surface of the ground diagonally downward for 10 to 20 ins. and 
to insert in this from % to 1 lb. of dynamite. This amount will 
shatter the general run of pine stumps, and makes the cost of this 
part of the work from 5 to 20 cts. per stump. "With stumps of the 
fir type, which do not usually root deeply, blasting is best done by 
placing several sticks of dynamite beneath the center on the hard- 
part, if not too deep, so as to cause the force of the explosion to be 
exerted upward. Mr. Thompson gives the following data as to size 
of charge under ordinary ground conditions, for shattering large 
Stumps which are to be removed by stump pullers, blocks or teams : 

Diam. of stump, ins 18 24 30 36 48 60 72 

Sticks of powder 5 7 10 20 35 50 65 

The sticks are 1 % x 8 ins., weigh a little over % lb. and cost 
from 10 cts. to 15 cts. a pound. The average cost of the removal 
of each stump from a tract of 120 acres containing fir stumps from 
1 to 4 ft. in diameter was reported as follows: 

Cents. 

Powder 49.76 

Fuse 2.37 

Caps 0.87 

Labor 30.66 

Total 83.66 

If dynamite is handled with ordinary care there is but little 
danger attached to its use except in cold weather, when it should 
be kept warm, preferably at about 70° F. 

After loosening and shattering stumps by blasting, it is neces- 
sary to gather them in a pile for burning. This is usually done by 
means of a capstan or a donkey engine. The latter is reported to 
have found quite general application in the Northwest. A gin pole 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 



1051 



Is set up, as shown in Fig. 11, and the stumps drawn to it. When 
handled to advantage this method is considered to be time-saving 
and cheaper than liand methods. Another type of puller is the 
vertical derrick, which has the advantage of applying the pull in tho 
best direction for stumps having long tap roots, but it is objected 
to on account of liaving to be moved for each stump. 

Cost of Clearing and Grubbing, Ohio.* — Mr. Julian Griggs gives 
the following: All trees and brush on a reservoir site, near Colum- 
bus, Ohio, were cleared and grubbed by contract in 1904-5. The 
work was begun June 14, 1904, and carried on continuously till 
Aug. 5, 1905, the season being unusually favorable. The area 
cleared was 255% acres, lying in a narrow river bottom 5.8 miles 
long. It was thickly covered with shrubs and trees — elm, locust 
oak, hickory, sycamore, etc. There was a rank growth of weeds, 
horse-cane predominating. All was grubbed except about 5 acres. 

A trimming gang first cleared and grubbed the brush, cut off 







— /^If 



Fig. 11. — Method of Pulling and Handling Stumps, 



all low limbs and all small trees, and piled the stuff ready to burn. 
They were followed by a pulling gang of 6 to 12 men, a team of 
horses and a stump puller. During the winter it was possible to 
burn everything as fast as cleared. 

A "Hawkeye Stump Puller" was used. (This type of stump 
puller is illustrated and its use described in detail in Engineering- 
Contracting, March 25, 1908.) It consists of a capstan or vertical 
windlass (operated by a team of horses) that is mounted on a bed 
of two oak timbers (10 x 10-in. x 16-ft.) framed to form a cross. 
The drum is 2 ft. high and 13 ins. diam. The sweep (8x8-in. ) 
to which the horses are fastened is 20 ft. long. Dragging from the 
sweep, directly back of the horses, is a stick, the end on the ground 
being shod with an iron point, the purpose being to take the strain 
off the horses when they are standing still. Two %-in. wire cables, 
each 100 ft. long, hooks, grips, blocks, snatch cables, etc., compose 
the rest of the outfit. In operation, the timber bed is buried in the 
ground, and iron pins driven alongside the timbers into the ground. 



"Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 17, 1906. 



1052 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

or the timbers are loaded with stone. In pulling a tree, the snatch 
cable is fastened around it about 15 or 20 ft. above the ground. 
The cable is usually passed through a snatch block fastened to a 
tree near the stump puller, so as to bring the cable to a horizontal 
position as it winds around the drum. If the tree does not yield at 
first, some of the roots are cut, or a dynamite charge is exploded 
among the roots while the strain is kept on the cable. Stumps, of 
which there were many, were much harder to pull than trees, and 
most of them were dynamited and taken out in pieces. 

The following was the cost of clearing and grubbing 255 1/^ acres: 

Per acre. Per cent. 

Superintendent, at $4.17 $ 4.16 2.6 

Timekeeper, at $1.75 1.76 1.1 

Foreman, at $2.50 14.72 9.2 

Carpenter, at $2.00 0.48 0.3 

Dynamite men, at $1.75 3.04 1.9 

Laborers, at $1.50 85.28 53.3 

Single horse, at $1.50 1.28 0.8 

Two-horse team, at $3.50 11.68 7.3 

Total labor $122.40 76.5 

Dynamite, at llVa cts. per lb...- 30.56 19.1 

Machinery and repairs 7.04 4.4 

Grand total $160.00 100.0 

The work required 255 days, or an acre per day, with an average 
force of: 

1 superintendent. 
1 timekeeper. 
5 foremen. 
1/5 carpenter. 
1% dynamite men. 
65 laborers. 
1 horse. 
31/3 two-horse teams. 
There were 266 lbs. of dynamite used per acre. 
Before the reservoir could be filled with water it had grown up 
with weeds, which it cost $7 more per acre to cut and burn. This 
was one summer's growth. 

Cost of Blasting 3,500 Stumps.* — The Long Island R. R. bought 
a tract of land, in 1905, in Suffolk county on Long Island, in order 
to carry on experimental agricultural work. The tract was situ- 
ated in the waste lands of the island and the first work to be done 
was to clear it of timber. A force of men was put to work cutting 
down the trees and undergrowth, and this work was followed by the 
stump blasting. 

The blasting crew consisted of two men only, except for the three 
last days of the work when a third man was employed to hasten 
the finishing of the job. The work was done during the latter part 
of the summer and the fall of the year, good weather prevailing 
most of the time. 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 13, 1908. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1053 

One man employed was accustomed to handling explosives and 
had experience In blasting stumps. He was paid $3.50 for a 10-hr. 
day. The second man was a common laborer and was paid $1.50 
per day. The third man, used for three days, also had handled ex- 
plosives. He was paid $3 per day. 

In all 10 acres of land were cleared. The blasting gang made the 
hole under the stump and charged it, setting off the charge, but the 
work of cleaning up after the blast was done by other men. The 
stumps were mainly white oak and chestnut, varying in size from 
18 ins. to 7% ft. in diameter. Many of the stumps ran from 4 to 
414 ft. in diameter. Each acre of ground was measured off and a 
careful record kept of the number of stumps blown on each acre. 

The following table shows the number of stumps blasted and the 
amount of dynamite used : 

Lbs. dyna- Lbs. 

Number mite used dynamite 

Acre No. Stumps. per acre. per stump. 

1 293 145% 0.50 

2 310 152 0.49 

3 ■ 301 169 14 0.56 

4 270 150% 0.56 

5 280 211% 0.75 

6 305 19iya 0.62 

7 285 178 0.62 

8 337 1881/3 0.56 

9 334 198ya 0.59 

10 797 446 0.56 

Total 3,512 2,031 0.58 

The soil was a light loam with sand or gravel underlying it. Nat- 
urally the amounts of dynamite used per stump varied with the size 
of the stump. Small stumps up to 4 ft. in diameter needed % lb. of 
dynamite. Stumps from 4 to 6 ft. in diameter needed from 1 to 3 
lbs., while the largest stumps, measuring from 6 to 8 ft. in diameter 
needed from 3 to 4 lbs. of dynamite. The largest stump blown 
was a chestnut 7V2 ft. in diameter which took 3% lbs. dynamite. It 
-will be noticed that the average per stump was not quite 0.6 lb. 
All the dynamite used was 40%. 

In blasting the stumps the helper made a hole with an auger or 
tar under the stump, so the charge would be close up to the stump 
and near the center. The dynamiter prepared a large number of 
■cartridges with fuse and caps in them in advance, so that when a 
number of holes had been made, all he had to do was to place the 
charge and tamp up the hole. Double tape fuse was used to put 
off the blast. The fuse was cut to lengths to explode the load 
within a given number of seconds, just enough time being allowed 
for a man to run to a safe distance. For most of the stumps, fuse 
a foot and a half in length was used, and when the end was split 
to allow of easy lighting, it took 30 seconds for this fuse to burn to 
the charge, hence this was known as a "30-second length." Care 
was taken to use enough dynamite to blow out the entire stump, 
but not to waste the explosives. Small stumps were blown out 



1054 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

whole, but the larger ones were split up by the blast so they could 
be easily handled. 

The number of stumps blasted per day varied somewhat, accord- 
ing to the size of the stumps and the difficulties encountered. The 
best day's work for two men was 110 stumps, while on other days 
they did 97, 60, and 99, the average being 84 for two men, for the 
job. On one day that three men worked 160 stumps were blasted. 
In clearing an adjoining piece of land 1 man by himself blasted in. 
1 day 100 stumps, but he had prepared tlie charges the day previous. 
The cost of blasting the stumps for the 10 acres was : 

Total. Per acre. 

1 man, 40 days, at $3.50 $140.00 $14.00 

1 man, 40 days, at $1.50 60.00 6.00 

1 man, 3 days, at $3.00 9.00 90 

2,031 lbs. 40% dynamite, at 15 cts 304.65 30 46 

3,600 caps, at 75 cts. per 100 27.00 2 70 

7,000 ft. D. T. fuse, at 45 cts. per 100.. 31.50 3.15 

Total $572.15 $57.21 

This gives a cost per stump of the following: 

Labor $0,059 

Dynamite 0.086 

Caps 0.008 

Fuse 0.009 

Total $0,162 

This work was done under the direction of Mr. H. B. Fullerton, 
special agent of the Long Island R. R. Co., to whom we are indebt- 
ed for the information. 

Cost of Blasting 1,100 Stumps.* — In grubbing stumps from land, 
one of the most economic methods is by blasting, provided care- 
and judgment are shown in the use of explosives. The tendency 
seems to be to use a larger amount of explosives than is necessary. 
Then, too, different kinds of explosives are sometimes used in the 
same charge, such as dynamite and Judson powder. This should 
not be done. But one kind of powder should be used In a hole. 
For .small and medium sized stumps dj'namite will give the best 
results, but Judson powder will do efficient work on large stumps,, 
and, at times for very large stumps, black powder is the cheapest 
to use. 

The charge should be placed well up under the stump and as 
near the center of the stump as possible. A bar is generally 
the best tool for making the hole. When only one charge is placed 
under the stump it is more economical to use fuse and a cap. It 
is possible in stump blasting to use single tape fuse, but, if the 
ground is very wet, it may misfire. Under such conditions it is 
better to use double tape fuse. When several charges are placed 
under one stump, it is always advisable to use electrical exploders, 
so that the charges will be exploded simultaneously. For a single 
charge, electrical fuses are too expensive. 

In the job, the cost of which we give below, dynamite was used 



*Eninneering-Contracting, June 3, 1908. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 10.35 

exclusively, and caps and fuse were used for most stumps, but 
electrical exploders were used on some, as several charges were 
placed under some of tlie largest stumps. Tiiere wore 1,100 stumps 
blasted from 4 acres of land, tlie job being in eastern New Jersey. 
The trees had been cut about 2 years, and were mostly white 
oak and hicltory. They varied in size from 4 ins. to 6 ft., the 
average size of the 1,100 stumps being about 15 ins. in diameter. 

The dynamite used was 40 per cent. The ground was full of 
large boulders, and more fuse, single tape, was used than would 
have been required if the ground had not been full of stones. 
The long fuse was necessary in order to allow the men time to get 
away from the flying pieces of stone. Two men only were used. 
One man handled the dynamite and the other prepared the holes. 
These men did nothing towards cleaning up the stumps after they 
were blasted. 

The cost of the labor was as follows : 

Dynamiter, 19 days, at $3.50 $ 66 50 

Helper, 19 days, at $1.50 28.50 

Total $ 95.00 

The cost of the explosives was : 

850 lbs. dynamite, at 15 cts $127.50 

1,300 caps, at 75 cts. for 100 9.75 

1,300 ft. S. T. fuse, at 45 cts. per 100 5.85 

300 short electrical exploders, at 6 cts 18.00 

Total $161.10 

The total cost of the 4 acres was $256.10, giving a cost per acre 
of $64.02. 

The cost per stump was : 

Labor $0,086 

Dynamite 0.116 

Caps 0.009 

Fuse 0.005 

Exploders 0.016 

Total $0,232 

The average amount of dynamite used per stump was 0.77 lb. 

This is a very economical job of blasting, both as to labor, costs 
and explosives. 

We are indebted to Mr. Oscar Kissam, of Halesite, Long Island, 
N. T., for these data. The work was done under his direction and 
according to his methods. 

Cost of Clearing and Grubbing by Blasting.* — Mr. Daniel J. Hauer 
is author of the following: 

The work was done in 1893 in the suburb of an Eastern city. 
Nine acres of closely spaced trees, averaging about 20 ins. diam., 
were cleared. Trees ranged from 6 to 36 ins. diam. All smaller 
than 6 ins. was classed as brush. The trees were first cut down, 
and the brush and leaf wood piled and burned. The trunks were 
made into saw logs and cord wood. The timber was mostly oak. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 27, 1907. 



1056 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

hickory and chestnut. Work was done in the spring of the year 
in good weather. 

The tools were: 33 axes, 29 mattacks, 30 shovels, 1 hatchet, 
1 band saw, 3 cross-cut saws, 2 files, 3 water buckets, 2 grind- 
stones, 1 churn drill and 1 auger. These tools cost about $80, which 
could be charged at a rate of $9 per acre to the job. 

Foremen were paid $2.50 per 10-hour day and laborers, mostly 
Italians, were paid $1.25. One foreman looked after the chopping 
and grubbing, consequently his salary is divided between these 
items, while a second foreman gave his time exclusively to the 
blasting. 

The chopping down of 1,212 trees and the brush took about 13 
days, the cost being as follows: 

Foremen $ 20.00 

Laborers 149.61 

Total $169.61 

This makes a cost of $18.84 per acre. For eight days, as the 
above work was going on, another crew of men were piling and 
burning brush and grubbing the small stubs and stumps. This 
work was done at the following cost: 

Foreman $ 10.00 

Laborers 129.74 

Total $139.74 

Or a cost of $15.53 per acre, and a total cost per acre for both 
chopping and cleaning up, of $34.37. This can be divided as 
follows : 

Foreman $ 3.33 

Laborers 31.04 

When this much of the work was done a foreman and a crew 
of 4 men began the blasting of stumps. 

The following was the cost, 50 stumps per day: 

Per 

Per day. stump. 

1 foreman at $2.50 $ 2.50 $0,050 

4 laborers at $1.25 5.00 0.100 

200 lin. ft. double tape fuse at 50 cts. 

per 100 ft 1.00 0.020 

50 caps at 75 cts. per 100 0.40 0.008 

52 lbs. 40% dynamite at $0.15 7.80 0.156 

108y2 lbs. Judson powder at $0.10 10.85 0.217 

Total $27.55 $,0,551 

This work took 25 days, and, as there were 134 stumps per acre 
on the 9 acres, the cost of blasting stumps was $73.70 per acre. 

Both dynamite and Judson powder were placed in each hole. 

The stumps were not so large, except in a few cases, that one 
charge placed under it, by churning a hole with the drill and 
auger beneath the stump and then loading it, did not either blow 
the stump out or shatter it so that the grubbers were able to 
handle it. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1057 

The cost of grubbing the roots after blasting was as follows : 

Foreman $ 40.00 

Laborers 277.36 

Total $317.36 

This makes a cost per acre of $35.26, or $0,262 per stump, which 
makes a total cost of $0,813 per stump for blasting and grubbing. 

The grinding of the axes for chopping cost $5.87, or 65 cts. per 
acre, and an allowance of $9 per acre must be made for tools. 

At the same time the blasting began the chopping gang began 
to cut the tree trunks up into cord wood and saw logs, while the 
cleaning gang was set to grubbing the roots and the remains of 
the stumps after the blasters. The saw logs and cord wood were 
hauled away under another contract. 

The making of cord wood took eight days and cost : 

Foreman $10.00 

Laborers 81.25 

Total $91.25 

This was a cost of $10.14 per acre. Unfortunately the wood 
was not corded up before being hauled away, so no accurate 
record was made of the amount, but there were between 175 and 
200 cords, indicating a cost of about 50 cts. per cord after the trees 
were cut down. 

From the above we can obtain the total cost of the entire job 
(9 acres), which was as given below: 

Total. Per acre. 

Chopping $ 169.61 $18.84 

Grubbing and clearing 139.74 15.53 

Making cord wood 91.25 10.14 

Blasting 663.59 73.73 

Grubbing after blasting 317.36 35.26 

Grinding axes 5.87 0.65 

Tools 81.00 9.00 

Total $1,468.42 $163.25 

This is not much different from the cost of the work recorded by 
Mr. Julian Grigg in the following paragraphs. 

Cost of Clearing and Grubbing for a Railway.* — One of the items 
of work to be done in grading a railroad is generally the clearing 
and grubbing of the land. Under some contracts and specifications 
this work is paid for as one item, under others as two items as 
clearing and as grubbing, while under other forms of contracts 
this work is included in that of excavation. 

The method of paying for clearing by the acre as one item and 
grubbing as another item is to be commended. In order to do 
the excavation all the land must be cleared, but in addition to the 
area used for the cuts and embankments, the entire width of the 
right of way must be cleared, and overhanging trees and branches 
must be cut away. On the other hand there is no need of 
grubbing the area occupied by the embankments, nor that on the 



*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 25, 1907. 



1058 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

right of way not included in the cuts, hence there should be no 
reason why this area should be included in the payment. Likewise 
the method of doing the excavation will very materially effect the 
cost of the grubbing, while it does not play any part in the cost 
of clearing. 

When steam shovels are used the grubbing cost is small, as 
this machine will undermine the stumps, causing them to fall 
into the pit, where they can be loaded onto the cars by means of 
chains, attached to the dipper teeth. This work retards the 
progress made by the shovel, but the cost of grubbing is greatly 
reduced, and a contractor could afford to bid a low price on 
the grubbing when done with a steam shovel, if it is not lumped in 
with the clearing or other work. 

When grubbing is done in connection with rock excavation, its 
cost is small as the stumps are shot out with the blasting of 
the rock, and the only additional expense is to dispose of the 
stump. This will have to be done by hand and will be work that 
the contractor will charge for under grubbing. 

When grubbing is done for scraper work the stumps and 
largest roots must be blasted and dug out, and the work is much 
more expensive than with rock excavation and steam shovel work, 
although a large railroad plow in loosening the ground will cut 
and break up many of the roots, so that they do not have to be 
grubbed. 

The grubbing for elevating grader excavation must be done 
much more thoroughly, than that for scraper work. The stumps 
and large roots must not only be grubbed, but all the small bush 
stubs and roots must also be cut out. This is necessary as the 
grader plow will not cut these roots, as the pull on the plow is a 
steady one, unlike that of a breaking plow, which can be run 
in jerks, while the plowman can shake up the plow, which is a 
considerable help. In grubbing for a grader it is not advisable to 
blast the stumps, as this makes large deep holes, which, after rains, 
become full of water and soft, thus causing the traction engine 
and grader to mire in these holes. For this reason where there 
are many stumps of 6 ins. or more in size a stump puller should be 
used. The stump puller does its work much better than blasting, 
as it will not only pull up the stump, but also all the large roots 
and many of the small ones. Nor does it leave as large a hole 
as a blast does. Its work is as economical as blasting, and at times 
is much cheaper. The small stubs and roots must all be grubbed 
by hand. To do efficient work of grubbing for a grader, after 
the large stumps have been pulled, men should be spaced a few feet 
apart and the entire area gone over, the men working in rows 
grubbing up everything that may effect the working of the grader. 
This makes grader grubbing more expensive than that of any other 
grubbing for ordinary excavation work. 

The job to be described was the clearing and grubbing on 
nine miles of railroad construction. Most of the line was through 
cultivated fields, but in 11 places varying in length from. 100 to 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1059 

4,600 ft. there was clearing to be done. In all there were ny^ 
acres, of which IVi acres were over areas upon which embankments 
were to be made, while 13 acres were in cuts, hence there was botli 
clearing and grubbing to do. The excavation was to be done by an 
elevating grader, and, as stated above, the grubbing liad to be 
done more thoroughly than it would have been, if other methods 
of excavating had been employed. 

The first work done was to clear the ground. Most of the 
brush was burned, but some of it and the logs were rolled to the 
edge of the right of way and piled up. The trees, of the size of 
6 ins. or more in diameter, numbered about 40 to the acre; but 
there was a very rank undergrowth of bushes and saplings, the 
stumps and roots of which all had to be grubbed. The work 
was done by contract, and the men working upon the job were not 
experienced woodsmen or axemen, but were such as could be 
obtained at the labor market centers. Many of them were for- 
eigners. The wages paid to the foreman was $2.50 and to the men 
$1.50 per ten hour day. A waterboy was paid $1.00 per day. In 
the clearing gang an average of 12 men were worked, some using 
axes and others brush hooks. The brush was piled by hand, no 
forks being used, and the logs, few being more than 3 ft. in 
diameter, were cut short and rolled by means of hand sticks. 
Some few were carried by the men with these sticks. 

The cost per acre, there being as stated 14^4 acres, was: 

Per acre. 

Foreman $ 4.59 

Men 27.10 

Water boy 1.36 

Total cost clearing per acre $33.05 

The grubbing was done by a gang of men averaging 15. The 
wages were the same. Some few of the larger stumps were blasted, 
and their roots afterwards grubbed. Dynamite, costing 15 cts. 
per lb., was used for this blasting. No separate record of the 
stumps that were blasted nor of the explosive used for each was 
kept, only the total cost of the explosives being kept, and the 
labor of blasting was included In with the other grubbing. About 
6 stumps were blasted to the acre. 

The cost per acre, there being but 13 acres to grub, was: 

Per acre. 

Foreman $ 4.54 

Men 38.84 

Water boy 1.81 

Explosives 2.54 

Total cost grubbing per acre $47.73 

The men used long cutter mattocks and short handled shovels in 
grubbing the stumps and roots. There is but little doubt that this 
cost of grubbing could have been reduced by the use of a stump 



1060 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

puller, but the contractor did not own one, and thought the job 
too small to justify purchasing such a machine. 

The total cost for clearing and grubbing was as follows: 

Per acre. 

Foreman $ 8.74 

Men 62.54 

"Water boy 3.00 

Explosives 33.00 

Total clearing and grubbing per acre $76.60 

The tools used for this work cost about $50, but with the 
exception of the brush hooks, they were all used on other work, 
hence to charge half their cost to this job would be sufHcient. 
This means a charge for tools of $2 per acre, making a total of 
$78.60. This work was being done at the same time that grading 
and other construction was going on, hence the charge to be added 
for general expense, such as superintendence and office expenses 
Would be small. 

This clearing and grubbing was not paid for by the acre, but 
the work was included with the grading, and the price of excavation 
covered the clearing and grubbing. There was 90,000 cu. yds. of 
earth excavation on the 9 miles of road, hence the cost of clearing 
and grubbing amounted to about 1% ct. per cu. yd. of earth. If 
elevating graders had not been used, the cost with the same forces 
doing the work, would have been less than 1 ct. per cu. yd. 

Another example of clearing and grubbing is given below. Five 
acres of woodland were to be cleared and grubbed of all bushes and 
worthless saplings, vines and briers. The undergrowth was dense. 
None of the trees were to be cut. The clearing was done by a 
contractor, but he was paid "force account," that is by the day 
plus a percentage for his work. The wages paid were the same as 
in the example just given. The brush, old logs and other debris 
had to be burned, and care had to be exercised that none of the 
trees were injured, as the woods was to be naade into a park. The 
cost of clearing was as follows: 

Per acre. 

Foreman $ 7.25 

Men 54.06 

Water boy 3.00 

Total ^ ... $64.31 

This work was done in the fall of the year, and the weather was 
exceptionally good. The following spring the ground had to be 
thoroughly grubbed in order to plant grass seed in the woodland. 
This work was done with mattocks, every inch of the ground being 
gone over, brier roots, old stubs and all roots of bushes being dug 
out. There were also a few old stumps that had to be taken out, 
but "■he work was mostly the small surface roots of bushes, saplings 
and briers. After the ground was gone over with mattocks, steel 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. lOGl 

rakes were used to rake out the roots, and put them in piles. 
Wheelbarrows were then used to haul them away to a waste pile, 
where they were afterwards burned, when they had dried 
sufficiently. 

This work had to be well done, or else the grass seed would not 
make a good sod ; that an excellent sod was obtained in one 
season, was evidence that the work was well done. Company 
forces did this grubbing, the rates of wages being: Foreman 
$2.50 for 9 hours, and laborers $1.50 for 9 hours. The cost of the 
grubbing was: 

Per acre. 

Foreman $ 4.20 

Men 51.30 

Total $55.50 

This gives us a total cost for clearing and grubbing of $119.81 
per acre. To this should be added $2.00 per acre for tools. 

If this work had been done by contract, it could not have been 
done better, but there is little doubt, that the cost would have 
been less. 

Cost of Transporting Logs by Driving and by Trains.* — Practi- 
cally one-third of the lumber used for pulp and paper in the 
state of Maine comes down the Kennebec waters. Tlie annual 
drive in the main river usually amounts to about 150,000,000 ft. 
B. M. In Water Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 198, Mr. H. K. 
Barrows gives some data as to the cost of driving on the above 
waters, the data being compiled from the reports of the Kennebec 
Log Driving Co., which controls the drives In the main river, the 
Moose River Driving Co. and the Dead River Driving Co. These 
companies drive the logs and apportion the cost as a tax per M. ft., 
this tax varying with the distance ; this tax is the cost per M. ft. 
for logs driven the distance for which the full tax applies. In the 
table below the cost of log driving on Kennebec River and 
tributaries, 1901-1905, is given, the cost per ton mile being 
approximate and calculated on the basis that 1,000 ft. B. M. 
weighs 3,500 lbs.: 

Average — Cost of driving — 

Distance, tax Per mile. Per ton. 

Drive. Miles, per M. Thousand. Mile. 

Kennebec river 91 $0.41 $0.0045 $0.0026 

Kennebec river 24 .12 .0050 .0028 

Dead river 43 .38 .0089 .0051 

Moose river 17 .... .024 .014 

Moosehead lake (Moose 

river to lake outlet, 

logs towed by boat) 9 t-12 .013 .0074 

The figures cover, in addition to the cost of driving itself, the 



'Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 13, 1907. 
tContract price for 10 years. 



1062 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

other charges arising in carrying on this work, such as costs of 
dams, improvement of channel, booms, etc., as well as executive 
charges. Many important changes have been made during the 
period covered by the above costs and consequently the unit costs 
are higher than they would have been had a longer series of years 
been considered. From the above table it appears that the cost 
of log driving per ton mile varies from about one-fourth to 1% 
cts., depending on the distance driven and difficulties experienced. 
The average freight rate in the United States at present is about 
0.8 ct. per ton mile and for the New England group of railroads 
1.20 cts. per ton mile. Under exceptionally favorable circum- 
stances rates as low as 0.2 ct. per ton mile have been granted for 
coal transportation from the coal fields to tide water. For the 
sake of comparison rates during 1906 for log transportation on 
the new Somerset Ry. extension are given below: 



Average 
Logs shipped distance, 
from Moscow to. miles. 

Bingham 12 

Solon 20 

North Anson 29 



Charge 


Cost of transportation, 


per ft. 


Per mile. 


Per ton. 


B. M. 


Thousand. 


Mile. 


$1.75 


$0,146 


$0,080 


2.00 


.100 


.057 


*1.50 


.052 


.030 



♦This price involves reshipment as manufactured lumber on 
Somerset Railway. 

Cost of Cordwood and Cost of a Wire Rope Tramway — Mr. B. 

Mclntire gives the following about a wire ropeway built by him in 
1884 in Mexico. He states that when the inclination of an endless 
traveling ropeway is greater than about 1 in 7 it will run by 
gravity, the speed being controlled by a brake. A ropeway 
running 200 ft. per min. with buckets at intervals of 48 ft., each 
carrying 160 lbs., will deliver 20 tons per hr. By using two clips 
close together on the rope, loads of 700 lbs. per bucket may be 
carried. This particular ropeway was used for carrying cordwood 
to a mine. Its total length was 10,115 ft. between terminals, and 
the difEerence in elevation was 3,575 ft. The longest span between 
towers was 1,935 ft., the shortest, 104 ft. ; there were 10 towers 
and two terminals. Hewed timbers were used for the towers, 
being much better than round timbers in maintenance. The rope 
was 13/16-in. diam., plow steel, of 300,000 lbs. strength per sq. in., 
bought of the California "Wire "Works. It was transported on 7 
mules in lengths of 2,250 ft., each mule carrying a coil 321 ft. 
long, with a piece 10 ft. long between mules. The coils were 24 
ins. diam. There were 3 men required to every 7 mules. Care 
must be taken to fead the mules on a steep ascent to prevent a 
sudden rush that may throw a mule over a precipice. The ;rope- 
way, after erection, was lubricated best by using black "West 
Virginia oil (instead of tar), applied continuously at the rate of a 
drop a minute. This was vastly better than intermittent oiling. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. lUUo 

The cost of this ropeway was as follows : 

Upper terminal $ 192.45 

Lower terminal 218.00 

5 trees fitted for towers 103.00 

5 towers 854.25 

Counterweight tower 169.00 

Remodeling towers 332.00 

Stretching, splicing and mounting rope, at- 
taching clips and baskets 255.00 

Total labor cost of construction $ 2,123.70 

Opening and maintaining roads 1,822.30 

Ropeway, materials and transportation 15,454.00 

Total cost in running order $19,400.00 

This is equivalent to about $10,000 a mile. During 9 mos. (he 
ropeway was operated at a cost of $400 a month, and handled 660 
cords per month ; the items of cost being as follows for 9 mos. : 

1 brakeman, at $52 per mo $ 468 

3 men filling, at $26 per mo. each 702 

1 man dumping, at $40 per mo 360 

1 man looking after line and oiling, at $26 234 

Oil 117 

Repairing (very heavy, $2.25 per day) 526 

2 men wheeling wood away from terminal 468 

2 men receiving wood from choppers and deliver- 
ing it to packers 702 

Total for 9 mos $3,577 

It will be noted that the cost of labor was low, being $1 a 
day for common labor. The cost of cutting and delivering wood 
to the tramway was $2.20 per cord, and the cost of transporting 
by the tramway, as above given, was 60 cts. per cord (not 
Including interest on the plant). During the previous year the 
cost of cutting and teaming wood had been $12 per cord. The 
total saving to the company, after deducting cost of tramway, was 
$33,500 the first year. 

Cost of Planting Trees at Washington, D. C* — During the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1909, the Office of Trees and Parkings, of 
the Engineer Department of the District of Columbia, set out 
3,988 young trees in the various streets of Washington and the 
District. Of this total 2,408 trees were planted in the fall season 
and the remainder in the spring season. The principal kinds 
of trees planted were elm, 626 ; Norway maple, 825 ; pin oak, 
316 ; silver maple, 495, and sycamore, 978. The labor cost of 
planting the trees was as follows : 

Total. Per tree. 

Miscellaneous nursery work $ 3,165 $0,794 

Digging tree holes 9,897 2.182 

Planting trees 2,394 .600 

Total labor $15,456 $3,876 



"Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 29, 1909. 



1064 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of lumber for tree boxes and stakes, straps, strap iron 
and nails amounted to $1.41 per tree. This added to the labor cost 
makes the cost per tree $5,286. This cost is an increase of nearly 
16 per cent over the cost of similar work in the previous year, 
the principal reason being the increased cost of skilled labor and 
the very large amount of nursery planting done. 

Cost of Tree Planting by the Massachusetts Highway Commis- 
sion.* — In 1904 the Massachusetts Highway Commission began the 
planting of trees along state roads. The total nuniber of trees 
planted that year was 3,907, the varieties being as follows: 1,737 
maples, sugar, Norway and white; 538 oak, red, scarlet, white and 
pin ; 1,000 elm, 207 poplar and some white pine and locust. The 
total cost of these trees in their final location, including trans- 
planting in a temporary nursery, care, manure, superintendence 
and labor, was $4,348.59, or an average of $1.14 per tree. During 
the fall of 1904 there was an unusually severe drought, which had 
a marked effect on the trees planted at the time. The total loss 
of trees was 15 per cent, this loss being traceable in a large degree 
to the dry weather. As a result greater care was taken in 1905 in 
preparing the ground for the reception of the trees. In 1905 the 
commission began placing in the state nursery all trees received 
from the nurserymen, so that the trees might get added development 
of root fibers. This made necessary two transplantings before the 
tree reached its final location. The cost of trees, transplanting, 
preparation of ground and final planting, in 1905, was $1.01 per 
tree. The original cost of each tree was higher in 1904, but more 
care was given to the preparation of the ground. The work for 
the year was as follows: Trees replaced, 726 ; new plantings, 3,239 ; 
vines planted, 300. In 1906 the systematic planting of trees along 
the state highways was continued, 2,511 new trees being planted 
that year. In addition 1,011 trees were replaced. The cost of 
planting the new trees in 1906, including the cost of tree and 
every expense connected therewith was $1.10 each. The cost of the 
maintenance of trees planted previous to 1906 was 16 cts. per 
tree, and including the cost of replaced trees 20 cts. 

Cost of Digging Holes and Planting Trees and Shrubs.f — ^In carry- 
ing on many earthwork jobs, the engineer not only has to think 
and plan for the engineering features of the work, but also has 
to consider the artistic side, namely, the landscape features. This 
is rapidly becoming the case with railroad work, as the right of 
way of some of our larger roads is being terraced, hedges planted, 
and banks sodded or seeded, and the station grounds made into 
smooth lawns with shrubs and trees to ornament them, and well 
kept drives laid out through the grounds. SeWerage disposal plants, 
reservoirs and filter beds are likewise treated in this manner. This 
has made landscape architecture or engineering more prominent, 
and the civil engineer finds that he must give attention to these 



^Engineering-Contracting, April 29, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Ja.n. 1, 1908. 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERIVORK. 1065 

matters. If he has much of this work to do he will call in an 
expert on the subject, but if the work does not warrant this 
expense, he will attend to the details himself. 

The cost of trees can be obtained from any nursery company, 
but the cost of planting is more difficult to obtain. 

One of the editors of tliis journal has done this work upon 
several occasions, and the following costs were kept several years 
ago. 

The trees in the first example were known as 4 to 6 in. trees, that 
is, trees measuring from 4 to 6 in. in diameter. They were maples 
and poplars, and were bought in the early spring and "healed" in, 
on a nearby lot to be planted later. 

Example I. In this -lot there were 80 trees. The ground had 
been graded, to a depth of 1 to 5 feet, hence there was no soil left. 
For this reason it was necessary to dig a deep hole and fill it in 
with good soil so as to give the tree every chance of growing. 
The spread of the roots was about 2% ft. on the trees, hence a hole 
5 ft. in diameter and 5 ft. deep was dug. Two men working 
together dug the holes, digging four such holes in a day. A pick 
and short shovel were used by them. The dirt was thrown on the 
side of the hole, wheel scrapers moving it away, but this cost was 
not charged against the tree planting as it saved borrowing that 
much earth elsewhere, hence this was charged against the borrow 
that was being made to fill in an adjoining marsh. In each hole 
there was 3.6 cu. yds. of earth. The wages paid for a nine-hour 
day were as follows : 

Foreman $3.50 

Men 1.50 

4-horse team and driver 7.50 

1-horse cart and driver 3.50 

About six men worked in the gang, and the cost of digging the 
80 holes was: 

Foreman, 6% days $22.75 

Men, 40 days 60.00 

Total $82.75 

The cost per hole was : 

Foreman $0.28 

Men 0.75 

Total $1.03 

This gave a cost per cubic yard of earth excavated as follows : 

Foreman $0.08 

Men 0.21 

Total cost per cubic yard $0.29 

It must be remembered that this kind of excavation is very 
similar to trench work, and also to shaft sinking, as the picking is 
always from the top of the excavation, and in shoveling, the 



1066 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

shovel cannot toe heaped as easily as when working against a 
breast. 

In planting these trees soil had to be liauled several hundred 
feet from nearby stock piles. Wood earth was also hauled from a 
piece of woodland a half a mile away. Twenty-five cents a yard 
was paid for the privilege of getting it, and the cost of hauling and 
loading it is included in the cost of the tree planting. A four- 
horse dump wagon that carried 2 cu. yds. each trip was used for 
this. This wagon also hauled some loads of "mulch" from the 
seashore close by, a haul not exceeding 700 ft. A cart was used 
to haul soil and water. 

The method of planting the trees consisted in filling in the 
bottom of the hole for about 2 ft. with soil, then using a mixture- 
of soil and woods earth, to fill up the hole within a few inches of 
the top. The roots of the tree were covered with about 10 in, 
of this mixture of soil. The last few inches was of the "mulch" 
from the seashore, as this kept the ground moist and prevented 
it from baking. As the tree was planted, plenty of water was 
poured around it. The placing of rich soil around the roots and 
the watering allowed the fibrous roots to begin at once to take 
nourishment for the tree. The planting was done in the summer 
time, thus making it necessary to take unusual precaution that 
the tree should grow. After the trees were planted they were 
watered and sprayed each day that it did not rain. 

The cost of the tree planting for these 80 trees was as follows: 

Foreman, 3% days. $12.25 

Men, 20% days 31.00 

Teams, 4 days 30.00 

Cart, 4 days 14.00 

Wood's earth, 12 cu. yds., at 25c 3.00 

Total $90.25 

This gives a cost per tree of the following : 

Foreman $0.15 

Men 0.30 

Team 0.37 

Cart 0.18 

Wood's earth 0.04 

Total $1.13 

This makes a total cost per tree, of digging the holes and plant- 
ing, of $2.16. 

Example II. In this case 270 trees of about the same size were 
planted. The work was done in the fall of year, after the sap was 
down, and the ground in which they were planted had several feet 
of fairly good soil on it. The tree holes were made, for this 
reason, 5 ft. in diameter, but only 4 ft. deep. This meant the 
excavation of 2.9 cu. yds. for each hole. The wages paid for a 
9 -hour day were the same as in Example I, but, instead of working 
only about six men in the gang, about 24 men were worked. It 



PILING, TRESTLING, TIMBERWORK. 1067 

will be noticed that this materially reduced the foreman cost. The 
cost of digging the 270 holes was: 

Foreman, 4 days $ 14.00 

Men, 95 days 142.50 

Total $156.50 

The cost per hole was as follows : 

Foreman $0.05 

Men 0.53 

Total for hole $0.58 

The cost per cubic yard of earth excavateil from the holes was : 

Foreman $0.02 

Men 0.18 

Total cost per cubic yard $0.20 

A comparison of this with the cost of digging the holes for the 80 
trees will prove interesting. The unit cost of the foreman was 
reduced as explained by Increasing the size of the crew of laborers, 
but it will be noticed that cutting off a foot of the depth (25 per 
cent) of the hole, decreased the cost of digging about 30 per cent. 
The cost of excavating per cubic yard was decreased 14 per cent. 
Two men working together nearly completed six 4 -ft. holes in a 
day. 

In planting the trees the same earth and soil that was dug 
from the hole was put back, hence the cost of planting includes the 
labor of back filling, the getting of the tree from the "healing in 
ground," the placing of it, putting some little manure around the 
tree after it was planted and watering while planting. No teams 
were necessary for this, the cost being as follows : 

Foreman, 1 V; days $ 5.25 

Men, 36 days 54.00 

Total $59.25 

The cost per tree was : 

Foreman $0.02 

Men 0.20 

Total $0.22 

This makes a total cost of planting each tree of 80 cts., and 
illustrates how much cheaper the work can be done when the 
season is favorable, and the soil does not have to be hauled and 
prepared to place around the trees. 

Example III. In this case 60 evergreen trees of various kinds 
from 3 ft. to 12 ft. high were planted. Earth was taken up with 
the roots, at the nursery where they were bought, and burlap was 
tied around the roots to keep this earth from falling off. As these 
trees were unloaded from the car, they were carried by the men 
directly to the place they were to be planted. Teams could not 
be used for this, as the lawns, which were new, would have been 



1068 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ruined by the passage of wheels over them. From 2 to 4 men 
were needed with hand sticlts to carry each tree. The holes dug 
were about 2 % ft. in diameter and about 1 8 in. deep, . there being 
about 6.4 cu. ft. of earth excavated from each hcrle. The back 
filling was done from this material, which was piled up around 
the tree, leaving but little excess to be hauled away in wheel- 
barrows. Large pieces of canvas were laid down on the grass to 
hold the excavated earth, thus preventing the earth from injuring 
the grass. The entire lot of trees was planted in one day, and 
the cost consists of unloading the trees from the cars, carrying 
them to place, digging holes, planting trees, and cleaning up the 
ground and pieces of canvas afterwards. The ground was wet 
enough from recent rains to do away with watering the newly 
planted trees. The entire cost of this work was: 

2 foremen, at $3.50 $7.00 

33 men, at $1.50 49.50 

Total $56.50 

The cost per tree was as follows : 

Foreman $0,115 

Men 0.825 

Total $0,940 

Example IV. This job consisted of planting 1,200 shrubs. About 
one-third of them were planted as separate shrubs or three or 
four plants in the same hole, the rest being platited as hedges. 
The holes were dug 1 ft. deep. A foreman and 3 men did the 
work, taking the shrubs from the "healing in ground," digging 
the holes, planting, back filling and watering. The wages were 
the same as paid in the other examples. The cost was as follows: 

Foreman, 5 days $17.50 

Men, 15 days 22.50 

Total $40.00 

This was a cost of a little more than 3 cents per shrub. All the 
worii was done by day labor. 



SECTION X. 

BUILDINGS. 

Cost of Items of Buildings by Percentages. — In any locality, if we 
select buildings of any given class and estimate the percentag-^ of 
the total cost chargeable to each item, w.e find a remarkably small 

Hi 

c . 

rn (D I— > f P3 ""^ .. 

M -ts ^: n n is 

Excavation, brick and 

cut stone 16% 36% 38% 48% 50% 15% 

Plaster 8 6 61/2 6 

Skylights and glass ". 10 

Millwork and glass. .. . 21 20 17 101/2 7 6 

Lumber 19 12 11 1/2 11 1/, 18 V2 61/2 

Carpenter labor 18 10 10 10 91^ 4 

Hardware 3 % 3 21/. 2 1/> 

Tin, galv. iron and slate 21/2 4 % 5 " 31/2 1 1/> 

Gravel roofing 1% .... 2 1 14 

Structural steel 51/2 45 y2 

Steel lintels and hard- 
ware • SY2 6 

Plumbing and gas fitt'g 7 3 4 4 2 .... 
Piping for steam, 

water and power 2 

Paint 5 51/2 41/2 4 21/2 2 

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Note. — Heating is not included. 
variation. For example, the hardware item in brick residences aver- 
ages about 3% of the total cost of the building whether the building 
costs $10,000 or $50,000. For a $10,000 building the hardware costs 
$10,000 X 3%, or $300. For a $50,000 building, the hardware costs 
$50,000 X 3%, or $1,500. In making preliminary estimates of cost it 
is often sufficiently close to estimate one or two of the large items 
and calculate the rest by percentages. Every builder and architect, 
therefore, should analyze the actual cost of each item of a number 
of typical buildings, and reduce the analysis to percentages. "Where 
foundation work is difficult and variable, it is well to exclude the 
foundations in forming a table of percentages, such as the one on 
this page. It is also well to carry the subdivisions of cost still 
farther ; but for the purpose of example, the foregoing table serves 
to illustrate. 

1069 



1070 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Buildings Per Cu. Ft. — In order approximately to esti- 
mate the cost of any proposed building for which plans have not 
yet been prepared, it is convenient to estimate the cost in cents 
per cubic foot. In the following examples the cubic contents are 
computed from the cellar floor to the roof (if the roof is flat), or 
(in a pitch roof) to the top of the attic walls that are finished or 
naay be finished ; but air spaces and open porches are not in- 
cluded. Measurements are from out to out of walls and founda- 
tions. 

The following figures were compiled by Mr. James N. Brown, of 
St. Louis, and form part of the instructions to insurance adjusters. 
Prices were for the year 1902. 

Country Property: Cts. per cu. ft. 

Frame dwelling, small box house, no cornice 4 

Frame dwelling, shingle roof, small cornice, no sash 

weights, plain 5 to 6 

Brick dwelling, same class 7 to 8 

Frame dwelling, shingle roof, good cornice, sash 

weights, blinds (good house) 7 to 8 

Brick dwelling, same class 9 to 10 

Frame barn, shingle roof, not painted, plain finish 1 % to 2y% 

Frame barn, shingle roof, painted, good foundation .... 2 ^ to 3 

Frame store, shingle roof, painted, plain finish 5 to 7 

Brick store, shingle roof, painted, good cornice, well 

finished 7 to 9 

Frame church or schoolhouse, ordinary 5 to 7 

Brick church or schoolhouse, ordinary 8 to 10 

If slate or metal roof, add i/4 ct. per cu. ft. to the above. 

City Property: 
Frame dwelling, shingle roof, pine floors and finish, no 

bathroom or furnace, plain finish (good house) 6 to 7 

Brick dwelling, same class. 8 to 9 

Frame dwelling, shingle roof, hardwood floor in hall and 

parlor, bath, furnace and fair plumbing 8 to 9 

Brick dwelling, same class 8 to 1 

Frame dwelling, shingle roof, hardwood in first floor, 
good plumbing, furnace, artistic design, some interior 

ornamentation, well painted 10 to 12 

Brick dwelling, good plumbing, bath, furnace, pine fin- 
ish, well painted 11 to 12 

Cost of Miscellaneous Buildings. — Mr. FVed T. Hodgson published 
the following in the Architects' and Builders' Magazine, May, 1902 : 
Bathhouses, complete, or for barracks, but not 

supplied with hot water, per cu. ft $ .45 to % .50 

Or per bath 280.00 to 320.00 

Baths, public, comprising swimming baths, slip- 
per baths, laundry, caretaker's quarters, 

machinery, etc., complete, per cu. ft .SO' to .36 

Breweries, complete, including buildings, cel- 
larage, boilers, engine, machinery, coppers, 
liquor baths, mash tubs, coolers, refriger- 
ator, ice storage, pumps, and all other re- 
quirements, per cu. ft .14 to .20 

Churches, plain, per cu. ft., from .16 to .22 

Per sq. ft., from 4.50 to 6.50 

Per sitting, from 40.00 to 55.00 

Churches, ornamental, per cu. ft., from .22 to .39 

Per sq. ft., from 7.00 to 12.50 

Per sitting, from 65.00 to 120.00 



BUILDINGS. 1071 

Cotton mills, as generally constructed : 

Per cu. ft .O'J to .12 

Per spindle .22 to .30 

Cow stables, complete, with iron finishings and 
fittings : 

Per cu. ft .14 to .16 

Per sq. ft 2.20 to 2. SO 

Per cow 170.00 to 11)0.00 

Second-class stable with common fittings : 

Per cu. ft .11 to .13 

Per sq. ft 1.G5 to 2.00 

Per cow 130.00 to 145.00 

Third-class, for farm, wood fittings: 

Per cu. ft 071/2 to .10 

Per sq. ft 1.45 to 1.50 

Per cow 90.00 to 105.00 

Drill halls or sheds for infantry : 

Per cu. ft .llto .14 

Per sq. ft 1.60 to 1.70 

Electric stations of power houses, buildings 
erected complete, exclusive of machinery 
and plant : 

Per cu. ft .14 to .17 

Flats, as constructed in New York, compris- 
ing ornamental brickwork in front, ele- 
vators, fire-resisting floors, and the whole 
well finished in ordinary wood throughout : 

Per cu. ft .28 to .36 

Hospitals, complete, including administrative 
buildings, etc. : 

Per cu. ft .20 to .30 

Per bed 1,550.00 to 2,300.00 

Cottage hospitals for small towns: 

Per cu. ft .17 to .22 

Per bed 1,050.00 to 1,550.00 

Hospitals, isolated, including all nursery 
buildings : 

Per cu. ft... .17 to .22 

Per bed 1,800.00 to 2,300.00 

Hotels, complete m every particular : 

First-class, per cu. ft .31 to .41 

Second-class, per cu. ft .23 to .31 

Third-class, per cu. ft .20 to .24 

Houses, complete, in brickwork and goor! sub- 
stantial finishings : 
First-class — Large mansion with elaborate 
finish : 

Main building, 16-ft. ceiling, per cu. ft .30 to .40 

Per sq. ft 5.50 to 6.50 

Additions, 11-ft. ceilings, per cu. ft .16 to .20 

Per sq. ft 2.50 to 3.00 

Second-class — Large mansion of ordinary 
character : 
Main building, 14-ft. ceiling, per cu. ft.... .22 to .30 

Per sq. ft 3.50 to 4.50 

Additions, per cu. ft .15 to .20 

Per sq. ft 1.65 to 2.15 

Third-class — Country houses : 

Height of ceiling, 11 ft., per cu. ft .15 to .20 

Per sq. ft 2.15 to 2.65 

Fourth-class — Speculative buildings : 

Ceilings, 10 ft., per cu. ft .13 to .15 

Per sq. ft 1.30 to 1.55 

Fifth-class — Tenements and cottages to rent : 

Ceilings, 9 ft., per cu. ft .] to .12 

Per sq. ft 110 to 1.35 



1072 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Libraries, public, complete in every particular: 

Per cu. ft .16 to .22 

Municipal lodging-houses for cities and large 
towns : 

Per cu. ft .15 to .18 

Per bed 300.00 to 375.00 

Museums, public : 

For large cities, per cu. ft .22 to .33 

Towns .19 to .26 

Music halls, complete, per head of accommo- 
dation : 

For large cities 80.00 to 130.00 

For small cities and tOBvns 40.00 to 70.00 

Town halls, complete : 

Large cities, per cu. ft .31 to .36 

Small cities and towns .22 to .30 

Alternative prices : 

Basement, per cu. ft .20 to .24 

Superstructure, per cu. ft .27 to .35 

Ornamental towers, per cu. ft .39 to .46 

Theaters, complete, per head of accommoda- 
tion : 

In large cities 82.00 to 108.00 

Small cities and towns 50.00 to 80.00 

Per cu. ft .28 to .38 

Chimney shafts, plain, as for factories, etc., 
complete, including foundations, iron cap, 
etc., height measured from surface of 
ground to top of cap : Per ft. in height. 

Not exceeding 100 ft. in height $ 40.00 to $ 46.00 

100 ft. to 180 ft. high 45.00 to 52.00 

180 ft. to 250 ft. high 50.00 to 56.00 

Costs of Concrete Buildings.* — A common method of stating the 
cost of buildings for approximate estimates and comparisons is in 
terms of dollars per square foot of floor or cents per cubic foot of 
space inclosed. Either unit has been supposed to be a reliable one 
for approximate comparisons and both have been used frequently to 
prove in individual cases the economy or the high cost of construc- 
tion work. In view of these facts the following comparisons made 
by Mr. Leonard C. WaSon, president, Aberthaw Construction Co., 

Table I. — Cost of Fireproof Completed Cotctracts. 

Volume Floor area Unit cost 



Kind of Building. in cu. ft. in sq. ft. Per cu. ft. Per sq. ft. 

Offices and stores 1,365,830 90,474 $0,133 $2.00 

do. 496,780 39,840 .124 1.545 

Factory 112,440 7,519 .114 1.70 

do. 746,674 49,546 .060 .902 

do. 312,000 24,960 .127 1.60 

Garage 156,198 10,806 .085 1.23 

Filter 149,250 19,208 .134 1.04 

Fire station 44,265 2,982 .153 2.26 

Observatory 9,734 657 .373 5.45 

Filter 59,991 5,243 .333 3.82 

Highest .333 3.82 

Lowest .06 .90 

Average .138 1.72 



*Engineering-ContracUng, March 10, 1909. 



BUILDINGS. 



1073 



Table II. — Cost of Fireproof Complete 



Volume 
Kind of Building. in cu. ft. 

Storehouse 1,7 

Hospital 7 

Office building 4 

Cold storage 1,5 

Factory 

do 1,3 

Storehouse 1,1 

Mfg. building 1,3 

Office 6 



Factory 
do 
do 
Highest 
Lowest 
Average 



. 1 
.1,2 
. 1 



14,448 
03,692 
96,780 
35,000 
12,400 
27,868 
40,000 
80,500 
93,840 
05,600 
11,364 
80,000 



Floor area 

in sq. ft. 

168,096 

57,654 

39,840 

154,000 

15,000 

106,022 

146,000 

90,240 

56,552 

8,800 

74,604 

16,394 



Per 



Buildings. 
— Unit cost- 
cu. ft. 
0.0827 

.0865 

.124 

.13 

.091 

.107 

.0685 

.067 

.197 

.124 

.0625 

.129 

.197 

.0625 

.1088 



Per sq. ft. 

$0.84 
1.05 
1.545 
1.30 
1.28 
1.335 

.575 
1.01 
2.42 
1.485 
1.01 
1.42 
2.42 

.575 
1.27 



Table III. — Cost of Fireproof Buildings. 

Volume Floor area Unit cost- 



Kind of Building. in cu. ft. 

Office building 441,000 

Cold storage 1,016,400 

Hospital 348,320 

Hospital 414,732 

Bank 533,750 

Masonic 1,479,456 

Warehouse 259,700 

Garage 497,420 

Warehouse 2,597,000 

Hotel 2,116,106 

Hospital 485,789 

Office 264,687 

Cold storage 909,240 

Club 513,808 

Office 501,575 

Highest 

Lowest 

Average 

Per cent variation, high and low 



in sq. ft. Per cu. ft. Per sq. ft. 

$1.97 



35,854 
01,640 
34,832 

29,838 



24,500 
21 2', 66 6 
38,247 
66*,745 
6Y,466 



$0,159 
.13 
.127 
.124 
.123 
.122 
.120 
.118 
.106 
.104 
.100 
.095 
.091 
.085 
.084 
.159 
.084 
.113 
53.8% 



1.30 
1.27 
1.73 



1.28 

1.30 

1.30 

1.24 

l.i2 
1.97 
1.12 
1.39 
57.0% 



Table IV. — Cost of Mill Construction or Second-Class Building. 



Volume 



Kind of Building. in cu 

Mill 544, 

Warehouse 2,808 

Mill 1,271 

Storehouse 1,714, 

Mill 1,622, 

Mill 1,331, 

Mill 1,752, 

Mill 2,641 

Mill 2,036 

Mill 2,867 

Highest 

Lowest 

Average 



. ft. 
,788 
,850 
,300 
,448 
,128 
200 
609 
,000 
731 
,535 



Floor area 

in sq. ft. 

44,172 



129,920 

168,696 

152,200 

83,200 

Sl,500 

98,059 

174,000 

157,730 



-Unit cost- 
Per 



Per cu. ft. 
$0,122 
.12 
.0891 
.059 
.056 
.054 
.048 
.046 
.046 
.045 
.122 
.045 
.069 



sq. ft. 
^.51 

.'875 
.60 
.60 
.865 
1.05 
1.25 
.542 
.82 
1.51 
.542 
.90 



Boston, Mass., will be of decided interest. In preparation for a 
study of the figures given it is important to note that Mr. Wason's 
conclusions are that, after making this comparison, he is con- 



1074 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

vinced that neither method is accurate enough to put much reliance 
on, but that the square foot method is a little safer than the other. 

The comparative figures compiled by Mr. Wason are given in 
Tables I to IV, inclusive. In each case the total cost includes 
masonry and carpentry work without interior finish or decorating, 
plumbing and heating. The effort has been made to put the build- 
ings upon a comparative basis as regards the amount of work done 
on each. 

The first table consists of the total cost of actual contracts exe- 
cuted. The second table consists of bona fide bids on complete build- 
ings on which Mr. Wason' s company were not the lowest bidders, 
but where the difference was not as a rule very great. The third 
and fourth tables are bona fide bids on work by another contractor 
whose experience was similar to that of Mr. Wason's. As a rule, 
cubic foot measurements are given in cents only, seldom being car- 
ried to any closer subdivision. In reference to Table IV on second- 
class buildings, it will be noted that for the largest building a vari- 
ation of 1 ct. per cu. ft., amounts to over $28,000, while the smallest 
one in the list amounts to only a little over $5,400. Again, on the 
last three items, the cubic foot price is practically identical, while 
the square foot measurements corresponding vary by more than 
100%, with no easily apparent reason in the design. 

In Table III another discrepancy is noticed. In the first and the 
last items, the highest and the lowest per cubic foot, as well as per 
square foot are on office buildings of similar type which were within 
one mile of each other where there is no apparent reason for such 
discrepancy in the design or difficulty or access in the erection of the 
building. 

Cost of Fireproof Office Buildings.— Mr. F. J. T. Stewart gathered 
the following data in 1906. 

The average cost of 3 office buildings in Chicago was 33 cts. per 
cu. ft., distributed as follows ; 

Per cent. 

Foundations 4.3 

Steel frame 15.2 

Mason work 25.5 

Equipment (elevators, plumbing, lighting, heating, 

ventilating, etc.) 25.0 

Trim and flnisli 30.0 

Total 100.0 

The average cost of 4 office buildings in Boston was 40 cts. per 
cu. ft., distributed as follows : 

Per cent. 

Foundations -7.0 

Steel frame 18.4 

Mason work 35.5 

Equipment 18.5 

Trim and finish 20.6 

Total 100.0 

Comparative Cost of Wood and Steel Frame Factory Buildings. — 

Mr. H. G. Tyrrell gives the following, based on prices existing in 
Ohio in the forepart of 1905. 



BUILDINGS. 1075 

Slow Burning Wood Construction. — The building is 60 x 100 ft., 
six stories higli, containing 6 flooi's, a roof and a cellai". Tlie 
floors are designed for a load of 100 lbs. per sq. ft. The building 
has windows on all four sides. The walls (brick) carry the ends 
of the floor beams. The basement walls are 24 ins. tliick. Walls of 
first four stories are 17 ins. thick; top two stories, 13 ins. thick. 
Eight tiers of columns, spaced 20 ft. apart in both directions, 
carry the floors and roof. The columns of the upper four stories 
are yellow pine, the size being 14 x 14 ins. for the lowest of these 
four stories. Below this, round cast iron columns are used, 
11x1% in. in the first story, and 12x1% ins. in the basement. 
All columns have cast iron bases 3 ft. square and 16 Ins. high. 
Lengthwise through the building in the floors, run two lines of 12 x 
20-in. yellow pine header beams resting on the brackets of the 
cast iron column caps. The cross floor beams are 8xl6-in. yellow 
pine, spaced 5 ft. apart. At the columns they rest on column caps, 
and at intermediate points they hang from the header beams by 
wrought iron stirrups. In the walls the cross beams rest on cast 
iron wall plates, 9 x 20 x % in. The floor is of %-in. matched 
maple, laid on 1%-in. yellow pine. The roof is similar in con- 
struction and has a tar and gravel covering. 

The following estimates are for the structural part of the building 
only, including walls, columns, floors, roof, excavation, foundation, 
doors and windows, but not including partitions, stairs, elevators, 
plumbing, heating, lighting or wiring. 

1. Excavation (cu. yds.) 1,800 

2. Cellar cement floor (sq. ft. ) 6,000 

3. Foundation concrete (cu. yds.) 150 

4. Brick (cu. ft. ) 39,000 

5. Windows, 4 x 7 f t 238 

6. Roofing (sq. ft.) 6,000 

7. Yellow pine timber (M. ) 116 

8. Yellow pine flooring (M.) 73 

9. Matched flooring (M.) 46 

10. Iron work (tons) 46 

The estimated cost of this design is $35,000, which is equivalent 
to 6.1 cts. per cu. ft., or 83 cts. per sq. ft. of entire floor area. 

The interior framing of floors and columns (including wall plates, 
columns, caps and bases and stirrup irons), is 27 cts. per sq. ft. 
of floor area. 

Fireproof Steel Construction. — This ).=! similar in design to the 
above, as regards arrangement of beams and columns. Riveted 
steel columns are used, and the floors are framed with steel beams. 
The flooring between the beams is reinforced concrete. 

The quantities are as before for items (1) to (6) inclusive. 

The remaining items are : 

7. Steel columns (tons) 105 

8. Steel beams and wall plate (tons) 252 

9. Concrete floor and roof (sq. ft.) 42,000 

The estimated cost is $57,000, which is equivalent to 10.2 cts. 
per cu. ft., or $1.36 per sq. ft. of total floor area. Floors and 



1076 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



columns cost 75 cts. per sa. ft. of floor area, as compared with 27 
cts. for the slow burning mill construction. 

Cubic Foot Costs of Reinforced Concrete Buildings.=*= — The follow- 
ing costs are for buildings actually erected and they are given by 
Mr. Emile G. Parrot, M. Am. Soc. C. E. : 

Cents per cu. ft. 

Warehouses and manufacturers 8 to 10 

Stores and loft buildings 11 to 17 

Miscellaneous, such as schools and hospitals. . .15 to 20 




l£A/6TH /// f££T 



Fig. 1. 



These costs include the building complete, omitting power, heat, 
light, elevators and decorations or furnishings. 

Cost of iVIill Buildings.— Mr. Charles F. Main is authority for the 
following data, based upon eastern prices in 1910. 

It is not an uncommon thing to hear the cost of mill buildings 
placed from 70 cts. to $1 per sq. ft. of floor space, regardless of the 
size or number of stories. There is, however, a wide range of cost 



*Engineerinff-Coniracting, Jan. 27, 1909. 



BUILDINGS. 



1677 



pei- square foot of floor space, depending upon the width, length, 
height of stories and number of stories. 

Some time ago, I placed a valuation upon a portion of the prop- 
erty of a corporation, including some 400 or 500 buildings. In order 
lo have a standard of cost from which to start in each case, I pre- 
pared a series of diagrams showing the approximate costs of build- 
ings varying in length and width and from one story to six stories 
in height. The height of stories also was varied for different 
widths, being assumed 13 ft. high if 25 ft. wide, 14 ft. if 50 ft. 
Wide, 15 ft. for 75 ft., 16 ft. for 100 ft. and over. 




Fig. 2. 



The costs used in making up the diagrams are based largely 
upon the actual cost of work done under average conditions of 
cost of materials and labor and with average soil for foundations. 
The costs given include plumbing, but no heating, sprinklers, or 
lighting. These three latter items would add roughly 10 cts. per 
sq. ft. of floor area. 

Estimates. — The accompanying diagrams. Figs. 1 to 6, can be 
used to determine the probable approximate cost of proposed brick 



1078 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



buildings, of the type known as "slow-burning" to be used for 
manufacturing purposes, with a total floor load of about 75 lbs. 
per sq. ft. and these can be taken from the diagrams readily. The 
curves were derived primarily to show the estimated cost per 
square foot of gross floor area of brick buildings for extile mills, 
and to include ordinary foundations and plumbing. For example, 
if it is desired to know the probable cost of a mill 400 ft. long 
by 100 ft. wide, three stories high, refer to the curves showing the 
cost of three-story buildings. On the curve for buildings 100 ft. 




^ 5^ t ^ § ^ ^ ^ I I 

Fig. 3. 

wide, find the point where the vertical line of 400 ft. in. length cuts 
the curve, then move horizontally along this line to the left-hand 
vertical line, on which will be found the cost of 81 cts. 

The cost given is for brick manufacturing buildings under average 
conditions and can be modified if necessary for the following con- 
ditions : 

(a) If the soil is poor or the conditions of the site are such as to 
require more than the ordinary amount of foundations, the cost will 
be increased. 



BUILDINGS. 



1079 



(b) If the end or a side of the building is formed by another 
building, the cost of one or the other will be reduced slightly. 

(c) If the building is to be used for ordinary storage purposes 
with low stories and no top lloors, the cost will be decreased from 
about 10% for large low buildings, to 25% for small high ones, 
about 20% usually being a fair allowance. 

(d) If the buildings are to be used for manufacturing purposes 
and are to be substantially built of wood, the cost will be decreased 







£r?^.-G?/?^ 



Fig 



from about 6% for large one-story buildings, to 33% for high 
small buildings ; 15% would usually be a fair allowance. 

(e) If the buildings are to be used for storage with low stories 
and built substantially of wood, the cost will be decreased from 
13% for large one-story buildings, to 50% for small high buildings ; 
30% would usually be a fair allowance. 

(f) If the total floor loads are more than 75 lbs. per sq. ft. the 
cost is increased. 

(g) For office buildings, the cost must be increased to cover 
architectural features on the outside and interior finish. 



1080 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The cost of very light wooden structures is much less than the 
above figures would give. Table IVa shows the approximate ratio 
of the costs of different kinds of buildings to the cost of those shown 
by the curves. 

Evaluations. — The diagrams can be used as a basis of valuation 
of different buildings. 

A building, no matter how built nor how expensive it was to 
build, cannot be of any more value for the purpose to which it is 




5i 



% 



%%% 






Fig. 5. 



put than a modern building properly designed for that particular 
purpose. The cost of such a modern building is then .the limit of 
value of existing buildings. Existing buildings are usually of less 
value than new modern buildings for tlie reason that there has been 
some depreciation due to age and that the buildings are not as 
well suited to the business as a modern building would be. 

Starting with the diagrams as a base, the value can be approxi- 
mately determined by making the proper deductions. 

The diagrams can be used as a basis for insurance valuations 
after deducting about 5% for large buildings to 15% for small ones. 



BUILDINGS. 



1081 



for the cost of foundations, as it is not customary to include the 
foundations in the insurable value. 

Use of Tables. — Table V shows the costs which form the basis of 
the estimates and these unit prices can be used to compute the 
cost of any building not covered by the diagrams. The cost of 
brick walls is based on 22 bricks per cubic foot, costing $18 per 
thousand laid. Openings are estimated at 40 cts. per sq. ft, in- 
cluding windows, doors and sills. 




Fig. 6. 



Ordinary mill floors, including tiijibers, planking and top floor 
with Southern pine timber at $40 per M. ft. B. M. and spruce 
planking at $30 per M., costs about 32 cts. per sq. ft., which has 
been used as a unit price. Ordinary mill roofs covered with tar and 
gravel, with lumber at the above prices, cost about 25 cts. per sq. ft. 
and this has been used in the estimates. Add for stairways, elevator 
wells, plumbing, partitions and special work. 

Deductions from Diagrams. — (1) An examination of the diagrams 
shows immediately the decrease in cost as the width is increased. 



1082 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This is due to the fact that the cost of the walls and outside founda- 
tions, which is an important item of cost, relative to the total cost, 
is decreased as the width increases. 

For example, supposing a three-story building is desired with 
30,000 sq. ft. on each floor: 

If the building were 600 ft. x 50 ft., its cost would be about 99 
cts. per sq. ft. 

If the building were 400 ft. x 75 ft, its cost would be about 87 
cts. per sq. ft. 

If the building were 300 ft. x 100 ft., its cost would be about 83 
cts. per sq. ft. 

If the building were 240 ft. x 125 ft., its cost would be about 80 
cts. per sq. ft. 

(2) The diagram shows that the minimum cost per square foot 
is reached with a four-story building. A three-story building costs 
a trifle more than a four-story. A one-story building is the most 
expensive. This is due to a combination of several features : 

(a) The cost of ordinary foundations does not increase in pro- 
portion to the number of stories, and therefore their cost is less 
per square foot as the number of stories is increased, at least up to 
the limit of the diagram. 

(b) The roof is the same for a one-story building as for one of 
any other number of stories, and therefore its cost relative to the 
total cost grows less as the number of stories increases. 

(c) The cost of columns, including the supporting piers and 
castings, does not vary much per story as the stories are added. 

(d) As the number of stories increases, the cost of the walls, 
owing to increased thickness, increases in a greater ratio than the 
number of stories, and this item is the one which in the four-story 
building offsets the saving in foundations and roof. 

(3) The saving by the use of frame construction for walls instead 
of brick is not as great as many persons think. The only saving 
is in somewhat ligliter foundations and in the outside surfaces of 
the building. The floor, columns, and roof must be the same 
strength and construction in any case. 

Assumed Height of Stories. — From ground to first floor, 3 ft. 
Buildings 25 ft. wide, stories 13 ft. high. Buildings 50 ft. wide, 
stories 14 ft. high. Buildings 75 ft. wide, stories 15 ft. high. 
Buildings 100 ft. wide, stories 16 ft. high. Buildings 125 ft. wide, 
Stories 16 ft. high. 

Unit Prices. — Floors, 32 cts. per sq. ft. of gross floor space not 
including columns. If columns are included, 38 cts. 

Roof, 25 cts. per sq. ft., not including columns. If columns are 
included, 30 cts. Roof to project 18 ins. all around buildings. 

Stairways, including partitions, $100 each flight. Allow two 
stairways, and one elevator tower for buildings up to 150 ft. long. 
Allow two stairways and two elevator towers for buildings up to 
300 ft. long. In buildings over two stories, allow three stairways 
and three elevator towers for buildings over 300 ft. long. 

In buildings over two stories, plumbing $75 for each fixture in- 
cluding piping and partitions. Allow two fixtures on each floor up 



BUILDINGS. 108? 



OlS 9 oo,-i«<Dcni-(e'iec'<*"meo 

^j -^ irt irt in lo «> c£t <D cc CO <o 

O 

S <u -ois g 

<= 5 

S m •n-ir< I. Mint-^^COt^OOOiOtH 

7, r "lb F u5inio(»tc>«Dtoi:o«5t-t- 

O S 



^C« 






•ois 8 



tOOOO-^t^aJOrHMMeO 



^ **5 *» m lO CD CD CD CD t- t^ C^ t- t~ 



^ rv* '0?S S iHOOOCOlrtt-OMCOrfincOt- 

■^ W miO CD CD CD CD l> t> t^ t- t^ t^ C-» 

H 

m 

m *01C! T OlOTtlt^OOr-ICgcOTjHmCDCDt* 

J +0 »• t-C-t-C-C-0000000000000000 

►J 

M 

M -o^S 9 

u 

3 
M o 
■<! M 

E-i u 
o 

O r/5 

o ^ 

2 PQ -mCS 7 M CO O iH 1-1 M -* lO CO CD t- t- 00 

E5 "to O t- t- 00 00 00 OO OD OO 00 00 00 00 oo 

s 

M 

& 
PQ 



m 

S 'O^S 9 

<! 

!> 

§ -o^S 9 



o ^ -ottS 8 

■s " t- CO oo m o «<i CO m CD t- 1- 1- 00 

PH "OIQ 2 CDC-t-C~00O00OO0O0OOOOO0O0 



k? CD CD a^ O O T-( cq C<J CO CO CO rt< T14 

•^ O^S T OOCOo0030505030>Oi<J5Cn050 



n ooooooooooooo 

■<! lOOOOOOOOOOOOO 

H -^js X m joou io'^-'"-'=l"l"=-'=-'=-°.'=-'=l^-'=-°.. 
jaej iBiDijaaang r-irHMffqcocoTt<Tt<io 



1084 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to 5,000 sq. ft. of floor space and add one fixture for each additional 
5,000 sq. ft. of floor or fraction thereof. 

(Note. — From the above data the approximate cost of any size 
and sliape of building can be estimated in a few minutes. After 
the cost of the items given is determined about 10% should be added 
for incidentals. ) 

Reinforced Concrete Buildings. — From such estimates and pro- 
posals as I have been able to get and from work done it appears 
that the cost of reinforced concrete buildings designed to carry floor 
loads of 100 lbs. per sq. ft. or less would be about 25% more than 
the slow-burning type of mill construction. 

Alternate Method of Estimating Cost. — Floors. — 38 cts. per sq, 
ft. of gross floor space. This price will include column piers, column 
castings and wrought iron. 

Roof. — 30 cts. per sq. ft., including projections, say 18 ins., in- 
cluding columns, etc. 

Stairways and Elevator Towers. — Allow two stairways and one 
elevator tower in buildings over two stories high up to 150 ft. long. 
Allow two stairways and two elevator towers up to 300 ft. long. 
Allow three stairways and three elevator towers over 300 ft. long. 

Brick Walls. — Enclosing stairs and elevators, estimated as inside 
walls. 

Stairs. — $100 per flight, per story. 

PlumMng. — Allow two fixtures on each floor up to 5,000 sq. ft. 
of floor space, and add one fixture for each additional 5,000 sq. ft. 
or fraction thereof. Allow $75 per fixture. 

Incidentals. — ^Add about 10% for incidentals. 

Table V. — Data foe Estimating Cost of Buildings. 

Columns 

Foundations Brick "Walls, including 

including exc. Cost per sq ft. piers and 

Cost per lin. ft. of surface, castings. 

for outside inside outside for inside Cost 

walls. walls. walls. walls. of one. 

One story building $2.00 $1.75 $.40 $.40 $15.00 

Two story building 2.90 2.25 .44 .40 15.00 

Three story building 3.80 2.80 .47 .40 15.00 

Four story building 4.70 3.40 .50 .43 15.00 

Five story building 5.60 2.90 .53 .45 15.00 

Six story building 6.50 4.50 .57 .47 15.00 

Table VI. — Data for Approximating Cost of Mill Buildings op 
Known Size But Without Definite Plans Made. 

Brick walls. 
Including 
Foundations. doors and windows 
including exc. Cost per lin. ft. 

Cost per lin. ft. of surface, 

for outside inside outside for inside 
Height of Building. walls. walls. walls. walls. 

One story $2.00 $1.75 $.40 $.40 

Two stories 2.90 2.25 .44 .40 

Three stories 3.80 2.80 .47 .40 

Four stories 4.70 3.40 - .50 .43 

Five stories 5.60 3.90 .53 45 

Six stories 6.50 4.50 .57 .47 



BUILDINGS. 1085 

Estimating Quantity of Lumber. — Lumber Is measured in feet 
board measure, as explained on page 487. 

There are 15 or more associations in America having rules 
governing the inspection and classification of lumber. The following 
three have printed rules that are particularly valuable to have : 
The National Hardwood Lumber Association, Chicago ; Southern 
Lumber Manufacturers' Association, St. Louis ; Mississippi Valley 
Lumbermen's Association, Minneapolis, Minn. 

In building a house, there is always a considerable percentage of 
waste lumber. Then, too, there is the loss in surface area in 
forming tongues and grooves at the mill, and in dressing the edges. 
Therefore, after computing the e.Kact number of pieces, or the exact 
area, as shown in the plans for the building, it is necessary to add 
considerably to the lumber bill to cover the waste. 

To estimate the number of joists for each room, count the actual 
number and add 1 joist ; for an extra joist is needed for the wall. . 
Joists are nearly always "bridged," and for this purpose 2 x 4-in. 
stuff is used. The "bridging" is the inclined bracing between the 
joists. 

Allow 25 lin. ft. of 2 x 4-in. bridging for each "square" (100 sq. 
ft.) of flooring. Where 2 x 12-in. joists are placed 16 ins. apart, it 
will be found that the 2 x 4-in. bridging amounts to about 9% of the 
number of ft. B. M. of joists. 

On a plain roof count the number of rafters and add 1 extra. 

In estimating the number of studs for wall.s and partitions, allow 
1 stud for every lineal foot of wall or partition where studs are 
"spaced 16 ins. centers," that is 16 ins. center to center. This 
seemingly large allowance is made to cover the doubling of studs 
on corners, doors and windows. For a stable or shed no such 
extra allowance need be made. 

To estimate the quantity of sheeting or of shiplap, calculate the 
exact surface to be covered, deducting openings, then add the 
following percentages: 

Sheeting. Shiplap. 
Per cent. Per cent. 

For floors 15 17 

For sidewalks 17 20 

For roofs 20 25 

Sheeting is laid with 2-in. spaces on cheap roofs, then deduct 
accordingly. Sheeting and shiplap are sometimes laid diagonally, 
then add 5% to the above figures to cover waste in sawing both ends. 

Remember that lumber comes in lengths of even feet, and, 
with few exceptions, 16 ft. is the maximum stock length. Examine 
each area to be covered to see whether a given number of standard 
lengths will cover it, or whether there will be a waste on each 
length. 

To estimate the amount of siding, calculate the exact surface, 
deducting openings, and add 33%, if 6-in. siding with 414 ins. to 
tho weather: but if it is 4-in. siding add 50% to the actual surface. 

There are two classes of flooring, namely, "dressed or square 
edge flooring," and "dressed and matched flooring." The square 



1086 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

edge flooring ordinarily has a face width about % in. less than 
its nominal width ; thus, a piece of 6-in. square edge flooring has a 
face widtli of 5% ins., and a piece of 4-in. flooring has a face 
width of 3% ins. The loss in the case of the flooring with 51/^ -in. 
face is 9%, and in the case of the 3%-in. face, the loss is 14%. But 
in addition to these mill losses, there is generally waste owing to 
bad ends, etc., so that after estimating the exact area of floor, add 
the following percentages: 

Per cent. 

For 6-in. flooring, add 11 

For 4-in. flooring, add 20 

The following gives a fair extra allowance where dressed and 
matched flooring is to be laid : 

Per cent. 

For 6-in. flooring, add 17 

For 4-in. flooring, add 25 

For 2 1/4 -in. flooring, add 33 

For 1%-in. flooring, add 40 

Remember that if tlie flooring is to be laid under partitions, due 
allowance must be made. If the architect has so spaced the joists 
that full standard lengths can not be used, there may be a very 
large waste not included in the above allowances ; thus, if the 
width of room is such as to require flooring 12 ft. 2 ins. long, it will 
be necessary to buy flooring 14 ft. long, and saw off nearly 2 ft., 
which is wasted. Flooring less than 1 in. thick is estimated as 
being 1 in. thick. 

Ceiling and Wainscoting are estimated just as dressed and 
matched flooring is estimated. 

Cost of Timberwork in 5 Different Kinds of Buildings. — In the 

following table is given the average cost of timberwork in a number 
of different buildings. Bacli building is briefly described in the 
table, and the cost is the average of all the rougli lumber in it, and 
does not include the work on the milled, or dressed lumber. Only 
carpenters were engaged on this worK, and they handled all the 
lumber after its delivery in wagons at the site of the work. Wages 
of carpenters were 40 cts. per hr. No common laborers employed. 

Cost per 
Ft. B. M. M., wage 
per man being 
Building per day $3.20 for 

number of 8 hrs. 8 hrs. 

1 A block of six 3-story "flats," first story 

veneered with brick ; rest covered with 

slate; an expensive front; towers 275 $11.60 

2 Same type of building with a plain front 375 8.50 

3 Three-story schoolhouse," plain ; including 

sheeting, shiplap, and all plain lumber 

except flooring 400 8.00 

4 Three-story business building 475 6.80 

5 Heavy warehouse, mill construction 550 5.80 

6 A plain two-story building, with a 2-in. 

flooring roof, and plank under-floors . . . 385 8.30 



BUILDINGS. 1087 

Cost of Framing and Placing Lumber. — The following table gives 
the actual cost of the carpenter work involved in doing the different 
classes of work enumerated. No common laborers were employed. 

Cost per 
Ft. B. M. M., wage 
per man being 

per (lay $3.20 for 
of 8 hrs. 8 hrs. 
Joists: In a four-story brick business block, hav- 
ing steel girders, 3 x 14-in joists delivered 
sized, average cost of work on joists and sheet- 
ing (not including hoisting which was $2 per 

M. for second story and up) 550 $ 5.80 

Joists: In a three-story, plain, electric light 
building, with flat roof, 3 x 12-in. joists, in- 
cluding sizing of joists 400 8.00 

Joists and floor : In a warehouse, joists dropped 

into stirrups, and a heavy plank floor 500 6.40 

Bridging: 2 x 4-in. bridging between joists 150 21.30 

Sleepers: For a railroad machine shop, 6 x 8-in. 

sleepers buried in sand 380 8.40 

Plank floor : The 3-in. plank floor laid on the 

sleepers above described 450 7.10 

Purlins : For a warehouse, including hoisting 

60 ft 265 12.10 

Plank floor : A 2-in. plank floor laid on purlins 

that were 6-ft. apart 230 13.90 

Sheeting for floors 800 4.00 

Sheeting for roof of six-story building , 500 6.40 

Sheeting on frame building 500 6.40 

(Note. — If sheeting is laid diagonally, add 
15% to the cost of laying.) 
Rafters: 2 x 6-in. rafters for plain gable roof... 300 10.70 

Rafters: 2 x 6-in. rafters for a hip roof 125 25.60 

Roof boards: Rough boards on a plain gable roof 600 5.35 

Roof boards : Rough boards on a hip roof 400 8.00 

Siding: Rough boards on a barn 800 4.00 

Studding: 2 X 4-in 250 12.80 

Studding: 2 x 6-in 350 9.15 

Sills and plates: 6 x 8-in., without gains or 

mortices 400 8.00 

Sills and plates: 6 x 8-in., with gains but no 

mortices 200 16.00 

Sills and plates : 6 x 8-in., with gains and 

mortices 135 23.70 

Platform : A rough timber platform on short 
posts, around a warehouse, including posts, 

caps, joists and floor 400 8.00 

Board fence : A close board fence, 8-ft. high 

(posts already set) 400 8.00 

Cost of Laying and Smoothing Floors. — In the following table is 
given the cost of laying matched flooring, after the joists are in 
place. All the cost of handling the flooring after its delivery at the 
building site is included. "Where the width of the flooring plank 
is given, the face width is meant, and it should be remembered that 
the face width is about %-in. less than the original stock width 
of the material before milling. A flooring that is sold by the mills 
as 4-in. plank, has a face width of 3^^ ins. The cost of laying is 
given in "squares" of 100 sq. ft. 



1088 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost of Laying Flooring. 



Squares 
per man 
per day 
of 8 hrs. 



Yellow pine: 3% -in. face laM on sheeting, includ- 
ing the laying of paper between the sheeting 
and the flooring and including the smoothing of 
rough joints in the flooring, in a four-story 
business block 

Yellow pine: 3% -in. face, including smoothing 
and sandpapering, in a five-story business 
block, men worked very hard 

Yellow pine: 3i^-in. face, laid direct on joists, 
no smoothing 

Maple : Square edged, 4 -in. face, doubled nailed, 
not smoothed, in a warehouse 

Yellow pine : 4-in. face, nailed on one edge only, 
not smoothed, in a six-story warehouse 

Yellow pine: 314 -in. face, including smoothing 
and sandpapering, in a three-story seminary, 
ground floor 

Ditto : Small upper rooms 

Maple: 214-in. face, laid but not smoothed 

Maple: 2^ -in. face, laid but not smoothed, large 
floor of warehouse 

Maple : 2 % -in. face, laid and smoothed, houses 
and offices ■ 

Maple: 1%-in. face, laid and well smoothed, 
houses and offices 

Maple : Smoothing only, not including laying 
the floor 

Oak : Gluing, smoothing, scraping and sandpaper- 
ing a fine floor, men working hard 

Yellow pine; 5i4:-in. face, 2 ins. thick, tongue 
and groove, for mill building, not smoothed. . . . 

Yellow pine: 5% -in. face on bare joists, not 
smoothed 

Ditto : Laid on top of an under-floor 

Ditto : Laid on a pitched roof without many 
angles 



Cost per 
square, 
wages 
being 

$3.20 per 
8 hrs. 



? 1.60 



1% 


1.80 


3 


1.10 


2% 


1.40 


2% 


1.30 


IV2 
1% 
2 


2.10 
2.60 
1.60 


31/2 


0.90 


1 


3.20 


% 


4.30 


1 


3.20 


% 


12.80 


2% 


1.30 


4 
3 


0.80 
1.10 



1.60 



Cost of Celling, Wainscoting and Siding. — The following table 
gives the cost of ceiling, wainscoting and siding: 



Squares 
per man 
per day 
of 8 hrs. 

Ceiling of a store 1 1^ 

Smoothing an oak ceiling after laying % 

Wainscoting: Cut, put up and finished with cap 

and quarter round 1 % 

Siding : Plain, 6-in 2 ^ 

Drop-siding: When window casings and corner 

boards are placed over the siding 4 

Drop-siding: When joints are made against 

casings and corner beads 2^2 

Lap-siding 3 

Surfaced barn boards 7 



Cost per 
square, 
wages be- 
ing $3.20 
per. day. 
2.10 
4.30 

1.80 
1.40 

0.80 

1.30 
1.05 
0.45 



BUILDINGS. 



1089 



Cost of Shingling. — The fullowiiig table gives the cost of laying 
shingles, shingles being well laid with 4i^-in. exposure: 

Cost per 

Squares square, 

per man wages be- 

per day ing $3.20 

of 8 hrs. per day. 

Plain roof zy^ $1.30 

Fancy roof 1% 1.80 

Difficult roof, much cutting 1 3.20 

Plain side walls 1% 2.10 

Difficult side walls •. 1 3.20 

The standard bunch of shingles is supposed to contain 250 
shingles averaging 4 ins. wide. Hence if shingles are laid with an 
exposure of 41/^ ins., each shingle covers 4 X 414 = 18 sq. ins., or 
800 shingles to the square. But the cutting for angles, the loss of 
broken shingles, the double course at the eaves, and the like, 
necessitate a larger allowance. On plain roofs allow 8% more, and 
on gables 12% more than the theoretical 800. Estimate as follows: 

Plain roof. Cut-up roof. 

Shingles Shingles 

per square. per square. 

With 4-in exposure 990 1010 

With 4%-in. exposure 880 900 

With 5-ln. exposure 790 810 

Cost of Laying Base- Boards. — The amount of base-board work is 
computed in lineal feet, instead of board feet. The following costs 
relate to the actual number of lineal feet, doors and openings being 
deducted: 



Cost per 

Lin. ft. lin.ft. 

per man wages be- 

per day ing $3.20 

of 8 hrs. per day. 

Base-board : In a building with an unusually 

large number of pilasters 50 6% cts. 

Base-board : Three-membered, hardwood, average 

number of miters 50 6 Vi cts. 

Base-board : In a plain five-story business block, 

two-membered base scribed to floor 80 4 cts. 

Base-board: In a three-story seminary, narrow 

birch ; fitting to the floor not necessary 100 3% cts. 

Base-board: Plain, quarter-round at floor 100 3% cts. 

Moulding : Bed, flat, 3-in 320 1 ct. 



1090 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost of Placing Doors, Windows and Blinds. — The following table 
gives the cost of labor on doors, windows and blinds : 

Labor 
cost of 
Number each, 

of hrs. wages be- 
labor on ing 40 cts. 
each. per hour. 
Windows : To put frames together if stuff comes 

knocked down 1% $ 0.60 

Window : Ordinary pine window in a frame build- 
ing including setting frame 5 2.00 

Window: Same as before, except hardwood 6% 2.60 

Window : Ordinary pine window in brick build- 
ing, including setting frame 6% 2.60 

Window: Same as before, except hardwood 9 3.60 

Window: 30-light (lights 10 x 14), setting frame, 
fitting and hanging sash, and putting on hard- 
ware, for a machine shop 7 2.80 

Window : Same as before, but hung on sash bal- 
ances 6 2.40 

Transom : Fixed 1 0.40 

Transom: Hung 1% 0.60 

Door : Common hardwood, set jambs, case, hang 

and finish, including transom 10 4.00 

Door: Birch door, complete, for a seminary 7 2.80 

Door: Common pine door, 1%-in., complete 4% 1.80 

Door : Common pine, 1%-in., complete 5% 2.20 

Door : Pine, swinging door, no hardware except 

hinges 4 1.60 

Door : Pine, finish of wide paneled jambs, with 

transom, for school house 10 4.00 

Door : Same as before, but hardwood 12% 5.00 

Sliding doors: Pine (framing not included), to 
finish complete with lining, jambs, casings, and 
hardware, per pair 32 12.80 

Sliding doors: Same as before, but hardwood, per 

pair 48 19.20 

Outside doors : Pine, 6 x 8 ft., door frame, 

casings, and hardware, complete, per pair 10 4.00 

Outside doors : Same as before, but hardwood, 

per pair 14 5.60 

Outside double doors: Opening 12 x 18 ft., in a 

factory , 32 12.80 

Sliding doors: Opening 12 x 18 ft., in a barn 24 9.60 

Blinds: If fitted before frames are set, per pair. . % 0.30 

Blinds: If fitted after frames are set, per pair. . . 1 0.40 

Blinds: Plain pine, inside blinds, per set 3 1.20 

Blinds : Same a.a before, but hardwood 5 2.00 

The labor cost of bedding and setting 10 x 14-in. lights on a 
large building was 1 % cts. per light, or 1 % cts. per sq. ft. ; and 
one-twenty-flfth of a pound of putty per lineal foot around the edge 
of the glass was used. With a deeper rabbet and putty not properly 
pressed, one-fifteenth pound per lineal foot of glass edge may be 
used. The cost of setting plate glass is about 7 cts. per sq. ft. 
Floor and sidewalk glass, may be set for 5 cts. per sq. ft. ; skylight 
glass for 8 cts. per sq. ft. 



BUILDINGS. 1091 

Cost of Closets and Sideboards. — The following miscellaneous la- 
bor costs will serve as a guide : The labor costs are given in dollars 
and cents, wages being 40 cts. per hour: 

Cost of 
Labor. 

Drawers, if dovetailed, each $ l.OO 

Drawers, 15 ins. wide, 18 ins. deep, including racks and fit- 
tings, each 0.80 

Shelves, in a storeroom, shelves dadoed into compartments 18 

ins. square, per sq. ft. of shelf 0.25 

Shelves, in Dantry, no dadoing, per sq. ft 0.15 

Closet hooks, on a strip of wood, hooks 12 Ins. apart, per lin. 

ft. of strip 0.06 

Sideboard, ash, 8x8 ft., drawers, doors, brackets, shelves, mir- 
rors and hardware 50.00 

Sideboard, oak, less detail than before 40.00 

Sideboard, pine, fairly good 25.00 

Cost of Making Stairs. — The labor cost of making a number of 
different kinds of stairs will be given, labor being 40 cts. per hour. 
The cost includes the making and setting of the stairs, but does not 
Include mill work. 

Cost of 
Labor. 

Two flights of stairs (for a school), 6 ft. wide, with ceiling 

rail $ 35.00 

Three flights of oak stairs (for a hospital). 5 ft. wide with 

continuous rail 90.00 

Three flights of oak stairs (for a seminary) 120.00 

Box-stair, long, without landing 9.00 

Box-stair, for cellar or attic, if windows are used 10.00 

One flight of plain stairs, in a 7-room house 16.00 

One flight of fine stairs, in a 9-room house 40.00 

Cost of Tin Roofing. — The sizes of tin sheets are 14 x 20 ins., and 
20x28 ins. An allowance of 1 in. must be made for* laps at 
joints; with sheets 20 x 28 ins., a square (100 sq. ft.) requires 29 
sheets. With 14 x 20-ln. sheets, allow 63 per square, and 50% 
more of solder, rosin, etc. A box of tin contains 112 sheets, and 
the large sheets of L C. tin weigh 225 lbs. per box; the I. X., 285 
lbs. per box. 

One man, at 40 cts. per hr., will lay 2 squares of plain 'roofing per 
day. One man will line about 75 sq. ft. of box gutter, or an equal 
amount of flashing, per day. The cost per square of tin roof was as 
follows : 

Per square. 

29 sheets of L C. tin, 55 lbs., at 8 cts 4.40 

5 lbs. solder, at 14 cts 0.70 

1% lbs. nails, at 4 cts 0.06 

1 lb. rosin 0.04 

Labor, at 40 cts. per hr 1.60 

Charcoal 0.10 

Painting two coats 1.50 

Total $8.40 

A man, at 40 cts. per hr., will put up plain metal ceilings at the 
rate of 1% to 2 squares per day, including cornice and centers. 
On a large room, and plainest kind of woi-k, he may do 3 or 4 
squares. "Wainscoting, at the same rate. 



1092 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A man, with a helper, will lay 12 squares of corrugated iron 
roofing in a day. 

Building Papers and Felts. — The cheapest grade of building paper 
is "rosin-sized" paper. It is not waterproof, and should not be 
used on roofs, or on walls In a damp climate. It comes in rolls 
36 ins. wide, containing 500 sq. ft., weighing 18 to 40 lbs., and 
costs about 3 cts. per lb. 

There are a number of different kinds of waterproof papers used 
for sheathing under siding or shingles. P. & B. building paper, 
for example, is coated with a paraffin compound. It comes in 
rolls 26 ins. wide containing 1,000 sq. ft. The weights per roll are: 

Ply 1-ply. 2-ply. 3-ply. 4-ply. 

Weight 30 lbs. 40 lbs. 65 lbs. 80 lbs. 

Price is 10 cts. per lb. 

Common dry felts are made of wood fibers cemented together 
witli rosin. They weigh about 5 lbs. per 100 sq. ft. The best grades 
of dry felt are made of wool, and weigh 11 lbs. per 100 sq. ft. 
when they are %-in. thick; but some brands are 50% heavier than 
this. The price of dry wool felt is about 2% cts. per lb. 

Tar felt, or common roofing felt, is made by saturating common 
dry felt with coal tar. The weight of a single layer or ply is 
12, 15 or 20 lbs. per 100 sq. ft., but the felt is laid in several layers, 
usually 4 or 5-ply, in making a roof, each layer being mopped 
with a "composition" of % tar and % pitch. The price of tar felt 
is about 1% cts. per lb. 

There are many kinds of patent roofing felts. Ordinarily they 
come in rolls 29 ins. wide, and each roll covers a square, allowing 
2 ins. for the lap. Nails and cement are supplied with each roll by 
the manufacturers. The cost of the roofing is $3 to $5 per square, 
and the cost of laying it is about 1 hr. labor per square, or 40 cts. 
The weight of such roofing varies considerably, but ordinarily is 
about 100 lbs. per 100 sq. ft. 

Cost of Gravel Roofs. — Tar felt, 4 or 5-ply, is first laid, the sheets 
being mopped with "composition" of % tar and % pitch. Screened 
roofing gravel is spread over the roof. A square of grravel roof 
costs about as follows : 

Per square. 

1-6 cu. yd. (450 lbs.) gravel, at $2.40 $0.40 

40 lbs. tar, at iy2 cts 0.60 

80 lbs. pitch, at 11/2 cts 1.20 

100 sq. ft. felt, 4-ply, 75 lbs., at li/o cts 1.13 

Labor, at 35 cts. per hr : . . 0.70 

Total per 100 sq. ft $4.03 

Note. — About 20 lbs. of "composition" per square per ply is 
ordinarily sufficient where sheets are mopped only at the joints 
instead of all over ; but in the above the sheets are assumed to be 
mopped all over, which takes 50% more composition. 

Tar is usually sold by the gallon, or by the oil barrel holding 50 
gallons, present prices being 12 cts. per gallon. Tar weighs almost 
exactly as much as water, or 8% lbs. per gallon. 



BUILDINGS. 1093 

Cost of Slate Roofs. — Roofing slate comes In a great variety of 
sizes, the most common of wliicli are 16 x 8, 16 x 10, and 18 x 9 
ins. ; but sizes as large as 25 x 14, and as small as 12 x 6, are made. 
To determine the number of pieces to a square, deduct 3 ins. from 
the length (for the lap), divide tliis by 2, multiply by the width of 
the slate, and divide the result Into 14,000. An 18x9 slate 
would be estimated thus: 18 — 3 = 15, which divided by 2 
gives 7% ; then 71/3 X 9 = 67l^ ; then 14,400 ^ 671/0 = 214 pieces. 

Slates are sold by the square, that is a sufficient number of 
slates to lay 100 sq. ft., each course having a lap of 3 ins. over the 
head of those in the second course below. The price f. o. b. Penn- 
sylvania and Vermont quarries varies according to the grade ; 
but a good No. 1 slate, 3/16-in. thick, can be bought for $5 per 
square. The freight from Pennsylvania or Vermont to the 
Mississippi River is about $2.50 per square. Allow about 1% waste, 
unless the roof is perfectly plain. 

Tlie weight of 1 sq. ft. of slate %-in. thick is 3.6 lbs. As there 
are 214 pieces of 18 x 9-in. slate per square of roof; and if it were 
all %-in. thick, the weight would be 868 lbs.; if it were 3/16-in. 
thick, the weight would be 621 lbs. 

Before laying the slate, the roof is covered with paper. A 50-lb. 
roll will cover 400 sq. ft., and with wages at 40 cts. per hr., the 
cost of laying the paper is 20 cts. per square. The holes for the 
nails must be punched in the slate before laying. This may be done 
by the manufacturers, but it is usually done by hand by the slaters, 
because if a corner is broken off in transport the slate can be 
turned end for end, moreover as slate usually comes in three 
thicknesses it must be sorted anyway before laying, and the punch- 
ing can as well be done at the same time. One slater, at 40 cts. 
per hr., with a helper, at 20 cts. per hr., will punch the holes in 
10 X 16-in. slates at a cost of 45 cts. per square. 

In laying slates, about one laborer is required for two slaters 
on plain roofs. A slater will punch and lay 3 squares per 8 hrs. 
on plain straight work, 2 squares on roofs with many hips and 
valleys, and as low as 1 square on difficult tower work. For fair 
average work allow 2% squares per day per slater, and allow 1 
laborer to 2 slaters. This includes punching, and laying paper and 
slate. The cost of a slate roof, 10 x 16-in. slates, was as follows: 

Per square. 

Slate for 1 square $ 5.00 

Freight (650 lbs.) 2.50 

Loading and hauling 0.20 

Wiastage, 1% of ?7.70 0.08 

16 lbs. paper 0.50 

1 lb. nails 0.05 

21/0 lbs. .of 3d galv. nails for slate 0.10 

Slater, at 40 cts. per hr 1.30 

Helper, at 20 cts. per hr 0.30 

Total per square $10.03 



1094 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Roofs. — In the Proceedings Assoc. Ky. Supts. of Bridges 
and Buildings, 1902, a committee report gives the following costs of 
roofs in New England. 

Per square. 

Slate $ 9.00 to $12.00 

Tile 30.00 to 33.00 

Cedar shingles 4.50 to 5.00 

Tinned shingles 5.00 to 6.50 

Sheet tin 6.50 to 8.00 

Tar and gravel 4.00 to 5.00 

Ruberoid 2.75 to 3.75 

Paroid 3.00 to 3.50 

Tar paper, two-ply, laid double 2.00 to 2.25 

Tar paper, three-ply, laid single 1.50 to 2.00 

Instances were cited of slate roofs 40 years old. Shingle roofs 
28 years old were cited, but 15 years seemed to be the ordinary 
life of good shingles. Tar and gravel roofs 30 years old were cited, 
but an ordinary life seemed to be 12 to 18 years. 

Cost of Ferroinclave Roof — This type of roof was invented by 
Mr. Alexanuer Brown, vice-president of the Brown Hoisting Mchy. 
Co. It consists of corrugated sheet steel plastered on both sides with 
Portland cement mortar, giving a total thickness of 11^4 ins. 
The corrugations are in the form of a dovetail. The steel sheets 
are laid on purlins spaced 4 ft. 10 ins., and clipped to them. The 
cement mortar is mixed 1 :2. and that used on the under side 
contains a small amount of lime and hair. When the cement has 
set for 10 days, the upper side is painted with two coats special 
paint. 

The cost per square (100 sq. ft.) is said to be as follows: 

Per sq. 

Ferroinclave sheets $ 8.50 

Fastening cHpd 0.48 

Laying Ferroinclave 1,25 

Cement mortar on upper side 3.00 

Cement mortar on lower side 4.00 

Waterproofing paint 1.50 

Sundries, freight, supt, etc 1.27 

Total $21.00 

The weight is about 15 lbs. per sq. ft. 

Brick Masonry Data. — The size of common bricks varies widely. 
I have seen bricks as small as 2 x 3i/4 x 7% ins. used for house 
building in New York City. In the New England States, common 
bricks are said to average about 2i4x3%x7% ins. In most of 
the Western States, common bricks average 2% x 4% x 8% ins. 
The size of individual bricks in a car load often varies' considerably ; 
hard bricks being % to 3/16-in. smaller than soft (or salmon) 
bricks. Pressed or face bricks are quite uniformly 2%x4%x8% 
ins. A thousand bricks, averaging 2i4x4x8i4 ins. weigh 5,400 
lbs., if there is any standard size it may be said tobe2i4x4x8i4 
lbs., and they weigh 125 lbs. per cu. ft. ; and they occupy 43.2 cu. ft. 
of space, which is equivalent to 23% bricks per cu. ft., if no 
allowance is made for joints. If these bricks are laid in massive 
masonry with %-in. joints, about 430 bricks will be required per 



BUILDINGS. 1095 

cu. yd., or IG per cu. ft. ; if laid witli %-in. joints, 515 bricks per 
cu. yd., or ly per cu. ft. 

Masons liave empirical rules for estimating the number of bricks 
in a wall. Their rules do not give even an approximation to the 
actual number, or "kiln count." They often make no deductions 
for openings, but use a "wall measure" rule, allowing ly-z bricks 
per sq. ft. (or per superficial foot) for a wall that is a "half brick 
thick," that is a 4-in. wall. For "one-brick" wall, that is 8 or 9 ins. 
thick, they estimate 15 bricks per sq. ft. For a "one-and-a-half- 
brick" wall (12 or 13 ins. thick), they estimate 22^4 bricks per 
sq. ft. This rule takes no account of the actual size of the bricks, 
and does not, therefore, give "kiln count," but gives "wall count." 
We have seen, above, that "standard size" bricks, laid with i^-in. 
mortar joints, will actually average 16 per cu. ft., as compared with 
22% per cu. ft. "wall count." 

If all the broken bricks, or "bats," were thrown away, the 
wastage would be about 2% with fair bricks to 5% with poor bricks , 
but it not often that contractors are prohibited by inspectors from 
using practically all the "bats." 

The cost of loading and hauling paving bricks is given on page 
158, and practically the same costs apply to building bricks, except 
that the latter are lighter. As above stated, the "standard size" 
hard brick weighs about 5.4 lbs., or 2.7 tons per M., or 125 lbs. per 
cu. ft. Soft bricks weigh 20% less, but repressed bricks weigh 20% 
more per cubic foot. With wages at 15 cts. per hr., the cost of un- 
loading cars into wagons is 30 cts. per M., and, unless a dump 
wagon is used, it costs another 30 cts. per M. to unload the wagons. 

Cost of Laying Brick. — In building brick walls there are usually 
1 to 1% laborers to each brick mason. The laborers mix mortar 
and carry mortar and bricks to the masons, using hods for the 
purpose. A hod holds about 18 bricks, or approximately 100 lbs. 
The wages of masons and hod carriers vary widely in different 
cities, but seldom, exceed $5 per 8-hr. day for masons and $3 for 
hod carriers. Very often the masons' unions have forced up their 
rates of wages, but the hod carriers have not, and may receive but 
little more than other common laborers. With wages as just 
given, and one helper to each mason, the labor cost of laying should 
not exceed $6 per M. for common brick, and $10 per M. for pressed 
(face) brick, "kiln count" in both cases. 

On a three-story brick hospital, with a carefully laid front (%-in. 
"shoved" joints), the labor cost was $5.50 per M., "kiln count." 
There were three laborers to every two masons, and wages were 
17% cts. per hr. for laborers, and 45 cts. per hr. for masons, work- 
ing 9 hrs. The cost of the masons' wages amount to $3.50 per M., 
and the cost of the helpers' wages was $2 per M. This cost was 
rather high, due to the number of deep flat brick arches over 
basement openings, and to the row-lock arches over other openings, 
as well as a tower and other puttering work. 

In building warehouses, where the work was plain, wages being 
as just given, the cost was $4 per M., "kiln count." 



1096 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

On several large citj^ buildings, in which 15 to 20% of the brick 
masonry was pressed brick, each brick mason laid the following 
average number, "kiln count,"' per 9-hr. day : 

Apartment house, 4 stories 1,200 

Four-story fronts 1,250 

Heavy walls, ground level 1,500 

Heavy footings and warehouse basement walls. 3,200 

A bricklayer should lay 400 or 500 pressed brick per 8-hr. day. 
If an ornamental brick front is to be laid, with molded arches, 
buttresses with bases and caps, etc., the labor of laying pressed 
brick may run as high as $20 per M. 

In veneering a frame building with brick, a mason will average 
400 bricks per day. 

In building brick arches to support the sidewalk in front of a 
city building, after the centers were set, each bricklayer averaged 
.1,800 bricks per 9-hr. day; and it required one man to make and 
deliver mortar and to deliver brick to every two bricklayers. 
The brick arches were 5 -ft. span, 11 ft. long, and 4 ins. thick. 

Cost of Mortar. — With lime mortar, mixed 1 part lime to 3 parts 
sand, it required 0.9 bbl. lime per M. of bricks, "kiln count," the 
bricks being laid with %-in. joints. A common allowance in esti- 
mating the cost of mortar, for "standard size" bricks, is 1 bbl. lime 
and 0.6 cu. yd. sand per M., "kiln count." About % cu. yd. of 
mortar is usually allowed per cu. yd. of brick masonry, or 0.7 cu. yd. 
mortar per M. of bricks, when bricks are laid with %-in. joints. 
If cement mortar is used, the number of barrels of cement per 
cubic yard of mortar will be found on page 253. It will seldom 
require less than 1.6 bbls. of cement per M. of bricks, or 0.8 bbl. 
per cu. yd. of brick masonry, for if the mortar is made leaner it 
will not trowel well, and cause more loss in labor than is saved in 
cement. 

Rockland, Me., lime is sold by the barrel, 220 lbs. net. When 
shipped in bulk 2% bu., of 80 lbs. per bu., are usually called a 
barrel. A barrel holds about 3.6 cu. ft. The average yield of lime 
paste from the best limes is 2.6 bbls. of paste for each barrel of 
quick lime. This paste is usually mixed with 2 parts sand by 
measure. It, therefore, takes about 1% bbls. of the best quick lime 
to make 1 cu. yd. of mortar. A poor lime does not make % as much 
paste as a good lime. 

The price of lime is about 60 cts. per bbl. 

Cost of Brickwork in a Railway Repair Shop.* — Below is given the 
labor cost of some brickwork done in October, 1896, for the Detroit, 
Lansing & Northern R. R. The work consisted of building the 
walls of the railroad repair shop at Ionia, Mich. The work was 
done by contract, the contractors, however, furnishing only the 
labor, this being done for a lump sum ; the materials were furnished 
by the railroad company. The face bricks were new, but the back 
was of bricks which came from an old building. The size of the 
bricks was 2% x 3% x 8 in., and the joints were from %-in. to 
%-in. in thickness. According to these figures about 20 bricks were 

"Engineering-Contracting, May 16, 1906. 



BUILDINGS. 1097 

used to the cubic yard, and that number was used in computing the 
number of bricks in the building. In the summary is given tlie 
actual cubic contents of the walls, all openings being deducted. 

As the walls were only 20 fl. high, scaffolds and runways were 
built so that wheelbarrows could be used throughout the entire work 
for tending masons. The cost of laborers was thus reduced. The 
scaffolding was built by the railroad company. The wages allowed 
were as follows: Foreman, 40 cts. per hr. ; mason, 30 cts. per hr. ; 
laborers, 12% cts. per hr. The weather was favorable for good 
work. 

Cubic ft. built 5,204.3 

Bricks laid 104,086 

Foreman, hrs 161 

Mason, hrs 439 

Laborers, hrs 509 

The average number of bricks laid per mason per hour was 173, 
including the time of the foreman, who was a mason and worked 
also. 

The labor costs were as follows : 

Mason's wages $196.10 

Laborer's wages 66.63 

Mason's wages per cu. yd 1.02 

Mason's wages per M brick 1.88 

Laborer's wages per cu. yd 0.33 

Laborer's wages per M brick 0.61 

Total cost of masons and labor per cu. yd 1.35 

Total cost of masons and labor per M 2.49 

From the above figures the cost of labor for similar work can be 
estimated as follows: Labor cost of 1 cu. yd. brickwork is equal 
to 5/6-hour wages of foreman, plus 2% hours wages of mason, 
plus 2 % hours wages of laborer. In the same manner, the cost 
of laying 1,000 brick is equal to 5/6-hour wages of foreman, plus 
414 hours wages mason, plus 4% hours wages laborer. 

In the work it was found that 0.44 cu. yd. of sand and 10-11 bbl. 
(bulk) lime were required to lay 1,000 brick with %-in. to ^^-in. 
joint. One barrel of lime equaled 3% cu. ft. and weighed 201 lbs., 
the weight being figured from car weight. Accordingly 1 bbl. (bulk) 
lime was used for laying 1,100 bricks, with %-in. to %-in. joint; 1 
cu. yd. sand was used for laying 2,260 bricks, with %-in. to %-in. 
joint. 

Cost of Brickwork in Five Buildings for Manufacturing Plant.* — 
Mr. Sam W. Emerson gives the following record of cost of brick- 
work in five buildings forming part of a large manufacturing plant. 
The work was done by the owners hiring their own labor. 

All joints in the brickwork were struck both sides, and a first- 
class job obtained. 

On building No. 1 local bricklayers were used at 50 cts. per hour, 
but for the other buildings city bricklayers at 60 cts. per hour 
were imported. The latter did better work and more of it, as shown 
by Table VII. 



*Engineering-Contracting , April, 1906, p. 100. 



1098 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The hod carriers were developed from local laborers, and were 
paid 17% cts. per hour. 

Buildings Nos. 1 and 2 were long and low, containing about equal 
amounts of 9-in. and 13-in. wall. 

Buildings Nos. 3 and 4 were higher and had a somewhat larger 
proportion of 13-in. wall. 

Part of the brickwork in No. 4 was started from steel lintels 
at some distance above the floor line, which explains the high 
cost of scafEolding. 

Building No. 5 was higher and contained more brick than any 
of the others. It was composed of 13-in. walls, with some 17-in. and 
22-in. walls. The heavier wails account in part for the lower cost 
of laying, but better foremanship had something to do with it. 

The scaffolds were erected by carpenters at 20 and 22% cts. 
per hour, drawn from other parts of the work when needed. 

Handling materials include unloading and hauling brick, sand, 
lime and cement, and is the average for the job. About one-third 
of the materials had to be hauled from a switch nearly a mile away, 
the balance being delivered on a switch run over to tlie plant site. 

The brick were large, so that 918 laid up a "thousand," figuring 
14 brick per square foot of 9-in. wall. All openings were deducted. 

Brick cost $5.00 and $5.25 per M., f. o. b. the yards; the average 
cost was $5.08 per M. 

No record was kept of the cost of scaffold lumber, as material 
ordered for other purposes was used and worked up later in wooden 
buildings. 

About two or three weeks after the 60-cent bricklayers started 
work, the writer, being dissatisfied with the way the work was 
going, started the practice of preparing careful estimates of the 
brick laid each week and figuring the cost per 1,000 for bricklayers 
and helpers. 

Within three weeks after the first estimate, the output per 
bricklayer had increased over 40 per cent, and about 30 per cent 
increase was maintained. 

This illustrates one of the reasons for keeping "up-to-date" cost 
records. 

The cost of the work per 1,000 brick was as follov/s : 

Table VII. — Labor Cost per 1,000 Brick. 
Buildings — Nos. 1. 

Bricklayers,t 60 cts. per hr. .$5.56 
Helpers,* 171/2 cts. per hr. . . 1.95 
Carpenters,! 20 and 22 y2 cts. .70 
Handling materials 1.16 



2. 


3. 


4. 


5. 


Av. 


$4.49 

1.67 

.71 

1.16 


$4.57 

2.14 

.88 

1.16 


$4.68 
1.95 
1.15 
1.16 


$3.68 
2.00 

- .67 
1.16 


$4.16 

1.87 

.77 

1.16 



Total labor $9.37 $8.03 $8.75 $8.94 $7.51 $7.96 



*Hod carriers and mortar men. 

tOn Building No. 1 bricklayers received 50 cts. per hr. 

JBngaged in building scaffolds. 

Note. — Buildings Nos. 1 and 2 were long and low, with about 
equal amounts of 9-in. and 13-in. walls; Buildings Nos. 3 and 4 had 
larger proportion of 13-in. wall; Building No. 5 contained more 
brick than any of the others, and had 13-in. walls, with some 17-in. 
and 22-in. walls. 



BUILDINGS. 1099 

Cost per 1,000 Brick. 
Materials: 

Brick, 918, at $5.08 $ 4.67 

Brick, freight 1.12 

Sand, i/o cu. yd., at $0.46 0.23 

Sand, freight 0.13 

Cement, 0.44 bbl., at ipJ 0.88 

Lime, 2 bu., at $0.20 0.40 

Total, materials $ 7.43 

Total, labor (average) 7.96 

Grand total, material and labor, per 1,000 

brick $15.39 

As is stated elsewhere in this article, 14 brick were figured as 
making one square foot of 9-in. wall. This would make 504 bricks, 
wall measure, per cubic yard. Accordingly, if we divide the figures 
in the tabulations given above by 2, we will have the cost per cubic 
yard of brick masonry. On this basis we have : 

Materials: Cost per cu. yd. 

459 bricks, at $5.08 $2.33 

Freight 56 

% cu. yd. sand, at $0.46 ■ 11 

Freight 06 

.22 bbl. cement, at $2.00 44 

1 bu. lime, at $0.20 20 

Total, materials $3.71 

Labor: 

Bricklayers $2.08 

Helpers 93 

Carpenters 39 

Handling materials 58 

Total, labor $3.98 

Total, material and labor $7.69 

Cost of Brick Chimneys. — On small chimneys and fireplaces the 
labor costs 2 to 3 times as much per M. as on plain wall work. 
A mason (55 cts. per hr) and helper will lay 600 bricks in 9 hrs. 
The labor costs 30 to 35 cts. per lin. ft. for single-flue chimneys, 
8x8 ins. square and 4 ins. thick; and 50 cts. per lin. ft. for double- 
flue chimney. There is a wastage of brick of about 5% where the 
brick fit, or 10% where cutting is necessary. 

Cost of High Brick Chimney Stacks — With wages of masons at 
55 cts. per hr., and where the flue is large enough for men to work 
from the inside, the cost of laying bricks for chimney stacks, 100 to 
125 ft. high, is $12 per M of bricks. In one case a stack 150 ft. 
high, containing 250,000 bricks, cost $7 per M for labor, wages being 
as above given. 

Cost of Brickwork, Cross- References. — In various sections of this 
book will be found further data on brick masonry, for which con- 
sult the index under "Brickwork." 

Cost of Rubble Walls. — Basement walls are commonly made of 
rubble. The best work requires "two-man rubble," that is, stone 
too heavy for one man to lift. A common allowance for a lime- 



1100 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

stone rubble wall is % cu. yd. sand, % bbl. cement, and 2,800 lbs. 
stone, per cu. yd. of wall. If lime is used, allow % bbl. lime. A 
mason and helper will lay 3 cu. yds. in 8 lirs., so that if wages are 
50 cts. per hr. for mason and 25 cts. per hr. for helper, the cost of 
laying is |2 per cu. yd. 

For further data, see the sections on Masonry and Concrete. 
Cost of Ashlar. — Ashlar in buildings is estimated by the cubic 
foot. In ordering "raw stone" (uncut stone) for ashlar, grive the 
quarryman the exact number of cubic feet measured in the wall. 
He will make allowance for the waste in cutting it. 

The cost of Bedford ashlar for the moldings, turrets, etc., in an 
Omaha building was : 

Per cu. ft. 

Raw Bedford $0.65 

Cutting, wages 55 cts. per hr 1.00 

Setting in the Duilding 0.20 

Washing and pointing 0.05 

Total in place $1.90 

It requires about 1 gal. muriatic acid to wash 500 sq. ft. To 
wash and point the joints costs 3 cts. per sq. ft. 

Cost of Cut Stone Work.* — The walls for the building of the 
Government Printing Office at "Washington, D. C, completed in 1903, 
were built of red bricks trimmed with red sandstone from a quarry 
near Longmeadow, Mass. The cost of this stone, ready to set, 
was as follows : 

Per cu. ft. 

Plain ashlar |1.80-$2.00 

Molded courses 2.00- 2.40 

Sills 2.00- 2.40 

Lintels 1.95- 2.15 

Columns 3.00 

In computing these prices, all molded and curved or irregular 
pieces were squared out to the minimum containing rectangular par- 
allelopipedon. The cost of setting, etc., average for all classes, was 
as follows : 

Per cu. ft. 

Handling $0,133 

Setting 179 

Cutting (corrections, etc. ) 018 

Pointing 041 

Mortar 012 

Miscellaneous materials • .026 

Total $0,409 

The high cost is said to be due to the care with which the joints 
were calked, and to the fact that there was not enough stone to be 
placed to justify the purchase of a special plant to handle it. Some 
of the wages paid for 8-hr. day on this job were as follows : Labor- 
ers, $1.50 ; stone masons, $4 ; stone cutters, $4. 

*Engineering-CGntracting, Feb. 19, 1908. 



BUILDINGS. 1101 

Cost of Wood Lathing. — The standard size of wood laths is 
V4-in. X IV2 ins. X 4 ft. There is a special lath made 32 ins. in 
length. Laths are sold by the 1,000 in bundles of 50 or 100 laths 
per bundle. A common price is $3 per 1,000 laths. It requires 
1,500 standard laths to cover 100 sq. yds. Allow 10 lbs. of 3d fine 
nails for 100 sq. yds. when joists are 16 ins. center to center. Chi- 
cago lathers have fixed 1,250 laths as a day's work per man. 
The cost per 100 sq. yds. Is as follows: 

100 sq. yds. 

1,500 laths, at $3 per M $4.50 

10 lbs. nails, at 3 cts 0.30 

Labor, at $3.20 per 8-hr. day 3.84 

Total per 100 sq. yds $8.64 

This is 8.6 cts. per sq. yd. There is no uniformity in practice as to 
deducting window and door openings from the area lathed. 

Cost of Metal Lathing. — There are several makes of wire lath- 
ing, as well as expanded metal lathing. For plastering, the Ex- 
panded Metal Engineering Co., of New York, furnish two styles of 
expanded metal lath, in sheets li/^ X 8 ft., as follows: 

Lbs. per sq. yd. 

"Diamond" lath. Gage No. 24 3.65 

"Diamond" lath, Gage No. 26 2.66 

"A" lath. Gage No. 24 4.23 

"B" lath, Gage No. 27 2.84 

The price of these laths ranges from 15 cts. to 20 cts. per sq. yd. 

The cost per 100 sq. yds. Is as follows : 

100 sq. yds. 

100 sq. yds., "Diamond" No. 26 $15.00 

10 lbs. staples, at 3 cts 0.30 

Labor, at $3.20 per 8-hr. day 3.20 

Total per 100 sq. yds $18.50 

This labor includes the cost of scaffolding, and is based upon some 
6,000 sq. yds. of work. It will be noted that the labor cost is 1.2 
cts. per lb. of metal. 

Cost of Plaster. — Plastering on laths generally requires three 
coats, occasionally two coats. The first is the scratch coat ; the 
second is the brown coat ; the third is the white coat, or finish. On 
brick walls the scratch coat is generally omitted. 

Plaster is made either with lime or with cement plaster. Cement 
plaster (or wall plaster) usually consists principally of plaster of 
Paris. Some plasters are made of lime gaged with Portland ce- 
ment. Whatever kind of lime or plaster is used, sand and hair are 
mixed with the plaster. The hair is put up in paper bags sup- 
posed to contain 1 bu. of hair when beaten up, and supposed to 
weigh about 7 lbs. Some cement plasters are sold with the proper 
amount of hair mixed in. Cement plaster is commonly sold in 100- 
Ib. sacks, four sacks making 1 bbl. A common price is 2r> cts. per 
sack. 

* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 4, 1907. 



1102 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In making lime plaster, 1 part, of lime paste to 2 or 21/2 parts of 
screened sand is used. About 1% cu. yds. of sand are required per 
100 sq. yds. of three-coat plaster, and about 4 bbls. of lime, or 
cement plaster, and 2 bu. of hair. 

The cost of 100 sq. yds. of three-coat plaster is about as follows: 

100 sq. yds. 

1.75 cu. yds. sand, at $1 $ 1.75 

Zy-i bbls. lime, or 9 bu., at 35 cts 3.15 

2 bu. hair, at 40 cts 0.80 

100 lbs. plaster of Paris, at 50 cts 0.50 

Labor, plasterers, at 55 cts. per hr 15.00 

Total, 100 sq. yds., at 21.2 cts $21.20 

Cost of Plastering. — Mr. R, L. Brooker gives the following average 
cost of plastering 17 houses in Oliio in 1903. Each house required 
500 to 1,000 sq. yds. of plastering. 

Per sq. yd. 
Cts. 

Lath and nails 6.5 

Labor lathing 3.0 

Materials for 1st coat mortar 3.5 

Labor for 1st coat mortar -. 3.8 

Materials for wliite coat 1.0 

Labor for white coat 3.0 

Total 20.8 

The following materials were required per 100 sq. yds. : 
26 bunches of lath. 
7 sacks Alabastine (100 lbs. ea. ), mixed 1:2. 

150 lbs. white coat material (white enamel finish). 

In plastering, a man averaged 16 sq. yds. of first coat per hour, 
although on two jobs the average was 21 sq. yds. per hr. On white 
coat work, a man averaged 19 sq. yAs. per hr., and the best record 
was 211/2 sq. yds. per hr. 

The lowest labor cosE of lathing was 2% cts. per sq. yd. 

The plastering was "three-coat" work, tlie first and second coat 
being applied at the same time and of the same material, while the 
third or white coat was not applied till the other coats were dry. 
The "brown wall" was rodded along angles and base, then darbied, 
and just before taking a set was floated to an even surface. 

Cost of Placing Tile Fireproofing. — Hollow tile used for floors or 
walls, or for protecting steel beams and columns, is measured by 
the square foot. It is desirable to purchase it from the manufac- 
turers on the basis of the square foot measured in the work. Where 
the brick- layers' wages were 45 cts. per hr., the tile work in a 
four-story hospital cost 5% cts. per sq. ft. for the labor on the 10- 
in. and 12-in. tile floors and roof. This does not include the cost of 
hauling the tile to the building, but it does include the hoisting and 
delivery of the tile to the masons. The labor cost of 4-in. tile parti- 
tions and tile protection for I-beams and columns was 4 % cts. per 
sq. ft. 



BUILDINGS. 1103 

Cost of Terra Cotta Brick Fire Proofing,* — Solid brick of porous ter- 
ra cottu were used tor tireprooflng the lioor arches, girders and col- 
umn coverings at the U. S. Government printing office, completed 
in 1903, at Wasliington, D. C. In connection with the floor arches 
a very heavy skewback having projecting flanges iy-> ins. thick was 
designed. Tlie protecting flanges are very heavy and strong, and 
meet, with a small mortar joint, under the beam. The lower flanges 
or girders were covered with shoes of tlie ordinary form, meeting 
under the girder. They were, however, much heavier than ordi- 
narily used, being solid and 2y-> ins. thick. They wei-e filled with 
mortar and squeezed on, so as to have a solid bearing, and were 
then wrapped all around with wire lathing and plastered with Port- 
land cement mortar. On top of the shoes, on either side of the 
girder, was built a 4-in. terra cotta brick wall, the wire lathing 
being applied before the 4 in.s. walls were built. The 4 ins. walls 
on the sides of the girder were carried to the top flange before the 
floor arches were built. The latter were then built, abutting at their- 
ends against the upper part of the 4-in. walls, thus bracing them 
securely in position. The columns were covered with 4-ins. of por- 
ous terra cotta brick work built around them. The inside of the col- 
umn and all space between it and the fire proofing were filled solid 
with Portland cement concrete. The work was done by contract, 
the following data being obtained by keeping records of the con- 
tractors' work : 

From time required to set, it was determined that the girder 
shoes on the various girders were equivalent to about 8.5 bricks per 
linear foot. This was a little high for beams smaller than 20 ins., 
but it was compensated for by increased cost of changing scaffolds, 
centers, etc., for the smaller girders. The figures of cost do not 
allow for power for hoisting furnished by the United States, nor 
for contractor's general expense. 

Girder Coverings of 33-in., 30-in. and 2 4-in. Girders. 
Total labor cost: 

Per 1,000 bricks $12.80 

Per linear foot of covering 0.524 

Materials, exclusive of the terra cotta and 
wire netting: 

Per 1,000 bricks 0.85 

Per linear foot of covering 0.162 

Average day's work per man, bricks 564 

Number of bricks per barrel of cement 546 

Girder Coverings for Girders 20 Ins. and Under. 

Labor cost: 

Per 1,000 bricks ?12.80 

Per linear foot of covering 0.323 

Materials, exclusive of terra cotta and loire 
netting: 

Per 1,000 bricks 3.40 

Per linear foot of covering 0.093 

Average day's work per man, bricks 564 

Average number of bricks per barrel of cement. 615 



^Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 4, 1907. 



1104 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Column Coverings. 
Labor Cost : 

Per 1,000 bricks $12.80 

Per linear foot of covering 0.46 

Average day's work per man, bricks 564 

Average number of bricks per barrel of cement. . . 545 
In the one linear foot of beam covering (skewbacks) was taken 
as equivalent to 5.5 bricks in time and labor, data on the work being 
as follows : 

Total labor, per 1,000 bricks $10.64 

Total labor per sq. ft. of floor 0.06 

Total materials, except bricks, per 1,000 bricks.. 3.65 
Total materials, except bricks, per sq. ft. of floor. 0.021 

Average day's work per man, bricks 892 

Average number of bricks per barrel of cement. . . 575 

The above figures are based on the actual number of bricks laid 
plus 3 pel' cent for waste. The average cost of all fireproof con- 
struction, excluding ceilings, but including column and girder cov- 
erings, and including roof, was 36.4 cts. per square foot, of which 
9.5 cts. was labor applied at the building. Some of the wages in 
force on the work were as follows per 8-hr. day: Laborers, $1.50 to 
?2 ; bricklayers, $4 to $4.50. 

Cost of Ornamental Terra Cotta Work.* — In the construction of 
the new U. S. Government printing office at Washington, completed 
in 1903, 19,100 cu. ft. or 585 tons of ornamental terra cotta was 
used. All of the ornamental terra cotta was filled solid with concrete 
and where it projected considerably, as in the main cornice, it was 
thoroughly tied back with steel anchors. The ornamental terra cotta 
used was built up of relatively thin webs, like hollow tiles, except 
that it was built up by hand instead of by being forced through a 
die. The total cost of the work was as follows ; the price given for 
materials, however, does not include brick or concrete filling : 

Per cu. ft. Per ton. 

Handling $0.0332 $1.0881 

Setting 1301 4.2513 

Cement, etc 0243 .7944 

Anchors, etc 0245 .8010 

Total cost of setting $0.2121 $6.9348 

Average price for materials 1.5300 50.0000 

Grand total $1.7421 $56.9348 

Some of the wages paid per 8-hr. day during the construction 
of the building were as follows: Laborers, $1.50; bricklayers, $4 
to $4.50. 

Cost of Combined Concrete and Tile Floor Construction.f — Rein- 
forced concrete was employed in constructing, during 1908, a 150x50 
ft. extension from 8 to 10 stories high to the famous Quebec hotel, the 
Chateau Prontenac. Structurally the new building consists of a rein- 
forced concrete skeleton covered with brick outside walls, metal roof, 
etc. The floors were combined clay tile and reinforced concrete con- 

* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 20, 1907. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 18, 1909. 



BUILDINGS. 1105 

struction, and columns and girders were of reinforced concrete. 
Complete records of the cost of the work were kept, but these are 
not available for publication except for one typical lloor, and the 
cost of this floor is given below. 

The typical floor is that located at elevation 187. The slab spans 
varied from 12 to 16 ft. The tile used were 8 X 12-in. hard terra 
cotta. The concrete joists were 4 ins. wide, reinforced by one % X 
2-in. Kahn bar and one V^-in. cup bar. The ioists extended the full 
depth of the tile and were in one piece, with the 2-in. concrete slab 
which covered the tile. The floor concrete was a 1-2-4 mixture, and 
the column concrete was a 1-1-2 mixture. A %-in. limestone was 
used for aggregate. The concrete was machine mixed at basement 
level and was hoisted to floor level, discharged into a hopper and 
distributed over the floor by wheelbarrows. The quantities re- 
quired for the floor were : 

Concrete in columns, cu. yds 43. S 

Concrete in floor, cu. yds 255.8 

Reinforcing steel, tons 25.9 

Tile, 8 X 12-in., number 28,000 

Lumber, forms and staging, ft. B. M 45,000 

The cost of the floor concrete was as follows : 

Concrete: Total. Per cu. yd. 

Materials for 255.8 cu. yds $1,445 $5.65 

Placing 255.8 cu. yds 174 0.58 

Totals $1,619 $6.23 

This is the cost for the floor slabs and beams above. The cost 
of the concrete in the columns (43.5 cu. yds.) was $464, or $9.21 
per cu. yd. The cost of reinforcement for the whole floor, columns 
included, was as follows: 

Reinforcement : Total. Per ton. 

29.9 tons steel at $75 $1,943 $75.00 

Cartage on steel 21 0.80 

Handling and placing steel 130 5.00 

Totals $2,094 $80.80 

This gives a cost per cubic yard of concrete for reinforcement of 
$6.99 — or say $7. The cost of forms and staging was as follows: 
Forms and Staging: Total. Per M. ft. 

45 M. ft. B. M. lumber at $22 $990 $22.00 

Construction 616 13.70 

Totals $1,606 $35.70 

Summarizing, we get the following total cost for concrete, charg- 
ing everything, except tile work, to concrete : 

Item: Per cu. yd. 

Concrete in place. , $6.97 

Reinforcement 6.99 

Forms and staging 5.38 

Total $19.34 



1106 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the tile work in the floor slabs was as follows : 

Tile Work: Total. Per yie. 

28,000 tile at 10 cts $280 10.00 cts. 

Cartage 33 0.12 cts. 

Handling and laying 42 0.15 cts. 

Totals ?355 1C.27 cts. 

The total cost of the floor was $6,072, divided into the following 
percentage items: 

Concrete 33 per cent 

Steel 35 per cent 

Forms 26 per cent 

Tile 6 per cent 

Total 100 per cent 

Costs of Combination Concrete and Tile Floors in Three Build- 
ings.* — The following figures of costs of similar construction are 
from figures given by Prof. W. K. Hatt, Purdue University, La- 
fayette, Ind., who was engineer of the work. The work comprised 
three buildings : 

Indiana State Soldiers' Home. — This building is irregular in plan, 
with two stories, attic and basement. It is constructed of brick and 
limestone, with reinforced concrete hollow tile floors, each floor cov- 
ering approximately 7,000 sq. ft. The floor ribs are 4 ins. in width 
and range in depth from 10 to 6 ins. The rib spans are from 8 to 
15 ft. The tile are 12 X 12 ins. of projected area, and the ribs are 
thus spaced 16 ins. centers in all cases. The thickness of concrete 
over the tile is 2 ins. Upon this floor is placed a 3-in. cinder con- 
crete, ovei which there is a %-in. maple flooring upon nailing strips. 
The floor was designed to hold a live load of 60 lbs. per sq. ft. for 
the first floor and second floor, and 30 lbs. per sq. ft. live load for the 
attic floor in addition to cinder filling and wood floor. The ribs were 
continuous from the side rooms through into the corridor. The con- 
crete was 1:2:4, with a screened gravel aggregate. The gravel and 
sand contained about 4% per cent of clay. Reinforcing was plain, 
round bars of soft steel. Forms consisted of %-in. lagging sup- 
ported on joists, spaced 24 ins., running between the walls. The 
steel rods were supported on a large-headed nail driven into the 
centering, and the wire staple was driven over tlie bar into the same 
centering. The channels of the ribs were cleaned of all dirt by blow- 
ing out with steam. The tile were kept wet. 

The attic floor was of cinder concrete slab construction, 3 ins. 
thick. Wire fabric of 3 X 12-in. mesh, 3 X 8-in. and Nos. 6 and 10 
gage wires, respectively, were used for reinforcing. The cinder con- 
crete was 1:2:4. Cinder was of good quality and screened of all 
ashes. 

Most of the floor construction was during freezing weather and 
the building was heated. Salamanders were kept burning day and 
night and the forms were sprinkled to prevent baking the con- 



*Engineering-Contracting , Oct. 13, 1909. 



BUILDINGS. 



1107 



Crete, while the exposed surface of the concrete Wcis protected from 
freezing by tar paper, on which was a layer of manure. 

Table VIII. gives the unit cost of tlie second floor of the Soldiers' 
Home Hospital. The spans were as follows: Corridor, clear span, 
8 ft. ; side rooms, clear span, from 10 to 15 ft. 

The unit stresses used for the design were as follows : Tension of 
steel, 16,000 lbs. per sq. in. ; compression in concrete, 750 lbs. per sq. 
in. ; bond, 75 lbs. per sq. in. ; diagonal tension, 75 lbs. per .sq. in. 
(one bent rod). 

Table vni. — ^Unit Costs of Second Floor, Soldier's Home 
Hospital. 

Per 

cu. yd. 

of con- 

Per sq. Crete and 

Total. ft. floor, mortar. 

Tile laying , ?108.70 $0,015 $1.40 

Steel: 

Bending and placing 36.40 

Cost f. o. b Lafayette 175.00 0.030 2.80 

Total $211.40 

Concrete: 
Cement, 114.5 lbs., $1.75 f. o. b. Lafayette 200.37 
Gravel, 64.24 yds. at $1.10 per yd., hauled 

and screened 70.66 

Sand, 32.12 yds. at $1.10 per yd., hauled 

and screened 35.36 0.044 3.96 

Total $306.39 

Mortar: 
Cement, 16.25 bbls., $1.25, f. o. b. Lafayette 28.44 
Sand, 4.4 cu. yds. at $1.10, hauled and 

screened 4.84 0.005 0.43 

Total $ 33.28 

Labor: 
Wheeling, mixing, hauling, tamping, runs, 

etc 255.79 0.036 3.30 

Centering: 
Putting up and tearing down 414.40 0.060 5.35 

Totals .., $1,329.93 ?0.190 $17.24 

Piirclue University Experiment Station Building. — The' building is 
LT-shaped, with basement, two stories and attic. The first and sec- 
ond floors were designed for a live load of 100 lbs. per sq. ft., and 
the attic for a live load of 60 lbs. per sq. ft., in addition to weight 
of cinder filling and floor. The concrete is 1:2:4; aggregate was 
screened bank gravel. The sand and pebbles were remixed in speci- 
fied proportion. Reinforcing was plain, round bars of steel. The 
floors were supported on girders and columns. The spans varied 
from 9 to 23 ft. 

The centering is composed of 4 X 4-in. posts with 2 X 10-in. 
chords nailed to them. Upon the chords are joists supporting %-in. 
lagging. The spacing of the chords, posts and joists varied accord- 



110s HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ing to the weight of the floor supported. On the lagging tiles are 
placed with a clearance of not less than 4 ins. from all walls and 
girders and spaced 17 ins. centers, thus making a 5-in. rib. In lay- 
ing these tile, hard-burned, small tile were placed together, and soft- 
burned, large tile together, thus assuring a rib of even width. The 

Table ix.^Unit Costs First Floor Experiment Station. 

Per 
Per sq. cu. yd. 
ft. of of con- 
floor Crete and 
Total. area, mortar. 

Tile: 

Laying $ 43.20 

Hoisting 129.60 

Cost f. o. b. Lafayette 567.85 $0.0587 $3.47 

Total $740.65 

Steel: 

Bending and placing 255.69 

Cost, f. o. b. Lafayette 5 82.00 0.0664 3.92 

Total $837.69 

Concrete, 1,961 yards: 

Cement, 308 bbls. at $1.17 f. o. b. Lafayette 360.36 
Sand, $1 per yd., hauled and screened. . . . 86.30 
Gravel, $1 per yd., hauled and screened... 172.60 0.0490 2.90 

Total $619.26 

Mortar, 178 yards: 

Cement, $1.17 f. o. b. Lafayette 42.70 

Sand, $1 per yd, hauled and screened 17.80 0.0048 0.28 

Total $ 60.50 

Labor: 

Wheeling, mixing, hoisting, tamping, runs 

and dumping 542.50 0.0430 2.53 

Centering : 

Let by contract at $12 per 1,000 ; 67,600 

used (labor only) 811.20 0.0642 3.80 

Superintendence 330.00 0.0261 1.54 

Total $3,941.80 $0.3^22 $18.44 

rods were held in place by nails and staples and were continuous 
from one panel to another. Before any concrete was deposited in 
the ribs a 1 :3 cement mortar was placed in the bottom of the chan- 
nel and brought to the level of the middle of the rod. Great care 
was exercised in cutting the concrete in between the rods and 
against the faces of the tile. The concrete was very wet, so that it 
would keep an even surface in the wheelbarrow, but yet would sup- 
port the pebbles on the surface. 

A batch of concrete in the mixer was received in a bucket and 
hoisted to a large box on the floor, and taken out in barrov/s to be 
dumped. 



BUILDINGS. IIOU 

Table x. — Unit of Costs of Second Floor, Experiment Station. 

Per 
Per sq. cu. yd 
ft. of of con- 
floor Crete and 
Total. area, mortar. 
Tile: 

Hoisting $125.00 

Laying 4 8.20 

Cost f. o. b. Lafayette 593.62 $0.0607 $3.42 

Total $766.82 

Steel: 

Bending and placing 178.73 

25.5 tons at $30, f. o. b. Lafayette 765.00 0.0745 4.22 

Total $943.73 

Concrete, 214 yards: 
Cement, 336.5 bbls. $1.17, f. o. b. Lafayette 393.70 
Sand, 94.16 yds., at $1, screened and hauled 94.16 
Gravel, 188.32 yds 188.32 0.0535 3.02 

Total $676.18 

Mortar, 9.5 yards: 
Cement, 26 bbls. at $1.16, f. o. b. Lafayette 30.40 
Sand, 9.5 yds. at $1, screened and hauled. 9.50 0.0036 0.18 

Total $ 39.90 

Labor: 
Wheeling, mixing, tamping, dumping runs 461.38 0.0364 2.06 

Superintendence 145.00 0.0115 0.65 

Centering: 
Set by contract (approximately) ,... 600.00 0.0475 2.68 

Total $3,633.01 $0.2877 $16.22 

The first floor was laid during freezing weather. To prevent 
freezing, salamanders were kept burning day and night and the 
concrete was covered with a heavy layer of straw. 

The labor for the concrete was paid at a rate of 20 cts. an hour. 
The unit cost for the first and second floors of the experiment 
station are given by Tables IX and X, as furnished by H. A. 
Wortham, inspector on the work. Note that these floors cost on an 
average of about 30 cts. per square foot. 

The unit stresses used were as follows: Tension in steel, 16,000 
lbs. per sq. in. ; compression in concrete, 750 lbs. per sq. in. ; bond 
on steel, 75 lbs. per sq. in. ; diagonal tension without stirrups, but 
with one bent rod, 75 lbs. per sq. in. 

The external moments were figured % W. L., both at the center 
and over supports. The length of span was between centers of the 
bearings. This desisn is conservative, and, in the belief of the 
writer, might be cut down perhaps 25 per cent with safety. 

Shrinkage stresses at the surface of the floors are taken up by 
14 -in. wire. 

Cost of Bituminous Concrete for a Mill Floor.* — In laying tar 



^Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 14, 1907. 



1110 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

concrete base for wood covered mill floors, the common practice is 
to use a mixture of steam cinders aggregate and coal tar binder, 
and to mix the materials by hand. A departure from this practice 
is recorded by Mr. C. H. Chadsey, Construction Engineer, Northern 
Aluminum Co., Ltd., Shawinigan Falls, P. Q., Canada, in laying 
17,784 sq. ft. of mill floor. A sand, broken stone and tar mixture 
was used and the mixing was done with a Ransome mixer. The 
apparatus used and the mode of procedure followed were as follows : 

Two parallel 8-in. brick walls 26 ft. long were built 4 ft. apart 
and 2% ft. high to form a furnace. On these walls at one end 
was set a 4x6x2 ft. steel plate tar heating tank. Next to this 
tank for a space of 4x8 ft. the walls were spanned between with 
steel plates. This area was used for heating sand. Another space 
of 4x8 ft. was covered with 1 % in. steel rods arranged to form a 
grid ; this space was used for heating the broken stones. The grid 
proved especially efliclent, as it permitted the hot air to pass up 
through the stones, while a small cleaning door at the ground 
allowed the screenings which dropped through tlie grid to be raked 
out and added to the mixture. A fire from barrel staves and refuse 
wood built under the tank end was sufficient to heat the tar, sand 
and stone. 

For mixing the materials a Ransome mixer was selected for the 
reason that heat could be supplied to the exterior of the drum by 
building a wood fire underneath. This fire was maintained to 
prevent the mixture from adhering to the mixing blades, and it 
proved quite effective, though occasionally they would have to be 
cleaned with a chisel bar, particularly when this aggregate was 
not sufficiently heated before being admitted to the mixture. A 
little "dead oil" applied to the discharge chute and to the shovels, 
wheelbarrows and other tools effectually prevented the concrete 
from adhering to them. 

The method of depositing the concrete was practically the same 
as that used in laying cement sidewalks. Wood strips attached to 
stakes driven into the ground provided templates for gaging the 
thickness of the base and for leveling off the surface. The wood 
covering consisted of a layer of 2-in. planks, covered by matched 
hardwood flooring. In placing the planking, the base was covered 
with a %-in. layer of hot pitch, into which the planks were pressed 
immediately, the last plank laid being toe-nailed to the preceding 
plank just enough to keep the joint ight. After a few minutes the 
planks adhered so firmly to the base that they could be removed 
only with difficulty. The hardwood surface was put on in the usual 
manner. 

The prices of materials and wages for the work were as follows : 

Pitch, bulk, per lb $ 0.0075 

Gravel per cu. yd 1.50 

Spruce sub-floor, per M. ft. B. M 15.00 

Hardwood surface, per M. ft. B. M 33.00 

Laborers per 10-hour day 1.50 

Foreman, per 10-hour day 4.00 

Carpenters, per 10-hour day 2.00 



, BUILDINGS. nil 

At these prices and not Including a small administration cost or 
tlie cost of tools and plant, the cost of the floor consisting of 4 % ins. 
of concrete, 2 ins. of spruce sub-flooring and % in. hardwood finish 
was as follows : 

Per sq. ft. 

Pitch $0.04 

Gravel 0.02 

Spruce, for sub-floor 0.03 

Hardwood for suifacing 0.035 

Labor, mixing • 0.03 

Labor, laying 0.015 

Carpenter work 0.025 

Total per sq. ft $0,195 

Cost of Passenger Stations.— In the Railroad Gazette, Sept. 16, 
1904, p. 350, photographs are given of a passenger station of the 
Santa Fe at Oakland, Calif. It is 204 ft. long, including arcades, 
and 54 ft. wide, total 11,000 sq. ft., and its cost was .U2,000. The 
main part is two stories high. It has arcades 12 ft. wide running 
entirely around it. The building is Spanish mission style, built 
of steel lath covered with concrete and with red tile roof. 

A one-story brick passenger station built in 1898 at Quincy, 111., 
for the C. B. & Q. R. R., cost $75,000, or $4.27 per sq. ft. It is 
58 X 304 ft., and has a tower, 20 ft. square at the roof level, rising 
to a height of 150 ft. Tlie walls of the station are of red pressed 
brick, with trimmings of sandstone and terra cotta. The walls are 
22 ft. high. The roof is of Spanish tile, with a pitch of 30°. The 
interior finish is an enameled brick wainscoting, and plastered walls 
and ceiling. The waiting room (54x70 ft.) has a marble tile 
floor, and the other rooms have mosaic tile floors. 

Cost of Four Frame Depots*. — This is the first of a series of 
articles that we shall publish on the cost of railway buildings. 
Wliile they are typical railway structures, still the cost data will be 
found equally valuaWe in estimating the costs of buildings erected 
for other purposes. 

It is a fact not generally known that the labor cost of framing 
and erecting plain buildings averages from $10 to $15 per 1,000 
ft. B. M. This fact will be clearly brought out in these articles, 
and it will be of great assistance to anyone who is called upon to 
estimate the cost of a plain frame building. Wages will be given 
in each case, but the reader is cautioned against supposing that an 
increase in wages necessarily involves a corresponding increase in 
cost. A high priced carpenter is usually more efficient than a low 
priced carpenter, the very fact that he is high priced often being 
evidence in itself that he is correspondingly more competent than 
the low priced man. A contractor who pays $3.50 a day for 
carpenters will usually get more work done for the money than will 
a railway company that pays $2.50 a day for its "company car- 
penters." Railways have a policy of paying very low wages, under 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 2 8, 1907. 



1112 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the mistaken idea that they are economizing thereby. In conse- 
quence, they usually secure lazy ' or incompetent day workers. 
Perhaps, with their present lack of system in keeping costs of 
construction, the railways would gain nothing by employing higher 
priced men. 

The work that we are about to describe was done by "company 
forces," carpenters receiving $2.50 for 10 hours. As is usually 
the case in day labor jobs^ the men were very slow. 

The method of summarizing the costs of buildings is our own. 
Records kept by railways are usually so jumbled up as to be of 
no use in comparing the costs of similar structures or in ascertain- 
ing whether the cost of any particular structure has been reasonable 
or not. This is largely because the engineering department is not 
in charge of building construction, or, if it is in charge, the engineers 
take little interest in work which does not seem to be engineering. 
There is crying need for cost analysis engineering in the manage- 
ment of all building construction, but particularly on railways. 

The cost of those plain frame depots may be conveniently dis- 
tributed under seven headings: 

Lumber. 

Shingles. 

Millwork. 

Hardware. 

Paint. 

Masonry. 

Labor. 

The first six items cover the materials. The labor item can be 
subdivided to suit each particular kind of work. 

The weight of each building of standard design should be esti- 
mated, so that the items of freight and team haulage can be ac- 
curately predicted, but this is rarely done by railway companies. 

The number of square feet of ground floor area should be stated, 
and the cost of each building reduced to costs per square foot, 
both in dollars and cents and in percentages. 

Cost of a 2Ji X 60 Ft. Depot. — This was a small combination 
passenger and freight depot, of very plain design, without a 
masonry foundation and without plastering. The building was one 
story, 24x60 ft., surrounded by a wooden platform in front and 
ends, and a cinder platform extension. 

This depot had an area of 1,440 sq. ft., exclusive of the platform. 

Weight. Lbs. 

30 M. at 3,300 lbs 99,000 

20 M. shingles at 150 lbs 3,000 

Millwork 1,000 

Hardware 1,600 

1,100 brick 6,000 

Total, 55 tons 110,600 



BUILDINGS. 1113 



Lumber. 



8,025 It. B. M., at $8.00 $ 64.20 

12,800 ft. B. M., No. 2 com. S. I. S., at $8.50 108.80 

1,400 ft. B. M., 1 in. oak, at $10.00 14.00 

3,000 ft. B. M.. % X 8 ft. to 18 ft, at $14.00 42.00 

2,700 ft. B. M., No. 2 D. siding, at $14.40 38.88 

1,100 ft. B. M., No. 3 flooring, at $12.00 13.20 

832 ft. B. M., No. 1 flooring, at $19.10 15.89 

30,057 ft. B. M., total lumber, $13.23 av $296.97 

SliingJes. 
20 M. shingles, at $1.10 $ 22.00 

M'llwork. 

900 lin. ft. miscel. moulding, at Ic $ 9.00 

225 lin. ft. 5 in. crown moulding, at 3c 6.75 

1 transom, 3 doors, 9 windows 24.00 

Frames for doors and windows 16.00 

Total millwork ? 55.75 

Hardware. 

8 rolls tar paper at 75c $ 6.00 

900 lbs. nails, at 2y2C 22.50 

Locks, knobs, hinges, etc 9.00 

Total hardware $37.50 

Paint. 
Paint, 23 gals, at 70c $16.10 

Masonry. 
Brick, 1,100, at $8.00 $ 8.80 

Labor. 

Building depot. 

38 days foreman, at $80.00 per mo $ 98.38 

87 days carpenter, at $2.50 217.50 

51.2 days helper, at $1.75 90.05 

176.2 days total, at $2.32 average $406.38 

Putting up ladders. 

2 days carpenter, at $2.50 $ 5.00 

Painting depot. 

14 days helper, at $1.75 $ 24.50 

Building chimney. 

4 days mason, at $4.00 $ 16.00 

Filling cinders in platform. 

2 days section foreman, at $50.00 per mo $ 3.20 

6 days labor, at $1.05 6.30 

8 days labor, total $ 9.50 

Tools $ 38.50 

Summary : 

Materials. Total. Per cent. 

30,057 ft. B. M., at $13.23 $296.97 33.2 

20 M. shingles, at $1.10 22.00 2.4 

Millwork 55.75 6.1 

Hardware 37.50 4.1 

23 g\ls. paint, at 70c 16.10 1.8 

1,100 brick, at $8.00 8.80 1.0 

Total materials $437.12 48.6 



1114 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

176.2 days labor building, at $2.32 ?406.38 45.3 

2 days labor, put up ladders, at ?2.50 5.00 0.6 

14 days labor, painting, at $1.75 24.50 2.8 

4 days labor, building chimney, at $4.00 16.00 1.8 
8 days labor, filling cinders, at $1.20 8.50 0.9 

Total labor $460.38 51.4 

Total materials and labor $897.50 100.0 

Freight 55 tons, 200 mi., %c ton mile..$ 55.00 

$952.50 

Tools (excessive in this case) 38.50 

Grand total $990.00 

Per. sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,304 44.2 

Labor 0.319 46.5 

Freight 0.038 5.5 

Tools 0.027 4.0 

Total $0,688 100.00 

It will be noted that the price of lumber was very low. 
The total labor was $460, which is practically $15 per 1,000 ft. 
B. M. in the depot and platform. If we exclude the labor of build- 
ing the chimney, painting the depot and spreading the cinder plat- 
form, the labor cost $406, or about $13 per 1,000 ft. B. M., yet some 
time was lost by the crew waiting for lumber to arrive. This lost 
time should have been recorded, but was not. 

Cost of Another 2li x 60 Ft. Depot. — This depot was similar 
to the last, except that 7,200 ft. B. M., of second-hand car sills 
(8x16 ins.), were used for posts and stringers of the platform. 
Grading of the depot grounds was an unusually expensive item. 
Lumher. 

8,000 ft. B. M., at $8.50 $ 68.00 

7,200 ft. B. M. C8 in. x 16 in.) second-hand, 

at $4.00 28.80 

6,400 ft. B. M., S. I. S., at $10.00 64.00 

8,900 ft. B. M., S. I. S., 1 in., at $12.00 106.80 

1,050 ft. B. M., com. floor, at $12.50 13.12 

3,600 ft. B. M., com. ceiling, at $12.50 45.00 

900 ft. B. M., clear floor, at $21.00 18.90 

2,600 ft. B. M., drop siding No. 2, at $21.00 54.60 

300 ft. B. M., com. ceiling, at $15.00 4.50 

38,950 ft. B. M., total lumber $403.72 

Shingles. 
23 M. shingles, at f 1-60 $ 36.80 

Millwork. 

1,200 lin. ft. molding, at %c av $ 9.00 

Doors and windows and frames 70.00 

Total millv/ork $ 79.00 

Hardware. 

5 rolls tar paper at 70c $ 3.50 

Locks, knobs, hinges, etc 6.00 

1,400 lbs. nails, at 214c 35.00 

Total hardware $ 44.50 



BUILDINGS. 1115 

Paint. 

34 gals, paint, at 75c $ 25.50 

16 gals, boiled oil and turp 9.00 

10 gals. Roger's black paint, at $2.00 20.00 

Total paint % 54.50 

Masonry. 

1 M. brick $ 8.00 

Labor. 

Unloading lumber. 

2 days, caroenter, at $2.50 $ 5.00 

7 days, helper, at $2.00 14.00 

9 days, total, av. at $2.10 $ 19.00 

Building and painting depot. 
33 days, foreman, at $80.00 per mo $ 86.66 

140.2 days, carpenter, at $2.50 350.50 

74.1 days, helper, at $2.00 148.20 

247.3 days, total, av. at $2.41 $585.36 

Grading depot grounds. 

5 days, section foreman, at $65.00 per mo $ 10.45 

153 days, section men, at $1.10 168.45 

158 days, total grading $178.90 

Tools $ 26.00 

Summary : 

Materials. Totals. Per cent. 

38,950 ft. B. M., lumber $ 403.72 32.7 

23 M. shingles, at $1.60 36.80 3.0 

Mill-work 79.00 6.3 

Hardware 44.50 3.6 

44 gals, paint, and 16 gals, oil and turp. 54.50 4.4 

1,000 brick 8.00 0.6 

Total materials 626.52 51.0 

Lahor. 

9 days, unload lumber, at $2.11 $ 19.00 1.6 

247.3 days, building, at $2.41 585.36 47.4 

Total labor $ 604.36 49.0 

Total materials and labor $1,230.88 100.0 

Freight, 70 tons at $1.00 70.00 

Tools 26.00 

Grading depot grounds 178.90 

Grand total $1,505.78 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,436 41.7 

Labor 0.420 40.2 

Freight 0.049 4.7 

Tools 0.016 1.6 

Grading 0.124 11.8 

Total $1,045 100.0 

It will be noted that the labor on the depot, exclusive of grading 

the grounds, amounted to $604. This is a trifle more than $15.50 

per 1,000 ft. B. M. 

It will be noted that the paint for this depot cost four times 

What paint cost for the other depot, indicating the necessity of so 



1116 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

classifying costs as to enable comparisons to be quickly made with 
a view to discovering "leaks." 

Cost of a 30 X i8 Ft. Depot. — This depot has the same area, 
1,440 sq. ft., as those previously described, but is wider and shorter. 
The labor of building this depot cost $542, which is equivalent to 
a little more than $13 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 

Weight. Lbs. 

41 M. at 3,300 lbs 135,300 

21 M. shingles, at 150 lbs 3,150 

Millwork 1,000 

Hardware 1,600 

1,000 brick 6,000 

6 bbls. cement 2,400 

Weight, 75 tons 149,450 

Lumber. 

10,255 ft. B. M., at $ 7.00 $ 71.79 

10,940 ft. B. M., S. I. S. 2E, at $7.50 82.05 

3,920 ft. B. M., S. I. S., at $7.50 29.40 

4,600 ft. B. M., No. 2 boards, at $11.90. 54.74 

2,800 ft. B. M., 1x6 siding, at $14.00 39.20 

1,100 ft. B. M., 1x4 flooring, D. M., at $19.00... 20.90 

1,700 ft. B. M., 2x6 selected, D. M., at $8.50 14.45 

139 ft. B. M., S. 4 S., No. 2 dr., at $17.00 2.36 

568 ft. B. M., S. I. S., at $10.00 5.68 

200 ft. B. M., S. 4 S., at $19.00 7.28 

4,437 ft. B. M., 8 in. x 16 in., S. H., at $4.00 17.75 

40,729 ft. B. M., total av., at $8.50 $345.60 

21 M. shingles, at $1.75 $ 36.75 

Millwork. 

1,380 lin. ft. molding at %c ? 10.35 

Windows, doors and frames 48.00 

Total millwork $ 58.35 

Hardware. 

11 rolls tar paper at 65c $ 7.15 

750 lbs. nails at 2i^c 16.90 

Locks, knobs, hinges, etc 5.60 

Miscellaneous 9.60 

Total hardware $ 39.25 

Paint. 

30 gals, outside paint at 60c $ 18.00 

20 gals, inside paint at 85c 17.00 

Total paint. $ 35.00 

Masonry. 

1,000 brick at $9.00 $' 9.00 

24 sacks cement at $1.00 24.00 

3 sacks lime at 60c 1.80 

Total masonry $ 34.80 

Labor. 

Unloading material. 

1 day foreman at $80.00 per mo =$ 2.67 

5 day carpenters at $2.50 12.50 

10 day helpers at $2.00 20.00 

16 Total av. $2.20 $ 35.17 



BUILDINGS. 1117 

Putting in foundation. 

5 day carpenters at $2.50 $ 12.50 

4 day helpers at $2.00 8.00 

9 Total av. $2.30 $ 20.50 

Building depot. 

27 days, foreman, at $80.00 $ 69.77 

87.5 days, carpenter, at $2.50 218.75 

50.5 days, helper, at $2.00 101.00 

165 days, total av. $2.36 $389.52 

Painting depot. 

6 days, carpenter, at $2.50 $ 15.00 

9 days, helper, at $2.00 18.00 

15 days, total av. $2.20 $ 33.00 

Excavating for platform and privy. 

9 days, helper, at $2.00 $ 18.00 

Unloading cinders and build cinder platform. 

18.5 days, helper, at $2.00 $ 37.00 

Building chimney. 

1.5 days, bricklayer, at $3.50 $ 5.25 

2.0 days, helper, at $2.00 4.00 

8.5 days, total av. $2.70 $ 9.25 

Tools $ 60.00 

Summary : 

3Iaterials. Totals. Per cent. 

40,729 ft. B. M., at $8.50 $ 345.60 31.8 

21 M. shingles at $1.75 .■ 36.75 3.4 

Millwork 58.35 5.3 

Hardware 39.25 3.5 

Paint 35.00 3.2 

Masonry 34.80 3.2 

Total $ 549.75 50.4 

Labor. 

16 days, unloading, $2.20 $ 35.17 3.2 

9 days, put in foundation, at $2.30 20.50 1.9 

165 days, build depot, $2.36 389.52 35.8 

15 days, paint depot, $2.20 33.00 3.0 

9 days, excavation, $2.00 18.00 1.6 

18.5 days, build cinder platform, $2.00 37.00 3.3 

3.5 days, build chimney, $2,70 9.25 0.8 

Total labor $ 542.44 49.6 

Total materials and labor 1,092.19 100.0 

Tools (excessive) 60.00 

Total $1,152.19 

Freight, 75 tons, 200 mi., at VsC ton mi. 75.00 

Grand total $1,227.19 

Cost 

per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,385 44.8 

Labor 0.378 44.0 

Tools 0.042 5.0 

Freight 0.052 6.2 

Total $0,857 100.0 



1118 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of a 30 X GO Ft. Depot. — This depot is of the same general 
type as the others, but larger, having an area of 1,800 sq. ft 
It will be noted that it contains a large amount of second- 
hand car sills (15,200 ft. B. M.), used in building the platform. 
The labor cost was $714, or nearly $12 per 1,000 ft. B. M. The 
labor of painting the depot was very high. The cost of the paint 
vas not $20, yet the labor of painting was nearly $70. 

Weight. Lbs. 

61,000 ft. B. M., at 3,300 201,000 

26 M. shingles, at 150 3,900 

Millwork 1,000 

Hardware 1,600 

Brick 6,000 

Stone 21,600 

Total weight, 118 tons 235,100 

Lumber. 

8,108 ft. B. M., at $8.50 $ 51.92 

6,912 ft. B. M., at $8.50 58.75 

1,440 ft. B. M., S. I. B., $8.50 12.24 

3,700 ft. B. M., boards, $8.50 31.45 

4,300 ft. B. M., S. I. S., $9.00 38.70 

9,189 ft. B. M., S. I. S., $9.00 82.70 

10,900 ft. B. M., No. 2 floor, ceiling and siding, 

$18.50 201.65 

408 ft. B. M., No. 2, S. 4 S., $26.00 10.63 

836 ft. B. M., S. 1. S., $25.00 20.90 

70 ft. No. 2, S. 4 S., $1.00 2.17 

15,200 ft. B. M., 8 in. x 16 in., S. H. (for plat- 
form), $4.00 60.80 

61,063 ft. B. M., total av. $8.73 $531.91 

Shingles. 
26 M. shingles, $1.72 $ 45.00 

Millwork. 

1,540 ft. moulding at Ic .- $ 15.40 

6 doors, 9 windows and frames 60.60 

Total millwork $ 76.00 

Hardware. 

11 rolls bldg. paper, 57c $ 6.27 

900 lbs. nails, 21/30 22.50 

Locks, knobs, hinges, etc 21.00 

Total hardware $49.77 

Paint. 

13 gals. O. B. paint, 50c $ .6.50 

14 gals, boiled oil, 37y2C 5.25 

16 gals, inside paint, 50c 8.00 

Total paint $ 19.75 

Masonry. 

1,000 bricks, $9.00 $ 9.00 

144 cu. ft. undressed stone, 70c 100.80 

IVa bbls. lime, 85c 1.28 

Total masonry $111.08 



BUILDINGS. 1119 

Labor. 

Unloading material. 

6.5 days, carpenter. $2.50 $ 16.25 

17.7 days, section men, $1.15 20.35 

24.2 days, total av. ?1.50 ? 36.60 

Trucking* lumber. 

1 day, foreman, at $80.00 per mo $ 2.85 

5 days, carpenter, $2.50 12.50 

29.5 days, helper, $2.00 59.00 

35.5 days, total av. $2.09 $ 74.08 



*Note.— Track was a long distance from depot. 

Clearing snow off timber. 

3 days, helper, at $2.00 $ 6.00 

Erecting depot. 

21 days, foreman, $80.00 per mo $ 54.19 

114 days, carpenter, $2.50 285.00 

24 days, helper, $2.00 48.00 

159 days; total av. $2.44 $387.19 

Painting depot. 

2 days, foreman, $80.00 per mo $ 5.16 

1 day, carpenter, $2.50 2.50 

31 days, helper, $2.00 62.00 

34 days, total av. $2.05 ? 69.66 

Unloading cinders. " 

10.8 days, section foreman, $55.00 $ 19.19 

7.0 days, section laborers, $1.20 7.95 

15.1 days, section laborers, $1.05 15.90 

32.9 Total av. $1.30 $ 43.04 

Building platform. 

7 days, foreman, $80.00 $18.07 

17.6 days, carpenter, $2.50 44.00 

11.2 days, helper, $2.00 22.40 

35.8 dayA total av. $2.36 $ 84.47 

Building privy. 

5.4 days, carpenter, $2.50 $ 13.50 

Tools $ 51.00 

Summary : 

Materials. Totals. Per cent. 

61,063 ft. B. M., $8.73 $ 531.91 34.4 

26 M. shingles, $1.72 45.00 2.9 

Millwork 76.00 4.9 

Hardware 49.77 3.2 

Paint 19.75 1.3 

Masonry 111.08 7.2 

Total $ 833.51 53.9 



1120 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

24.2 days, unload, $1.50 $ 36.60 2.4 

35.5 days, trucking, ?2.09 74.08 4.7 

3.0 days, clear snow, $2.00 6.00 0.4 

159.0 days, erect depot, $2.44 387.19 25.0 

34.0 days, paint depot, $2.05 69.66 4.5 

32.9 days, unload cinders, $1.30 43.04 2.8 

35.8 days, build platform, $2.36 84.47 5.5 

5.4 days, build privy, $2.50 13.50 0.8 

Total $ 714.54 46.1 

Total materials and labor $1,548.05 

Tools 51.00 

Total $1,598.05 

Freight, 118 tons 118.00 

Grand total $1,716.05 

Cost 
per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,463 48.6 

Labor 0.397 41.6 

Tools 0.028 2.9 

Freight 0.066 6.9 

Total $0,954 100.0 

Cost of 57 Frame Depots. — The following data relate to a rather 
cheap class of railway stations built in the Pacific Northwest, by 
company labor. Carpenters received $2.50 per 10. hr. day. Lum- 
ber was exceedingly cheap, hence the cost of materials is not typical. 
I have charged the entire cost of labor against the lumber, as that 
enables us to compare costs in terms of the M. ft. B. M., which 
is the best single unit for such comparisons. 

The average cost of five, first class, combination, one-story 
depots (24 X 75 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq.ft. 

Materials $1,450 $0.80 

Labor 927 0.52 

Total $2,377 $1.32 

There were 69 M. (including platforms) in each depot, hence the 

labor cost was $13 per M. 

The average cost of three, third class, combination, one-story 

depots (24 X 55 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $ 964 $0.75 

Labor 726 , 0.55 

Total $1,690 $1.30 

There were 39 M. (including platforms) in each depot, hence the 
labor cost was $18 per M. 

The average cost of 18 fourth class, combination, one-story 
depots (16 X 48 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $480 $0.62 

Labor 320 0.42 

Total $800 $1.04 



BUILDINGS. 1121 

There were 20 M. (including platforms) per depot, hence the 
labor cost was .?16 per M. 

The average cost of 15 fourth class, combination, one-story 
depots (16 X 68 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials ? 700 $0.64 

Labor 533 0.49 

Total $1,233 $1.13 

There were 26 M. per depot, hence the average labor cost was 
?20 per M. 

The average cost of five, second class, combination, two-story 
depots (24 X 59 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $1,480 $1.04 

Labor 1,150 0.81 

Total $2,630 $1.85 

There were 71 M. per depot, hence the average labor cost was 
$16 per M. 

The average cost of 11 third class, combination, two-story 
depots (24x55 ft.) was as follows per depot: 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $1,270 $0.96 

Labor 1,000 0.77 

Total $2,270 $1.73 

There were 51 M. per depot, hence the average labor cost was 
nearly $20 per M. 

The Cost of Five Frame Section Houses.* — In this issue we giv( 
the cost of five frame section houses. These were built in the 
northwest and were three room houses of very cheap construction, 
the type known in that section as "Jap houses." The work was done 
by company forces. As is customary for day labor work, nothing 
has been allowed for superintendence and general office expenses, 
as would have been the case if the houses had been built by 
contract. 

The three room houses were 16x24 ft., having 384 sq. ft. of room 
space. The bill of material for each house was as follows: 



*Engineering-Contracting , Sept. 11, 1907. 



1122 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA 

Bill of Material for 16 x 2i Section House. 

Ft. B. M. 

44 pes. 2x12 — 2 176 

5 pes. 6x6 — 16 240 

18 pes. 2x8 — 16 384 

18 pes. 2x4 — 16 192 

36 pes. 2x4 — 12 288 

2 pes. 1x6 — 14 14 

70 pes. 2x4 — 8 373 

24 pes. 2x4 — 14 192 

16 pes. 2x4 — 16 171 

4 pes. 2x2 — 12 16 

1,940 ft. eom. boards, sis 1,940 

95 pes. 1x10 — 10, sis 792 

1 pes. 2x12 — 12, sis 24 

6 pes. 1x6 — 14, sis 42 

4 pes. 1x12 — 14, sis 56 

8 pes. 1x6 — 12, sis 48 

1,700 ft. 1x6 D. and M., sis 1,700 

270 ft. 1x6 D. and M., s2s 270 

95 pes. 1x3—10 237 

7 pes. 2x4 — 12, s4s 56 

1134x%xl2, % rd 132 

2 pes. 2x4 — 14, s4s 19 

4 pes. 4x4 — 6 32 

5 M. shingles. 
15 pes. %xl% — 16 eover moulding. 
18 pes. 8x10 flashing tin. 

1 door 2.10x6.10x1 i/s, 4 P. and G. 

1 door frame, as above. 

2 doors 2. 8x6.8x1 Vs, 4 P. and G. 
4 windows 10x16 — 1%, 12 Its. 

4 window frames. 
350 brlek. 

10 lbs. 20d nails. 
100 lbs. 8d nails. 
25 lbs. shingle nails. 
10 sash spring bolts. 

3 prs. wrought butts. 

3 doz. 1-in. No. 8 screws. 

1 saek lime. 

2 rolls tarred paper. 

3 rim looks and knobs complete. 

5 gals, outside body paint. 

1 gal. outside trimming paint. 
5 gals, inside body paint. 
1 gal. inside trimming paint. 

The estimated weight is: 

Pounds. 

7,200 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs 23,760 

5 M. shingles at 150 lbs 750 

Millwork 500 

Hardware and paint 400 

Brick 2,100 

Total 27,510 

For practical purposes the weight can be considered as 14 tons. 
The cost of materials and labor for each house was : 



BUILDINGS. 1123 

House No. 1. 
Lumber. 

2,046 ft. B. M., $7.50 $15.35 

2,902 ft. B. M., sis, $8 23.22 

2,207 ft. B. M., 1x6, D. and M., $12 26.48 

100 ft. B. M., $9 90 

7,255 ft. B. M., total, $9.10 (av.) $65.95 

5 M. shingles, Star S, $1.35 6.75 

Millworlc. 

Moulding $ 2.50 

3 doors and 4 windows 26.46 

Total millwork $28.96 

Hardware. 

2 rolls tarred paper, 85 cts $ 1.70 

135 lbs. nails 4.94 

Locks, hinges, etc 4.82 

18 pes. 8x10 flashing tin 48 

Total hardware $11.94 

Paint. 

5 gals. o. s. body paint at 75 cts $ 3.75 

1 gal. o. s. trimmings at 70 cts 70 

5 gals. i. s. body paint at 80 cts 4.00 

1/^ gal. i. s. trimmings at 85 cts 43 

Total paint $ 8.88 

Masonry. 
350 brick at $7.50 $ 2.62 

Labor. 
Engineering $ 4.05 

Building section house. 

16.5 days, carpenter, at $2.50 $41.25 

2.0 days, bridgeman, at ;^2.25 4.50 



18.5 days, total, at $2.47 $45.75 

Building flue. 

1 day, bridgeman, at $2.25 $ 2.25 

1 day, helper, at $1.75 1.75 

Total $ 4.00 

Painting. 

4 days, foreman, at $2.50 $10.00 

Tools 4.50 

Summary : 

Materials. 

Totals. Pet. 

7,255 ft. B. M. lumber at $9.10 $ 65.95 29.0 

5 M. shingles at $1.35 6.75 2.9 

Millwork 28.96 12.8 

Hardware 11.94 5.2 

Paint 8.88 3.9 

Masonry, 350 brick, $7.50 2.62 1.1 

Total materials $125.10 54.9 



1124 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

Engineering $ 4.05 1.8 

18.5 days building house, $2.47 45.75 20.1 

2 days building flue, $2 4.00 1.8 

4 days painting, $2.50 10.00 4.4 

Total labor $ 63.80 28.1 

Total material and labor 188.90 83.0 

Tools 4.50 2.0 

Freight, 14 tons (excessive chg. ) 33.44 15.0 

Total $226.84 100.0 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,326 55.2 

Labor 0.167 28.3 

Tools 0.012 2.0 

Freight 0.085 14.5 

Total $0,590 100.0 

House No. 2. 
Labor. 

Unloading material. 

2 days, carpenter, at $2.50 $ 5.00 

Building house. 

16.5 days, carpenter, at $2.50 41.25 

Building flue. 

1.3 days, mason, at $3 3.90 

Painting. 

1 day, foreman, at $2.50 2.50 

3 days, helper, at $1.75 5.25 

Total labor $ 7.75 

Tools 3.65 

Summary : 

Materials, 

Total. Pet. 

7,255 ft. B. M. lumber at $9.10 $ 65.95 30.9 

5 M. shingles at $1.35 6.75 3.1 

Millwork 28.96 13.5 

Hardware 11.94 5.6 

Paint 8.88 4.1 

Masonry, 350 brick, $7.50 2.62 1.2 

Total materials $125.10 58.4 

Labor. 

18.5 days, building house, at $2.50 $ 46.25 21.7 

1.3 days, building flue, at $3 3.90 1.8 

Painting 7.75 3.6 

Total labor $ 57.80 27.1 

Total material and labor 182.90 85.5 

Tools 3.65 1.7 

Freight 27.31 12.8 

Total , $213.86 100.0 

* Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,326 58.7 

Labor 0.150 27.1 

Tools 0.009 1.6 

Freight 0.071 12.6 

Total $0,556 100.0 



BUILDINGS. 1125 

House No. 3. 
Labor. 

Unloading materials. 

2 days, carpenter, at $2.50 % 5.00 

Building house. 

16 days, carpenter, at $2.50 $40.00 

Cleaning up old material. 
1 day, carpenter, at $2.50 ? 2.50 

Painting. 
1 day foreman, at $2.50 $ 2.50 

4 days, helper, at $1.75 7.00 

Total labor $ 9.50 

Tools 4.18 

Summary : 

Materials. 

7,255 ft. B. M. lumber, at $9.10 $ 65.95 33.1 

Total. Pet. 

5 M. shingles at $1.35 6.75 3.3 

Millwork 28.96 14.6 

Hardware 11.94 6.0 

Paint 8.86 4.4 

Masonry, 350 bricks, at $7.50 2.62 1.3 

Total materials $125.10 62.7 

Labor. 

19 days building house, at $2.50 $ 47.50 23.7 

Painting 9.50 4.7 

Total labor $ 57.00 28.4 

Per cent. 

Total materials and labor $182.10 91.1 

Tools 4.18 2.0 

Freight 13.79 6.9 

Total $200.07 100.0 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,326 62.7 

Labor 0.148 28.4 

Tools 0.010 1.9 

Freight 0.036 7.0 

$0,520 100.0 
House No. 4. 
Labor. 
Building house : 

16.6 days, carpenter, at $2.50 $41.50 

Building flue : 
1 day, carpenter, at $2.50 $2.50 

1 day, helper, at $1.75 1.75 

$4.25 
Painting. 

3 days, foreman, at $2.50 $ 7.50 

2 days, helper, at $1.75 3.50 

Total labor $11.00 

Tools $ 3.82 



1126 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



SUMMART. 

Materials. Total. Per cent. 

7,255 ft. B. M. lumber, at ?9.10 $ 65.95 33.6 

5 M shingles, at $1.35 6.75 3.3 

Millwork 28.96 14.7 

Hardware 11.94 6.1 

Paint 8.86 4.5 

Masonry, 350 brick, $7.50 2.62 1.3 

Total materials $125.10 63.5 

Labor. 

16.6 days building house, at $2.50 $ 41.50 21.1 

Building flue 4.25 2.2 

Painting 11.00 5.6 

Total labor $ 56.75 28.9 

Per cent. 

Total materials and labor $181.85 92.4 

Tools 3.82 2.0 

Freight 10.67 5.4 

Total $196.34 100.0 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Material $0,326 63.4 

Labor 0.150 29.2 

Tools 0.010 2.0 

Freight 0.028 5.4 

$0,514 100.0 

House No. 5. 

Labor. 

Unloading materials : 

1 day, carpenter, at $2.50 $ 2.50 

Building house : 

20 days, carpenter, at $2.50 50.00 

Building flue: 

3 days, carpenter, at $2.50 7.50 

Painting : 

5 days, foreman, at $2.50 12.50 

1 day, helper, at $1.75 1.75 

Total labor $14.25 

Tools $ 4.44 

Summary. 

Materials. Total. Per cent. 

7,255 ft. B. M. lumber, at $9.10 $ 65.95 32.2 

5 M shingles, at $1.35 6.75 3.2 

Millwork 28.96 14.0 

Hardware 11.94 5.8 

Paint 8.86 4.3 

Masonry, 350 bricks, $7.50 2.62 1.3 

Total materials $125.10 60.8 



BUILDINGS. 1127 

Labor. 

21 days building house, at $2.50 $ 52.50 25.4 

Building flue 7.50 3.6 

Painting 14.25 7.0 

Total labor % 74.25 36.0 

Per cent. 

Total materials and labor $199.35 96.8 

Tools 4.44 2.0 

Freight 2.51 1.2 

Total $206.30 100.0 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,326 60.6 

Labor 0.193 36.0 

Tools 0.012 2.1 

Freight 0.007 1.3 

$0,538 100.0 

It must be borne in mind that the cost of lumber is extremely- 
low, even for the section in which this particular building work was 
done. 

Per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,326 60 

Labor 0.160 30 

Tools 0.010 2 

Freight 0.045 8 

$0,541 100 

Since the weight of the buildings is given in all cases, it is easy 
to calculate the freight for any given haul. 

The average cost of the labor on these section houses was $62 per 
section house. There were 7,250 ft. B. M. in each section house, 
and, if we charge the full cost of the labor ($62) against this 
amount of lumber, we have a trifle less than $9 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 

Cost of a Blacksmith Shop, Barn and Telegraph Office.* — We 
give in this issue the detailed cost of erecting a blacksmith shop, a 
telegraph ofliee and a barn for railroad purposes in the Northwest. 
The work was done by day labor. It will be noticed that the price 
of lumber is very low : 

Blacksmith Shop. 
Blacksmith shoD, 20x30 ft. ; area 600 sq. ft. 

Weight: Pounds. 

2,120 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 6 996 

41/2 M shingles, at 150 675 

Hardware 35 

Total, 4 tons 7,706 

Lumber: 

320 ft. B. M., at $8.00 $ 2.56 

1,800 ft. B. M. second hand, at $4 7.20 

2,120 ft. B. M. total, at $4.60 (av.) $ 9.76 

4% M shingles, at $1.65 7.43 

Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 6, 1907. 



1128 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Hardware: 

20 lbs. 8d. nails, at $2.10 $ 0.42 

5 lbs. 20d. nails, at $2.00 10 

10 lbs. 3d nails, at $2.45 .25 

Total hardware $ 0.77 

Labor: 

Superintendence $ 4.80 

Carpenter, 10.4 days, at $2.10 21.82 

Total labor $26.62 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

2,120 ft. B. M., at $4.60 $ 9.76 21.4 

41/2 M shingles, at $1.65 7.43 16.7 

Hardware 77 1.9 

Total materials $17.96 40.0 

Labor ^.$26.62 60.0 

Grand total materials and labor. .$44.58 100.0 

Cost sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,030 40.0 

Labor 0.044 60.0 

Total $0,074 100.0 

The low cost of materials for this building is explained by the 
fact that six-sevenths of it was second-hand material. The build- 
ing had no floor, and no studs were used in the sides. The cost per 
M ft. B. M. for the labor on the lumber was $12.55. 

Hat Barn. 

Hay barn, 20x35 ft; area, 700 sq. ft. 

Weight: ' • Pounds. 

6,794 ft. B. M., 3,300 lbs 22,420 

7 M shingles, 150 1,050 

Hardware, paint, etc 475 

Total, 12 tons 23,945 

Lumber: 

2,585 ft. B. M., at $7.50 .'...$19.39 

1,613 ft. B. M., at $8.00 12.90 

496 ft. B. M., at $12.00 5.95 

2,000 ft. B. M., at $8.00 16.00 

100 ft. B. M., at $17.00 1.70 

6,794 ft. B. M., total, at $8.23 (av.) $55.91 

7 M shingles, at $1.35 $ 9.45 

Millwork: 

2 window sash, at $0.75 1.50 



BUILDINGS. 1129 



Hardware: 



200 lbs. 20d. nails, at $3.55 7.10 

200 lbs. lOd. nails, at $3.55 7.10 

20 lbs. 3d. nails, at $3.95 79 

3 lbs. 8d. nails 15 

3 lbs. 3d nails 12 

2 pair 10-in. strap hinges 32 

36 1%-in. screws 07 

1 8-in. hasp 07 

2 8-in. bar locks 34 

No. 10 screws 01 

Total hardware $16.07 

Paint: 

5 gals, outside body paint, at $0.75 $ 3.75 

2% gals, oil, at $0.58 1.45 

Total paint $ 5.20 

Labor: 

Engineering $ .80 

Building hay barn : 

Foreman, 4 days, at $85 per month 10.95 

Carpenter, 20 days, at $2.50 50.00 

Carpenter, 6 days, at $2.25 13.50 

Helpers, 5 days, at $1.75 7.00 

Total $81.45 

Moving material from barn, helper, 1 day, at 

$1.75 $ 1.75 

Cutting door in back and placing it, carpenter, 

1 day, at $2.50 2.50 

Painting barn : 

Carpenter, 1 day, at $2.50. 2.50 

Bridgeman, 2 days, at $2.25 4.50 

Total , $ 7.00 

Total labor $93.50 

Tools $ 4.98 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

6,794 ft. B. M., at $8.23 $ 55.94 30.0 

7 M shingles, at $1.35 9.45 5.1 

Millwork 1.50 0.8 

Hardware 16.07 8.6 

Paint 5.20 2.7 



Total materials $ 88.16 47.2 

Labor: 

Engineering $ .80 0.5 

Building 81.45 43.6 

Moving lumber, etc 1.75 0.9 

Cutting door in back 2.50 1.3 

Painting 7.00 3.7 



Total labor . $ 93.50 50.0 

Total materials and labor $181.66 97.2 

Tools 4.98 2.8 



Grand total $186.64 100.00 



1130 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,126 47.2 

Labor 0.133 50.0 

Tools 0.007 2.8 

Total $0,266 100.0 

The cost of labor per M ft. B. M. of lumber used 
was $13.76. 

Telegraph Office. 
Telegraph office, 12 X 12 f t. ; area, 144 sq. ft. 
Weight: Pounds. 

2,332 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 7,695 

2 M shingles, at 150 lbs 300 

Hardware, etc 150 

Total, 4 tons 8,145 

Luinher: 

185 ft. B. M., at $12.00 $ 2.22 

230 ft. B. M., at $15.00 3.45 

340 ft. B. M., at $16.50 5.61 

431 ft. B. M., at $15.00 6.47 

243 ft. B. M., at $12.00 2.91 

73 ft. B. M., at $26.00 2.03 

200 ft. B. M., at $20.00 4.00 

630 ft. B. M., at $30.00 18.90 

2,332 ft. B. M. total, at $19.55 (av.) $45.59 

2 M shingles, at $3.50 •....$ 7.00 

Millwork: 

3 window sashes $ 3.28 

Hardware: 

75 lbs. tar paper $ 1.52 

1 pair strap hinges 20^ 

Screws 04 

1 rim hook 30 

6 lbs. 6d. nails 18 

5 lbs. 8d. nails (finishing) 31 

10 lbs. 4d. nails 30 

30 lbs. lOd. nails 84 

Total hardware $ 3.69 

Laior: 

Foreman, 3 days, at $80 per month $ 7.74 

Carpenter, 11 days, at $2.50 27.50 

Total labor $35.24 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Percent. 

2,332 ft. B. M., at $19.55 $45.59 48.0 

2 M shingles, at $3.50 7.00 7.3 

Millwork 3.28 3.5 

Hardware 3.69 3.9 

Total materials $59.56 62.7 

Labor 35.24 37.3 

Grand total $94.80 100.0 

Cost sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,413 62.7 

Labor 0.245 37.3 

$0,658 100.0 



BUILDINGS. 1131 

The cost per M ft. B. M. of lumber used for labor on the office 
was $15.11. This building had a floor in it and a ceiling, hence the 
cost per sq. ft. of area, and the cost per M ft. of lumber used 
would naturally be higher than in the other two buildings. 

Cost of Forty Hand-Car Houses.* — In this article we give the 
cost in detail of erecting 40 frame hand-car houses on a division of 
a Western railroad. The price of lumber is given and other ma- 
terials, as well as the labor costs. The work was done by "com- 
pany men." 

Forty hand-car houses built on one division ; size, 8x12 f t. ; 
area, 96 sq. ft. 

W sight: Pounds. 

48,055 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 158,581 

50 M shingles, at 150 7,500 

Hardware and pa.int 2,400 

Total, 84 tons 168,481 

Timber: 

9,207 ft. B. M., at $11.50 $105.88 

6,400 ft. B. M., at $11.50 73.60 

1,200 ft. B. M. S. 1 S., at $13.75 16.50 

4,053 ft. B. M. S. 1 S., at $28.75 116.52 

3,407 ft. B. M., at $19.00 64.73 

1,760 ft. B. M., at $19.00 33.44 

2,333 ft. B. M. ceiling, at $32.50 75.82 

2,725 ft. B. M. S. 1 S., at $14.00 38.15 

2,270 ft. B. M. S. 1 S., at $28.75 65.26 

8,500 ft. B. M. S. 1 S., at $28.75 244.33 

6,200 ft. B. M., at $13.00 80.60 

48,055 ft. B. M. total, at $19.03 (av.) $914.83 

50 M. shingles, at $1.25 62.50 

Hardware: 

80 pairs 12-in. hinges, $1.21 per doz $ 8.06 

80 5-in. hasp and staples 1.20 

140 doz. 1%-in. screws, at $0.23y2 per gross 2.74 

27 doz. 78 -in. screws, at $0.08 per gross .18 

200 lbs. 3d nails, at $2.85 5.70 

100 lbs. 6d nails, at $2.25 2.25 

200 lbs. 16d nails, at $2.00 4.00 

40 8-in. hinge hasps 1.25 

40 padlocks 9.00 

250 lbs. 20d nails, at $2.00 5.00 

800 lbs. lOd nails, at $2.05 16.40 

Total hardware $ 55.78 

100 gals, railroad paint, at $0.75 $ 75.00 

Labor: 

Superintendent $ 23.73 

Foreman, 29 days, at $3.00 87.00 

Carpenters, 121.5 days, at $2.50; 303.75 

Total labor $414.48 

Tools $ 3.75 



Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 20, 1907. 



1132 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

For one hand-car house, weighing 2.1 tons, we give the following 
sununary : 

Materials: Total. Percent. 

1,201 tt. B. M., at $19.03 $22.87 60.0 

1% M shingles, at $1.25 1.56 4.1 

Hardware 1.39 3.7 

Paint 1.87 4.9 

Total materials $27.69 72.7 

Labor $10.36 27.1 

Total materials and labor $38.05 99.8 

Tools $0.09 0.2 

Grand total $38.14 100.0 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent 

Materials $0,288 72.7 

Labor 0.108 27.1 

Tools 0.001 0.2 

Total : $0,397 100.0 

The cost per M ft. B. M. for the entire labor on these buildings 
was $8.62, which was quite low. 

Cost of Six Tool Houses.* — In this article we give the cost in 
detail of building six frame tool houses for use on railroads. The 
labor was performed by company forces. The costs are summarized 
so as to allow of comparison with other cheap structures, like those 
that have appeared in our previous issues in this series of articles. 
Lists of materials and prices are given as well as wages. The cost 
of lumber was very low. 

Example I. 
Tool house, 8x12 ft.; area, 96 sq. ft. 
Weight: Pounds. 

1.000 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 3,300 

1% M shingles, at 150 188 

Hardware 50 

Total, 1 % tons 3,538 

Lumber: . 

323 ft. B. M., at $9. $ 2.91 

630 ft. B. M., at $11.. 6.93 

48 ft. B. M. flooring, at $20 96 

1.001 ft. B. M. total, at $10.80 (av.) $10.80 

1% M shingles, at $1.80 $ 2.25 

Hardware: 
Bolts $ . .82 

3 lbs. 3d nails, $2.76 08 

10 lbs. 8d nails, $2.35 24 

5 lbs. 20d nails, $2.25 11 

1 gal. paint 60 

2 pr. 8-in. tie hinges, 4 ct 08 

1 8-in. hinge hasp, 5 ct 05 

% gross 1-in. No. 10 screws, 14 ct 07 

1 Yale padlock 43 

Total $ 2.48 



*Engineering-Gontracting, Oct. 30, 1907. 



BUILDINGS. 1133 

Labor: 

Engineering $ 1.65 

Building house, 4.5 days, carpenter, $2.50 11.25 

Total $12.90 

This includes painting. 
Tools $ .48 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Percent. 

1,001 ft. B. M., at $10.80 $10.80 38.0 

Shingles 2.25 7.4 

Hardware 2.48 8.5 

Total materials $15.53 53.9 

Labor: 

Engineering $ 1.65 5.7 

Carpenter 11.25 88.9 

Total labor $12.90 44.6 

Total materials and labor $28.43 98.5 

Tools 48 1.5 

Freight 00 0.0 

Grand total $28.91 100.0 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $ .161 53.9 

Labor 134 44.6 

Tools 005 1.5 

Total $ .300 100.0 

It will be noted that the carpenter labor, as above given, cost 
$11.25 per 1,000 ft. B. M. in rhe tool house. 

Example II. 

Tool house, 12 x 14 ft., and oil house, 10x32; area, 
168 sa. ft. and 320 sa. ft. Total area, 4S8 sq. ft. 

Weight: Pounds. 

Lumber and millwork 13,700 

5y2 M shingles, at 150 825 

Hardware and paint 200 

Total, 71/3 tons 14,725 

Lumber: 

416 ft. B. M., at $9 $ 3.74 

700 ft. B. M., at $12 8.40 

1,360 ft. B. M., at $8.50 11.56 

1,100 ft. B. M., at $12 13.20 

450 ft. B. M., at $9 4.05 

4,026 total, at $10.17 (av.) $40.95 

MillworU: 
Battens $ 1.92 

1 door frame and door 2.95 

2 window frames and sash 5.90 

Total $10.77 

51/2 M shingles, at $1.45 $ 7.98 



1134 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Hardware: 

100 lbs. 8d nails $ 2.56 

20 lbs. 30d nails, at $2.46 49 

1 hasp 05 

2 hinges and hasps 10 

1 pair butts 04 

20 lbs. 6d nails, at $2.66 53 

1 galv. iron chimney 1.04 

$ 4.81 
Paint: 

6 gals, outside body paint, 75 cts.'. $ 4.50 

1 gal. outside trim paint 70 

% gal. turpentine 22 

% gal. Japan dryer 20 

$ 5.62 

Labor: 
Building tool and oil house : 
Carpenters, 20 days, at $2.50 $50.00 

Putting up shelving: 

Carpenter, 4 days, at $2.50 10.00 

Painting, helper, 1 day, at $1.75 1.75 

Total labor $61.75 

Tools $ 2.34 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

4,026 ft. B. M., at $10.17 $ 40.95 30.5 

Millwork 10.77 8.0 

Shingles 7.98 5.9 

Hardware 4.81 3.5 

Paint 5.62 4.1 

Total material $ 70.13 52.0 

Lahor: 

Building $ 60.00 44.7 

Painting 1.75 1.3 

Total labor $ 61.75 46.0 

Total material and labor $131.88 98.0 

Tools 2.34 2.0 

Freight 00 0.0 

Grand total $134.22 100.0 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,144 52.0 

Labor 0.126 46.0 

Tools 0.005 2.0 

Total $0,275 100.0 

It will be noted that the labor cost about $15 per M. 
It is noteworthy in this instance to record that the foreman car- 
penter on this job was discharged for inefficiency, owing to the high 
cost of building these two sheds. One of these buildings had win- 
dows in it and shelving, which should have made the labor costs 
higher than in Example I, where neither windows nor shelves were 
used. A comparison shows that the cost per square foot of area in 
Example II was lower than in all the cases given except Example 
V. The cost was 2 % cts. lower than Example I, 1 ct. of which was 



BUILDINGS. 1135 

In the reduced cost of labor. This makes evident the fact that cost 
data and their analysis form the only true way of telling of the 
efficiency of worlcmen and methods, provided the records are kept 
honestly and intelligently. 

Example III. 

Tool house, 8 x 12 f t. ; area, 96 sq. ft. 
Weight: Pounds. 
1,110 ft. B. M. lumber, at 3,300 3,663 

1 1/5 M shingles, at 150 180 

Hardware and paint 50 

Total, 2 tons 3,893 

Lumber: 

758 ft. B. M., at $10.50 $ 7.95 

352 ft. B. M., at $7.50 2.64 

1,110 ft. B. M. total, at $9.54 (av.) $10.59 

1,200 shingles, at -$1.90 $ 2.28 

Hardware: 

3-in. bolts $ 1.60 

5 lbs. 20d nails, at $2 10 

5 lbs. 8d nails, at $2.10 11 

10 lbs. lOd nails, at $2.05 20 

Total $ 2.01 

Paint: 

2 gals, outside body paint, at 60 cts $ 1.20 

Labor: 

Loading material for tool house : 

Carpenter, 1 day, at $2.50 $ 2.50 

Erecting tool house : 

Carpenter, 2 days, at $2.50 5.00 

Helper, 6 days, at $2 12.00 

Total $19.00 

This includes painting. 
Tools $ 1.57 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

1,110 ft. B. M., at $9.54 $10.59 28.8 

1,200 shingles, at $1.90 2.28 6.2 

Hardware 2.01 5.5 

Paint 1.20 3.3 

Total material $16.08 43.8 

Labor $19.00 51.9 

Total materials and labor $35.08 95.7 

Tools 1.57 4.3 

Freight 0.00 0.0 

Grand total $36.65 100.0 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,167 43.8 

Labor 0.198 51.9 

Tools 0.016 4.3 

Total $0,381 100.0 



1136 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

It will be noted that the labor cost nearly 517.50 per M, which is 
excessive. 

Example IV. 
Tool house, 8 x 12 f t. ; area, 96 sq. ft. 

Weight: Pounds. 

1,247 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 4,115 

1% M shingles, at 150 187 

Hardware and paint 65 

Total, 2 tons .4,367 

Lumber: 

577 ft. B. M., at $7 $ 4.04 

180 ft. B. M., at $7 1.26 

490 ft B. M., at ?8 3.92 

1,247 ft. B. M. total at $7.40 (av.) $ 9.22 

1% M shingles, at ?1.50 ^ $ 1.87 

Hardware: 

10 lbs. 20d nails, at $2.46 % .25 

20 lbs. 8d nails, at $2.56 51 

5 lbs. 3d nails, at $2.91 15 

2 prs. hinges 12 

1 hasp 05 

1 padlock 16 

Total $~l"24 

Paint: 

4% gals, outside body paint, at 75 cts. $ 3.38 

% gal. boiled oil, at 70 cts 35 

Total $ 3.73 

Labor: 

Carpenter, 3 days, at $2.50 $ 7.50 

Carpenter, 1 day, at $2.25 2.25 

Helper, 1 day, at $1.75 1.75 

Painting, helper, 1 day, at $1.75 1.75 

Total $13.25 

Tools 95 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent 

1,247 ft B. M., at $7.40 $ 9.22 30.4 

1% M shingles, at $1.50 1.87 6.1 

Hardware 1.24 4.1 

Paint 3.73 12.3 

Total materials $16.06 52.9 , 

Labor: 

Building $11.50 38.0 

Painting 1.75 5.7 

Total labor $13.25 43.7 

Total material and labor $29.31 96.6 

Tools 95 3.4 

Freight 00 0.0 

Grand total $30.26 100.00 



BUILDINGS. 1137 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,167 52.9 

Labor 0.138 43.7 

Tools 0.001 3.4 

Total $0,306 100.0 

It will be noted that the labor cost $10.60 per M. 

Example V.. 

Double tool house, 12 x 30 f t. ; area, 360 sq. ft. 

Weight : Pounds. 

2,606 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs. 11,365 

SVa M shingles, at 150 lbs 525 

Hardware 75 

Total, 6 tons. 11,965 

ittmber; 

1,019 ft. B. M., at $8 $ 8.15 

708 ft. B. M., S. 1 S., at $8.50 6.02 

879 ft. B. M., at $8 7.03 

288 ft. B. M., at $8.50 2.45 

232 ft. B. M., at $8 1.86 

318 ft. B. M., at ?4 1.27 

3,444 ft. B. M. total, at $7.77 (av.) $26.78 

3% M shingles, at $1.40 $ 4.90 

Hardware: 

20 lbs. 4d nails, at $3.80 % .76 

6 lbs. 20d nails, at $3.50 21 

8 lbs. 8d nails, at $3.60 29 

24 lbs. lOd nails, at $3.55 85 

6 lbs. 30d nails, at $3.50 21 

4 pairs hinges 48 

2 pairs hasps 14 

2 Tale padlocks " 88 

Total $ 3.82 

Labor: 

Carpenter, 12.1 days, at $2.50 $30.25 

Tools 2.21 

Freight 76 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

3,444 ft. B. M., at $7.77 $26.78 39.0 

Shingles 3% M, at $1.40 4.90 7.2 

Hardware 3.82 5.6 

Total materials $35.50 51.7 

Labor $30.25 43.8 



Total materials and labor $65.75 95.5 

Tools 2.21 3.3 

Freight 76 1.2 

Grand total $68.72 100.0 



1138 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,098 51.7 

Labor 0.084 43.8 

Tools 0.007 3.3 

Freight 0.002 1.2 

Total ?0.191 100.0 

It will be noted that the labor cost $8.60 per M. 

Example VI. 

Tool house, 8 x 12 f t. ; area, 96 ft. 
Weight: Pounds. 

1,247 ft. B. M., at 3,300 lbs 4,115 

1% M shingles, at 150 187 

Hardware 60 

Total, 2 tons 4,362 

Lumber: 

577 ft. B. M., at ?7 $ 4.04 

180 ft. B. M., at $7 1.26 

490 ft. B. M., at $8 3.92 

1,247 ft. B. M. total at $7.39 (av.) $ 9,22 

1% M shingles, at $1.50 $ 1.87 

Hardware: 

Bolts $ .42 

10 lbs. 20d nails, at $2.46 25 

20 lbs. 8d nails, at $2.56 51 

5 lbs. 3d nails, at $2.91 15 

2 pairs hinges 12 

1 hasp 05 

1 padlock 16 

Total $ 1.66 

Paint: 

2% gals, outside body paint, at 75 cts $ 1.88 

% gal. oil, at 70 cts 35 

$ 2.23 
Labor: 

Carpenter, 6.3 days, at $2.50 $15.75 

Carpenter, 1 day, at $2.25 2.25 

Helper, 2.5 days, at $1.75 4.37 

Total $22.37 

Tools 92 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

1,247 ft. B. M., at $7.39 $9.22 24 

114 M shingles, at $1.50 1.87 4.9 

Hardware 1.66 43 

Paint 2.23 5.9 

Total materials $14.98 391 

Labor 22.37 58.4 

Total materials and labor $37.35 97 5 

Tools 92 2.5 

Freight 00 o.O 

Grand total $38.27 loo^ 



BUILDINGS. 1139 

Cost per sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,156 39.1 

Labor 0.233 58.4 

Tools 0.001 2.5 

Total $0,390 100.0 

It will be noted that the labor cost $18 per M, which is excessive. 
A number of these tool houses were 8 x 12, giving '96 sq. ft. of 
area in the building and needing for their construction a little more 
than a thousand feet of lumber. Their cost ran from $28 to $38 
. A comparison of these buildings with the cost of building a large 
number of shacks for camps in building railroads in the South will 
be of interest. These camps were built by one of the editors of this 
journal. 

They were about 10 x 10, and had a slanting roof. A door made 
from boards was used in it, and a sliding board window was put 
in one side. A bunk was also built in it, but there was no floor. A 
thousand feet of lumber was used in building the shack. The roof 
was covered with tar paper, and strap hinges, hasp and padlock 
were used on the door. The lumber on a large number built in Ten- 
nessee cost $10 per M; the tar paper, nails and hardware cost $2, 
making a cost of materials of $12. Carpenters were paid $3.50 per 
day, and 3 carpenters completed a building in a day, making a cost 
of about $10 for labor, or a total cost of $22 per shack. 

A comparison with the tool houses shows that if paint and 
shingles had been used these shacks would have cost a few dollars 
more for materials and slightly raised the cost of labor ; but wages 
paid by the contractor on the shacks were $1 per day higher, which 
about offsets the increased cost of materials. 

We have pointed out before that a contractor who pays $3.50 a 
day for carpenters will usually get more work for the money than 
will a railroad company that pays $2.50 to its carpenters. A com- 
parison of the cost of labor per square foot as listed above with 
10 cts. per square foot as paid for these shacks shows plainly that 
this is true. 

Capacity and Cost of Ice Houses. — The nominal capacity of an 
Ice house is generally stated in tons of ice, and is generally taken to 
mean the capacity up to the eaves. By stacking the ice up higher 
under the roof, working from doors in the roof or gable ends, the 
capacity can be increased 10% or more. About 34 cu. ft. of ice 
make a ton of 2,000 lbs., the ice weighing 58.7 lbs. per cu. ft. It 
Is not unusual to assume a weight of 60 lbs. per cu. ft. for con- 
venience of calculation. Allowing for voids between the cakes of ice 
it is customary to allow 36 cu. ft. per ton, but this is usually too 
low, a fair average being nearer 40 cu. ft. per ton of 2,000 lbs. In a 
large, well-built ice house, only 10% of the ice is lost annually by 
melting and evaporation, but in smaller houses the loss is larger. 



1140 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following are dimensions and nominal capacities of some 
standard ice houses on the Lehigh Valley R. R. : 

Size. Capacity Capacity 

cu.ft. tons. 

18 X 32 ft. X 12 ft. height of frame.... 6,912 150 

32 X 86 ft. X 28 ft. height of frame 1,500 

30 X 120 ft. X 24 ft. height of frame 86,400 2,000 

If frame ice houses cost 5 cts. per cu. ft. to build, the equivalent 
cost is $2.00 per ton of ice capacity. 

Cost of Six Ice Houses.* — The work was done by railway com- 
pany forces. It will be noted that the price of lumber was very 
low. 

Example I. 

Ice House 30 X 48 ft. 
Weight. Pounds. 

26,000 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs. equals 85,800 

17^ M. shingles at 150 lbs 2,600 

Hardware, etc 2,000 

Total, 45 tons 90,400 

Lumber: 

1,280 ft. B.M. at $8 $ 10.24 

7,333 ft. B.M. at ?8 58.66 

2,432 ft. B. M. at $8.50 20.67 

2,053 ft. B. M. at $7.50 15.40 

4,360 ft. B. M., 1 in., at $11 47.96 

777 ft. B. M., 1 in., at $12 9.32 

4,420 ft. B. M. drop siding at $13.50 59.67 

400 ft. B. M. flooring at $18.50 7.40 

3,072 ft. B. M. S. H., 8 X 16-in., at $4 12.28 

26,127 ft. B. M. total at $9.20 (av.) $241.54 

17 % M. shingles at $1.75 $30.19 

Hardware : 

390 lbs. rods and bolts at $2.55 per 100 lbs $ 9.95 

1,300 lbs. at $2 per 100 lbs 26.00 

Bolts, nuts and washers 11.75 

6 padlocks at 13 cts 78 

Total hardware $48.48 

Paint: 

27 gals, paint at 50 cts $13.50 

3 gals, oil at 37.5 cts 1.12 

Total paint $14.62 

Labor: 
Engineering $20.80 

Loading material: 

1.6 days carpenter at $2.50 $ 4.00 

3.2 days laborer at $2 6.40 

4.8 total $10.40 

Unloading material: 
1 day carpenter $ 2.50 



*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 9, 1907. 



BUILDINGS. 



1141 



Building ice house: 

18.5 days foreman at $80 per mo $ 47.74 

102.1 days carpenter at $2.50 256.75 

43.1 days helper at ?2... 86.20 

163.7 days total at ?2.37 $390.69 

Painting ice house: 

7 days helper at ?2 ?14.00 

Tools 32.50 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

26,127 ft. B. M. at $9.20 $241.54 28.4 

Shingles 30.19 3.5 

Hardware 48.48 5.5 

Paint 14.62 1.7 

Total material $334.83 39.1 

Labor: 

Engineering $ 20.80 2.5 

4.8 days loading 10.40 1.2 

1 day unloading 2.50 .3 

163.7 days building at $2.37 390.69 46.0 

7 days painting at $2 14.00 1.4 

Total labor $439.39 51.7 

Total materials and labor $774.22 90.8 

Tools 32.50 3.8 

Freight 45.00 5.4 

Grand total $851.72 100.00 

Cost per 
sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,232 39.1 

Labor 305 51.7 

Tools 022 3.8 

Freight 031 5.4 

Total $0,590 100.0 

Example II. 

Ice House 30 X 60. 
Weight : Pounds. 

18,600 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs. equals 61,380 

Hardware 700 

Total, 31 tons 62,080 

Lumher: 

10,196 ft. B. M. at $6.50 $ 66.27 

5,414 ft. B.M. at $7 37.90 

1,520 ft. B.M. at $7.50 11.40 

192 ft. B. M. sis, at $9 1.73 

320 ft. B. M., s4s, at $9.50 3.04 

300 ft. B. M., ceiling, at $10.50 3.15 

675 ft. B. M., 1 X 3 battens, at $16 10.80 

18,617 ft. B.M. total at $7.22 (av) $134.29 

19 M. shingles. Star A, at $1.15 $ 21.85 



1142 HANDBOOK OP COST DATA. 

Hardware: 
680 lbs. nails at .016 ct $ 10.04 

Paint: 
10 gals, outside paint at 70 cts $ 7.00 

Labor: 

Unloading lumber: 
1 day carpenter at $2.50 $ 2.50 

3 days laborers at $1.60 4.80 

4 days total at $1.82 ? 7.30 

Erecting ice house: 

93.5 days carpenter at $2.50 $233.75 

12.5 days helper at $1.75 21.85 



106 days total at $2.40 $255.60 

Painting : 

4 days foreman at $75 per month $ 9.67 

2 days painter at $2.50 5.00 

6 days total at $2.45 $ 14.67 

Tools . .' 19.00 

Summary. 

Materials: Totals. Per cent. 

18,617 ft. B. M. at $7.22 $134.29 25.1 

19 M. shingles at $1.15 21.85 4.1 

690 lbs. nails at 1.6 cts 10.04 1.8 

10 gals, paint at 70 cts 7.00 1.5 

Total i, $173.18 32.5 

Labor: 

4 days unloading lumber at $1.82 $ 7.30 1.3 

106 days erecting at $2.40 255.60 47.5 

6 days painting at $2.45 14.67 2.6 

Tools 19.00 3.5 

Total materials and labor $470.75 87.4 

31 tons freight, actual (excessive) 67.70 12.6 

Total $538.45 100.0 

Cost per 

sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,096 32.5 

Labor 0.164 54.9 

Freight 0.037 12.6 

Total $0,297 100.0 

Example No. III. 

Ice House 24 X 48. 

Weight: Pounds. 

16,665 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs 54,994 

151/2 M. shingles at 150 lbs 2,325 

Hardware 1,500 

Total (29 tons) 58,819 



BUILDINGS. 1143 



Lumber: 

624 f t. B. M. S. H. at %1 S 4.37 

6,420 ft. B. M. at $11.50 73.83 

240 ft. B. M. at $12.50 3.00 

112 ft. B. M., s2slE, at ?13.40 1.50 

328 ft. B. M., at $17.50 5.74 

5,441 ft. B. M., sis, No. 1, at $17.25 93.86 

3,500 ft. B. M., ship lap. No. 2, at $21 73.50 



16,665 ft. B. M. total (av.), $15.35 $255.80 

15 Va M. shingles at $2 $ 31.00 

Hardware: 

125 lbs. 20d wire nails at $1.60 $ 2.00 

355 lbs. lOd wire nails at $1.75 6.21 

70 lbs. 4d wire nails at $2.10 1.47 

Bolts, plates, nuts and washers 10.19 

Padlocks and hinges 1.78 

Total hardware $ 21.65 

Paint: 

10 gals, outside at 84 cts $ 8.40 

9 gals, oil at 55 cts 4.95 

Total paint $ 13.35 

Labor: 
Building : 

10 days carpenter at $2.64 $ 26.40 

41 days carpenter at $2.25 92.25 

6 3-10 days foreman at $2.50 15.75 

$134.40 

Painting : 

6 days painter at $2 $ 12.00 

Foreman 1.56 

Total $ 13.56 

Summary. 
Materials: Per cent. 

16,665 ft. B. M. at $15.35 $255.80 50.9 

Shingles 31.00 6.2 

Hardware 21.65 4.3 

Paint 13.35 2.6 



Total materials $321.80 63.9 

Labor: 

Puilding $134.40 26.9 

Painting 13.56 2.9 

Total labor $147.96 

Total materials and labor $469.76 

Tools 2.94 

Total $472.70 

Freight 29.00 

Grand total $501.70 100.0 



29.8 

93.7 

.5 


94.2 
5.8 



1144 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Cost per 

sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,280 64.0 

Labor 0.130 29.8 

Tools 0.005 .5 

Freight 0.015 i 5.7 

Total $0,430 100.0 

Example IV. 
Ice House 24 X 48. 
Weight: Pounds. 

16,694 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs 55,090 

15 M. shingles at 150 lbs 2,250 

Hardware 1,000 

Total (29 tons) 58,340 

Lumber: 

3,200 ft. B.M. at $18 $ 57.60 

256 ft. B.M. at $9 2.30 

960ft. B.M. at $9.50 9.12 

4,500 ft. B. M., sis, at $17.50 78.75 

108 ft. B.M., sis, at $17.25 1.86 

221ft. B.M., at $13 2.87 

2,498 ft. B. M., at $10 27.24 

312 ft. B. M., flooring, at $27.50 8.58 

719 ft. B. M. at $6.50 4.67 

3,120 ft. B. M. at $11 34.32 

16,694 ft. B. M., total average, $13.35 $227.31 

15 M. shingles at $2 $ 30.00 

Hardware : 

Rods, washers, etc $ 12.67 

200 lbs. 20d nails 3.20 

60 lbs. 4d nails 1.29 

400 lbs. lOd nails 7.00 

Locks, hinges, etc 2.08 

Total hardware $ 26.24 

Paint: 

12.5 gals, paint at 90 cts $ 11.35 

5.5 gals, oil at 59 cts 3.25 

Total paint $ 14.60 

Labor: 

Building house : 

Supervision $ 31.19 

11.5 days foreman at $85 per month 34.91 

45.5 days carpenter at $2.48 112.73 

Total $173.83 

Banking cinders around house : , 

1 day foreman at $1.74 $1.74 

6 days laborers at $1 6.00 

Total $7.74 

Painting : 

2 days painter at $2.25 $4.50 

3 days painter at $1.75 5.25 

Total $9.75 



BUILDINGS. 1145 

Summary. 

Material: Per cent. 

16,694 ft. B. M. at ?13.35 $227.31 43.3 

15 M. shingles at ?2 30.00 5.7 

Hardware 26.24 5.0 

Paint 14.60 2.8 



$298.15 56.8 

Labor: 

Building house $178.83 34.1 

Banking cinders 7.74 1.5 

Painting 9.75 1.8 

$196.32 37.4 

Materials and labor $494.47 94.2 

Tools 77 0.1 

Total $495.24 94.3 

Freight 29.00 5.7 

Grand total $524.24 100.0 

Cost per 
sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,259 56.8 

Labor 0.170 37.4 

Tools 0.001 0.1 

Freight 0.025 5.7 

Total %(iA^ 100.0 

Example V. 

Ice House 24 X 48. 

Weight: Pounds. 

18,247 ft. B. M. at 3,300 lbs 60,325 

14 M. shingles at 150 lbs 2,100 

Hardware 1,000 

Total (32 tons) 63,425 

Lumber: 

576 ft. B.M. at $12.50 $ 7.20 

4,560 ft. B.M. at $11.50 52.44 

3,500 ft. B. M., not ship lap, at $27.50 96.25 

224 ft. B. M., No. 2 flooring, at $13.50 3.02 

4,500 ft. B. M., No. 2 sis, at $13.75 61.88 

662ft. B.M. at $11.50 7.61 

225 ft. B.M. at $13 2.93 

18,247 ft. B. M. total (av) $12.68 $231.33 

14 M. shingles at $2.75 $ 38.50 

Hardware: 

2 kegs 20d nails at $2 $ 4.00 

2 Itegs lOd nails at $2.05 4.10 

80 lbs. 4d nails at $2.45 1.96 

Locks, hinges, etc 1.08 

Total hardware $ 11.14 



1146 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor: 

21 days foreman at $3 $ 63.00 

25 days carpenter at $2.75 67.25 

12.5 days carpenter at $2.50 31.25 

1 day foreman at $2.14 2.14 

19 days laborer at $1.50 28.50 

Total $192.14 

Summary. 

Materials: Per cent. 

Lumber, 18,247 ft. B. M. at $12.68 $231.33 45.8 

Shingles, 14 M. at $2.75 38.50 7.6 

Hardware 11.14 2.2 

$280.97 55.6 

Labor $192.14 38.1 

Freight 32.00 6.3 

$505.11 100.0 
Cost per 

sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,243 55.6 

Labor 0.167 38.1 

Freight 0.028 6.3 

Total $0,438 100.0 

Example VI. 

Ice House 24 X 48 

Per cent. 

Materials $322.81 62.2 

Labor 164.72 31.8 

Tools 1.69 0.3 

Freight 29.00 5.7 

$518.22 100.0 
Cost per 
sq. ft. Per cent. 

Materials $0,280 62.2 

Labor 0.143 31.8 

Tools 0.001 0.3 

Freight 0.025 5.7 

Total $0,449 100.0 

The labor cost per thousand feet of lumber in place was as fol- 
lows: 

Per.M. 

Example No. I $16.00 

Example No. II 15.60 

Example No. Ill 8.70 

Example No. IV 11.00 

Example No. V 10.70 

Example No. VI 10.00 

Average $12.00 

Cost of 11 Ice Houses. — The following costs relate to work done 
by railway company labor in the Pacific Northwest, carpenters 
receiving $2.50 per 10-hr. day. 



BUILDINGS. 1147 

A 200-ton ice house, 22 x 31 ft., contained 18 M. Tlie average 
cost of five of tliese houses was : 

Totals. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $270 f 0.40 

Labor 177 0.26 

Total $447 $0.76 

Since there were 18 M. in each house, the labor cost was $10 
per M. 

A 1,000-ton ice house, 30 x 86 ft., contained 54 M. The average 
cost of six of these houses was : 

Total. Per sq. ft. 

Materials $ 670 $0.26 

Labor 500 0.20 

Total $1,170 $0.46 

The labor cost was a little more than $9 per M. 

Cost of Car Shops. — Car shops were built in six months (1906) 
by contract for the "Wabash Ry., at Decatur, 111. 

The total cost of the plant was $368,000, including buildings, 
machinery, shop yard, grading and track. 

The cost of the different buildings was as follows : 

Per cu. ft. 
cts. 

Car shop, 88 X.464 ft 2.7 

Blacksmith and machine shop, 80 X 294 3.0 

Storehouse and 2-story office bldg at one end, 

40 X 464 5.5 

Wood mill, 80 X 238 2.9 

Cabinet, upholstering, etc., shop 40 X 350 4.5 

Power house, 60 X 108, brick 3.4 

Lavatory building 5.4 

Dry kiln, reinforced concrete roof, floor, etc 11.1 

Dry lumber sheds 2.3 

Iron, coal and coke sheds 3.5 

Material sheds and racks 5.8 

All the large shop buildings have timber frames with hollow walls 
formed of plaster (1 to 11/2 Ins. thick), on expanded metal lath (24 
gage), secured to 1%-in. round rods stapled to the timbers. The 
shop buildings have maximum window area. 

Cost of Engine Roundhouses. — Mr. R. D. Coombs gives the fol- 
lowing bills of materials and estimated costs of wooden, of steel 
framed, and of reinforced concrete roundhouses. Each stall is 73 
ft. long, 24 ft. wide at one end and 14 ft. wide at the other, giving 
an average width of 19 ft., or an area of 912 sq. ft. 

The estimated cost of one stall of the wooden roundhouse with 
brick walls is : 



1148 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Wooden Roundhouse. 

Roof and Center Columns: 

380ft. B.M. spruce monitor sheathing at $35.00...? 13.30 

320 ft. B. M. pine monitor purlins at $40.00 12.80 

345 ft. B. M. cypress monitor framing at $60.00... 20.70 

1.512 ft. B.M. spruce roof sheathing at $35.00 52.92 

2,238 ft. B. M. pine roof purlins at $40.00 89.52 

675 ft. B. M. pine girders at $40.00 27.00 

601 ft. B. M. pine columns and caps at $40.00 24.04 

65ft. B.M. spruce bridging, etc. at $40.00 2.60 

6,136ft. B.M. total timber $242.88 

70 lbs bolts at $0.03 2.10 

8 pivot windows, incl. painting, at $4.00 32.00 

2 fixed windows, incl. painting, at $2.50 5.00 

2.92 cu. yds. concrete column foundation at $6.00.. 17.52 

1.513 sq. ft. tarred felt roofing at $0.04 60.52 

Smoke-jack 30.00 

4,200 sq. ft. painting at $0.0225 94.50 

700 lbs. cast iron column base at $0.0275 19.25 

Total for roof and center columns $503.77 

Walls: 

12.5 cu. yds. brick wall at $6.50 $ 81.25 

1.8 cu. yds. brick arch at $8.00 14.40 

3,200 lbs. cast iron column at $0.0275 88.00 

7.2 cu. yds. concrete wall foundation at $6.00 43.20 

1.46 cu. yds. concrete post foundation at $6.00 8.76 

2 lifting windows, incl. painting, at $10.00 20.00 

200 ft. B. M. cypress window framing at $60.00.... 12.00 

1 double door, incl. painting 50.00 

Total for walls $317.61 

Grand total for one stall $822.38 

The cost of each stall of a steel framed roundhouse with brick 
walls is estimated as follows: 

Steel Framed Roundhouse. 

Roof and Center Columns: 

380 ft. B. M. spruce monitor sheathing at $35.00...$ 13.30 

320 ft. B. M. pine monitor purlins at $40.00 12.80 

345 ft. B. M. cypress monitor framing at $60.00 20.70 

2,330 ft. B. M. spruce roof sheathing at $35.00 81.55 

135 ft. B. M. spruce nailing strips at $40.00 5.40 

1,550 lbs. steel columns at $0.03 46.50 

7,650 lbs. steel purlins at $0.03 228.00 

1,900 lbs. steel girders at $0.03 57.00 

450 lbs. steel knees, etc. at $0.03 13.50 

100 lbs. bolts and fillers at $0.03 3.00 

8 pivot windows, incl. painting, at $4.00 32.00 

2 fixed windows, incl. painting, at $2.50. . . '. 5.00 

2.26 cu. yds. concrete column found, at $6.00 13.56 

0.14 cu. yds. column found, cap at $10.00 1.40 

1,470 sq. ft. roofing at $0.04 58.80 

■ Smoke jack 30.00 

1,250 sq. ft. painting, steel at $0.01 12.50 

1,900 sq. ft. painting, wood at $0.0225 42.75 

Total for roof and center columns $677.76 

Brick walls (same as for wood roundhouse) 317.61 

Grand total $995.37 



BUILDINGS. 1149 

The cost of one stall of reinforced concrete roundhouse is esti- 
mated thus: 

Reinforced Concrete Roundhouse. 

Roof and Center Columns: 

3,770 lbs. reinforcing rods at $0.03 $113.10 

42.56 cu. yds. concrete superstructure at $15.00 638.88 

2.3 cu. yds. concrete col. bases at $6.00 13.80 

410 ft. B.M. pine, monitor purlins at $40.00 16.40 

420 ft. B. M. spruce, monitor sheathing at $35.00. . . 14.70 

280 ft. B. M. cypress monitor frame at $60.00 16.80 

8 pivot windows at $4.00 32.00 

2 fixed windows at $2.50 5.00 

1,440 sq. ft. roofing at $0.04 57.60 

33 ft. gutter at $0.16 6.08 

18 ft. down spout at $0.30 5.40 

Smolte jack 30.00 

700 sq. ft. painting at $0.0225 15.75 

Total for roof and center columns $965.51 

Walls: 

640 lbs. reinforcing rods at $0.03 $ 19.20 

350 lbs. channels at $0.03 10.50 

2,330 lbs. cast iron column at $0.0275 64.07 

215 sq. ft. expanded metal No. 10 at $0.027 5.80 

6.42 cu. yds. reinforced concrete walls at $15.00 96.30 

7.09 cu. yds. concrete foundations at $6.00 42.54 

0.74 cu. yds. concrete door post at $6.00 4.44 

4 lifting windows at $10.00 40.00 

Double door 40.00 

Total for walls $346.85 

Total for one stall $1,312.36 

Cost of Roundhouse, Coaling Station, Turntable, Etc.* — Mr. A. 
O. Cunningham gives data of which the following is a brief abstract. 
See Engineering-Contracting for full description of the plant with 
drawings. 

In 1907, the Wabash R. R. built a new engine terminal plant at 
Decatur, 111., where 100 engines are cared for daily. 

The roundhouse has a wooden frame resting on concrete founda- 
tions. The walls are of wooden girts to which expanded metal is 
fastened on both sides. The expanded metal on the outer surface is 
plastered on both sides with a mixture of Portland cement, lime and 
sand, and cocoanut fiber. The expanded metal on the inner surface 
is, of course, only coated on one side with the same kind of plaster. 
This construction provides a wall with a hollow space of air between, 
so that dampness cannot penetrate to the inner surface. The air 
space forms a good insulator to keep the building warm in winter 
and cool in summer. The plaster applied to these walls consists of 
1 bbl. of lime mixed with 15 bbls. of sand and 4 lbs. of cocoanut 
fiber, the whole being mixed thoroughly with water and allowed to 
stand for at least two weeks so as to give the lime time enough 
to slack thoroughly. One part of Portland cement is added to three 
parts of this mixture, with enough water added to make a plastic 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 28, 1909. 



1150 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

mortar. This is applied to the expanded metal and allowed to 
harden. This is called a scratch coat. On this coat is plastered 
another layer of mortar, composed of 3 parts of sand to 1 part of 
cement. The plaster on the expanded metal on the outer surface 
of the house is l^i ins. thick, and that on the inner surface 
about % in. thick. This hollow wall extends completely around 
the outside of the house, and from the ground to a height 
of 5 ft. The exterior face of tlie wall is painted with a water- 
proofing compound. On tliis wall is placed a continuous line of 
windows, which extend to the underside of the eaves of the building, 
thus providing plenty of light, which is very essential in such build- 
ings. The cost of a wall of this description is slightly less than 
brick, but a saving is made because brickwork requires foundations 
to support it, while this construction requires only those necessary 
to support the posts. Also lintels are required over openings in 
brickwork, and none are required in this kind of a wall. A further 
advantage in this construction is that a continuous line of windows 
may be used, while with brickwork this is not possible, on account 
of the pilasters. The windows are made so that the two lower 
sashes are hung together with copper chains over pulleys ; thus 
when one is raised the other is lowered ; consequently they are 
counterbalanced without going to the expense of providing box 
frames with counterweights. 

The floor of tlie roundhouse is of concrete, built similarly to a 
sidewalk, and placed on cinders. It is laid out in squares of about 
3 ft. to the side, so if any square gets broken, as it is liable to be 
on account of the heavy pieces handled in a house of this description, 
it can be repaired at small cost. 

The foundations carrying the posts are of concrete and are 
entirely separate from the floor, so if any settle, the floor will not 
be disturbed. 

On the roof sheathing is laid a built-up roof of 5-ply tar and 
crushed limestone. The crushed limestone not only adds weight to 
hold the built-up roof in place, but, being white in color, helps to 
protect the tar from the rays of the sun. The cost of this roof 
covering in place was about the same as that of a prepared roofing. 

The turntable foundations are supported by piling and are of 
concrete. The center or pivot foundation is reinforced with rods 
just above the head of the piles. The circle rail is spiked to short 
ties laid without any fastenings on the circle wall. The pit is paved 
with concrete in a manner similar to that in the house and is drained 
by a 4-in. tile into the catch basin previously mentioned. 

The turntable is of the deck type, 75 ft. long, with a live load 
capacity of 215 tons, and is turned by means of a tractor wheel 
running on the circle rail and operated by electricity. The steel 
work of the turntable was built by the American Bridge Co., and 
installed by employes of t.^e Wabash R. R. Co. 

There are 70 cu. yds. of cinders removed daily from the cinder 
pits by means of an electric gantry crane and clamshell bucket, this 
part of the plant being made by the Case Mfg. Co., of Columbus, 



BUILDINGS. 1151 

Ohio. There are two cinder pits, eacli 150 ft. long, and the crai»« 
travels on a track between them. 

The cost of work is given below in detail ; but, as will be noticed, 
it does not include the value of the old buildings utilized (machine 
shop, blacksmith and boiler shop and sand house), nor the value of 
the old machinery and cost of labor for installing it in the machine 
shop. 

42 stall engine house, incl. turntable foundations. . . .$60,000 

RooHng 2,0U0 

Heating system with pump, well, etc 6.220 

Smoke jacks 2,100 

Door anchors 100 

Drainage and sjwerage 1,050 

Wiring and lights 1,000 

Grading 600 

Engineering in heii 1,000 

Track inside of engine house (value new) 1,675 

Telpher hoist 1.000 

Washout systein anJ motors 6,900 

$ 84,545 

Track between turntable and engine house and la- 
bor laying (value new) $ 1,955 

Turntable pit and foundation $ 3,360 

Turntable 2,4 30 

Circle rail and track on turntable (value new) 685 

Machinery for operating turntable 1,075 

— 7,550 

Cinder pit $ 6,875 

Gantry crane 835 

Machinery for gantry crane 2,950 

Clam-shell bucket (value new) 600 

11,260 

Coaling station (200-ton) 8,775 

Sand house and machinery (value new) 2,000 

50,000-gal. water tank and fixtures (value new) .... 1,100 

Three water cranes with water pipes and fixtures, 

etc. (value new) 1,000 



$118,185 



Note. — Items with the words "value new" written after them indi- 
cate that the material or structure had been formerly used with the 
old facilities. The amount given is the cost if new. 

Cost of a Brick and Steel Building.* — Mr. A. E. Duckham is 
author of the following : 

In the spring of 1907 the writer was called upon to design a 
building for a wire-glass plant in South Greensburg, Pa., for the 
Arbogast-Brock Glass Co. ; the wire-glass to be made under a new 
process of Mr. John Arbogast, who is now superintendent of the 
plant which has been completed. The building, which is 60 x 170 
ft., was started (breaking ground) on May 20 and was finished by 
the author on Aug. 1. This includes the lehr (furnace) foundations. 

The foundations up to the level of the ground are of concrete, 
made of 1 part cement (Portland), 3 parts sand, and 7 parts gravel. 
They were carried down to clay, which on an average was 3 ft. 
below the surface of the ground, which was level. As the ground 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 15, 1908. 



1152 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was marsh-like, the trenches were dug and immediately filled up 
with concrete, mixed on the board and deposited by wheelbarrow 
from a plank runway into the bottom. No water was required in 
the mixing-board for the bottom layers of concrete, owing to the 
trenches being partly filled with surface water. After standing all 
night wo would find the trenches filled with water in the morning; 
this we pumped out with an ordinary hand-pump and trench suction 
hose (about 3 ins. in diameter). At times, it kept one man busy 
pumping all day, owing to the heavy rains to which we were subject, 
which kept the ground saturated. 

Above the level of the ground the building is of brick. The 
roof-trusses are of steel, including the purlins. They rest on the 
pilasters of the wall, and are attached to them by anchor bolts. The 
latter were set loose in the walls ; and, after the erection of the 
steel, were grouted with cement mortar. This was to facilitate the 
erection of the steel-work. 

The roof was covered as fellows : Nailing strips of 2 x 4 in. 
hemlock were bolted (every 3 ft.) to the steel purlins, and upon 
them was nailed 1 % in. matched yellow-pine sheathing ; upon this 
was laid and fastened Carey's Magnesia Flexible Cement Roofing. 

The building was well situated for receiving materials, as it was 
located 118 ft. from the railroad and 75 ft. from a street. The 
cement, sand, gravel and brick were obtained from local dealers 
within a mile of the place ; the first three were hauled by wagon 
(with the exception of one carload of sand), and the last one was 
shipped in by car on a siding opposite the building, and slipped 
in by a chute, the railroad track being about 8 ft. above our 
ground. 

The walls between the pilasters are only 9 ins., but the pilasters 
project 9 ins., thus making an 18-in. pillar or column under each 
truss to carry the load ; the 9-in. wall between acting as a curtain 
wall. The brick wall was laid complete in cement mortar, no lime 
being used. The mortar was composed of 1 part of cement and 
2% parts of clean river sand. When the building was finished, the 
mortar was so hard that it was difficult to break it with a hammer. 
We had some trouble at first with the bricklayers to get them to use 
this mortar without the addition of lime, as it is not easy to spread. 
When set up, however, it lasts for all time. 

The cement, an American Portland, gave us perfect satisfaction. 
This was used throughout — in foundations, brick walls and lehr 
(furnace) foundations. Partly in the lehr foundation we used 
furnace slag from the steel works in place of gravel, being unable 
to obtain the latter in time. It was very satisfactory, but required 
much more water in mixing, which had to be carried from a creek 
about 100 ft. distant. 

The steel half trusses were skidded off the cars onto the ground, 
brought into the building after the erection of the walls through 
one of the large doorways on a "buggy," riveted together to form 
complete trusses, and then raised into position by a gin-pole, 
block and tackle, and crab (the latter being operated by six men). 
Therp were ten steel erectors, and it took them about ten days to 



BUILDINGS. 1153 

erect the steel-work, including trusses, purlins, lateral bracing (in 
tliree bays) and "sag rods." A day or so was lost, iiowever, waiting 
for tools and material. 

On the original plans we figured on regular ventilators or lanterns 
with side louvres of sheet steel extending the whole length of the 
ridge of the roof for ventilation ; but, at the suggestion of tliQ 
owners, to save cost, these were omitted, and four ordinary circular 
ventilators were used along the ridge. As there were many large 
windows along tlie sides of the building, as well as the ends, these 
were considered enougli for tlie purpose. The windows had boxes 
for pulleys and weights. Tliere were two sash to each window. 
The bottom sash weighed 39 lbs. including the glass; this was 
weighed to determine the size of counter-weights. 

The 122 squares of roof-covering took one week to lay, nail, 
cement, and paint. There were five men for three days and two 
men for six days. Two men (experts) came up on the job, and 
three ordinary local mechanics were hired. The extra men cost $20. 

In unloading the brick from the cars on the railroad track, in one 
case it took five hours to unload one box car of 12,000 brick with 
four men (two inside and two outside), with chute; and in another 
it took 3 % hours for five men to unload the same car. 

The building was not only designed by the author as engineer and 
architect, but he also had the contract to erect the building complete 
on the "cost-plus-a-fixed-sum" plan. By this method, the owners 
saved at least $2,000 figuring on the lowest bids, or about 25 per 
cent of the net cost (not taking into account the architects and 
contractors' commission). Tlie building was originally intended to 
be built at Carnegie (about five miles from Pittsburg), but was 
finally built at Greensburg (over 30 miles from Pittsburg), where 
everything, owing to the increased distance from a large city and a 
river (for sand and gravel), cost more. The bids were figured on 
the Carnegie location, consequently the percentage showing the 
amount saved in cost should be increased. 

The average lump bid of the contractors was about $11,500, but 
this was for the Carnegie location. To show the increased cost of 
the same building at Greensburg, we got a bid on the brickwork 
from the same man of $1,955 at Carnegie and $2,400 at Greensburg, 
or an increase of over 22 per cent. Again cement cost $1.75 per 
barrel at Carnegie and $1.85 at Greensburg, while sand cost 7^4 
cts. a bushel at Carnegie and 9 cts. at Greensburg. 

The detailed cost of the building as built was as follows : 

Steel-work $2,730.00 

Lumber, doors and windows, sheathing, etc... 1,283.64 

Roof covering (cement roofing felt) 412.50 

Cement, sand and gravel 938.04 

Brick 738.4.5 

Labor (including common labor, bricklayers 

and carpenters) 2,175.58 

Bolts to fasten nailing strips to purlins 28.88 

Hardware 79.54 

Ventilators (circular) 18.00 

Total $8,404.63 



1154 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the building per cubic foot of space from the ground 
level to the roof was 3^4 cents. The cost per square foot of floor 
space was 82.4 cts. The above does not include the architect's fee 
of 5 per cent or the contractor's fee (of approximately 8 per cent) ; 
this would bring the cost per cubic foot up to 3.6 cts., and the cost 
per square foot up to 93.1 cts. 

The building was filled in to a depth of 4 ft. with dry earth and 
burnt sand (from a foundry nearby). It was originally intended to 
lay a cement floor upon this, or a brick floor (preferably the latter, 
as being easier to take up for the additional lehrs) ; but this was 
abandoned for the present, until the filling would become well 
tamped down by walking and by rolling trucks over it. 

The lehr walls (foundation) were built by the writer under a 
separate contract with the furnace contractors. This work he did 
for $6.50 a cubic yard for the concrete walls (3 ft. under ground 
and 4 ft. above ground) and 50 cts. a yard extra for excavating 
the trenches. At this figure, he made 18 per cent profit. There 
were some advantages and some disadvantages. Under the head 
of advantages were the facts that his foreman, who was overlooking 
the main building, also took charge of this work ; then for casing or 
forms for the concrete we used sheathing and lumber afterwards 
used on the building; under the head of disadvantages were the 
handicaps of having to carry water for the concrete and that we 
were held up by the steel erectors, who got in our way. The car- 
penter work in building the forms for the concrete lehr foundations 
amounted to 10 per cent of the total labor bill. The total labor 
bill amounted to 28 per cent of the total cost, and the materials 
(cement, gravel, slag, and sand) consequently run up to 72 per cent 
of the total cost. Runways were built of inclined planks, and the 
concrete was deposited by wheelbarrows directly into the forms and 
then tamped. The writer believes in rather a wet mix of concrete, 
tamped enough to bring the water to the surface, and make it liver 
like (quaking). 

Inclined runways and scaffolding of 2-in. plank and doubled 2x4- 
in. studs as posts were also used in the main building to supply 
the bricklayers with brick and mortar. Up these, common laborers 
wheeled the material in barrows ; thus doing away with the slow 
and more expensive hod-carriers and ladders. The material used 
in the construction of the runways and scaffolds was afterward 
used in the room, so there was but little waste of lumber. 

The plans, with the exception of the details, were made on %-in. 
scale, instead of the usual %-in. scale. This smaller scale made 
It more convenient in the field, and not so cumbersome, especially 
when there was a strong wind. The writer believes that as small 
a scale as possible should be used, and all details should be made 
on a separate sheet on say 1-in. or li^-in. scale. Figures in all 
cases should be given instead of depending on the scale. This would 
remove all doubt and controversy. In fact we should follow the 
procedure of the bridge drafting room. 



BUILDINGS. 1155 

In designing the building, no attempt was made at ornamentation, 
as the owners wanted the building to cost as little as possible ; but 
the writer saw to it that everything was strong and efficient. 

The brickwork was laid in English Bond, the strongest kind ; and 
the writer was surprised to flind how few of the so-called practical 
bricklayers knew what it was or how to lay it. Most of them 
thought that it was Flemish bond — or alternate headers and 
stretchers — instead of alternate laj'ers of headers and stretchers, 
which is the English Bond. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Buildings. — The following is a very 
brief abstract of a five-page article by Mr. Leonard C Wason, 
President Aberthaw Construction Co., in Engineering-Gontracting, 
Jan. 13, 1909. [The labor unit costs are rather high. The work 
was done in New England.] 

It is well known that the cost of materials and labor in different 
parts of the country vary somewhat. Having the unit items all 
sub-divided into their elementary parts, it is an easy matter after 
determining the cost of materials in any locality to make the exact 
corrections to the re.^-ilts obtained on a previous job. Similarly, 
when a difference in tne rate per hour for wages is known, if the 
same efficiency is obtained from the men it is very easy to make a 
correction, or if the efficiency varies, judgment must be applied to 
determine the correct rate to use. It has been the writer's experi- 
ence that although the rate of wages and cost of materials vary- 
somewhat in different parts of the country, the variations frequently 
offset one another so nearly that the sum total of the unit cost 
obtained in one place may be used in another, very seldom needing 
correction. For instance, within one month, after careful investiga- 
tion, a bid was made up on a structure at San Juan, Porto Rico, 
using the same unit costs as for a building in Boston. In the report 
that is given, the costs relate to strictly first class material and 
workmanship in every case, as it has been the endeavor of the 
writer to establish and maintain one standard for all work. In 
general I would say that the standard mixture for all floors has 
been either 1-3-6, or 1-2-4 if the floor is subjected to extremely 
heavy loads and service. "Walls are mixed 1-3-6 and columns 
usually 1-2-4 ; in some cases where they are very heavily loaded a 
richer mixture is used. As these mixtures are common to nearly all 
construction the costs here given may be applied with little danger 
of error from neglecting the mixture on any work. Of course it can 
readily be understood that in the large number of jobs which have 
entered into the averages given, there being as many as 18 in the 
case of beam, floors, different methods of conducting the work have 
been used and many different foremen. Therefore, while the general 
average is doubtless safe for any work of an average character, some 
latitude may be allowed the judgment in determining whether any 
specific case is likely to be difficult, easy or average. The writer 
has found quite a difference, for instance, in cost of identical work 
handled by different foremen, due to the personal equation of their 
painstaking supervision and ability. 



1156 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Columns. — The following costs are the average of 9 
buildings : 

Per cu. ft. 
of concrete. 

Cement $0,085 

Sand and stone 0.049 

Labor on concrete 0.096 

General labor 0.027 

Team and miscellaneous 0.021 

Plant 0.023 

Total, exclusive of steel and of forms $0,301 

The cost of forms iier square foot of concrete surface encased 
was as follows: 

Per sq. ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,036 

Nails and wire 0.001 

Carpenter labor 0.082 

Total $0,130 

This includes all necessary posts and staging, also wheelbarrow 
runs for placing the concrete. 

Cost of Beam Floors. — The average cost for 18 buildings was: 

Per. cu. ft. 

of concrete. 

Cement $0,106 

Sand and stone 0.063 

Labor on concrete 0.111 

General labor • 0.020 

Team and miscellaneous 0.025 

Plant 0.024 

Total, exclusive of steel and of forms $0,354 

The cost of forms per square foot of concrete surface covered 
was: 

Per sq. ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,045 

Nails and wire 0.002 

Carpenter labor 0.070 

Total $0,116 

Cost of Flat Slab Floors. — The average cost of 3 buildings was : 

' Per cu. ft. 
of concrete. 

Cement $0,096 

Sand and cement 0.070 

Labor on concrete 0.097 

General labor 0.009 

Team and miscellaneous 0.019 

Plant 0.024 

Total, exclusive of forms $0,315 



BUILDINGS. 1157 

The cost of forms was: 

Per sq. f t. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,038 

Nails and wire 0.002 

Carpenter labor 0.071 

Total $0,111 

Cost of Concrete Slabs Between Steel Beams. — The average cost 
for 13 buildings was: 

Per cu. ft. 
concrete. ' 

Cement $0,128 

Sand and stone 0.068 

Labor on concrete 0.102 

General labor 0.019 

Team and miscellaneous 0.024 

Plant 0.017 

Total, exclusive of steel and of forms $0,359 

The cost of forms was: 

Per sq. ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,032 

Nails and wire 0.002 

Carpenter labor 0.061 

Total $0,095 

Cost of Walls. — The average cost of concrete walls (above grade) 
for 17 buildings was: 

Per cu. ft. 
concrete. 

Cement $0,073 

Sand and stone 0.076 

Labor on concrete 0.090 

General labor 0.016 

Team and miscellaneous 0.025 

Plant 0.019 

Total, exclusive of steel and of forms $0,301 

The cost of forms was : 

Per sq. ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,036 

Nails and wire 0.002 

Carpenter labor 0.085 

Total $0,128 

Cost of Foundation Walls. — The average cost for 14 buildings was: 

Per cu. ft. 
concrete. 

Cement $0,080 

Sand and stone 0.062 

Labor on concrete 0.076 

General labor 0.015 

Team and miscellaneous 0.019 

Plant 0.017 

Total, exclusive of forms $0,269 



1158 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of forms was : 

Per sq ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,033 

Nails and wire 0.002 

Carpenter labor 0.068 

Total $0,103 

Cost of Footing and Mass Foundations. — The average cost for 10 
buildings was : 

Per cu. ft. 

concrete. 

Cement $0,071 

Sand and stone 0.077 

Labor on concrete 0.045 

General labor 0.007 

Team and miscellaneous 0.007 

Plant 0.021 

Total, exclusive of forms $0,229 

The cost of forms was : 

Per sq. ft. 

Lumber at $22 per M $0,034 

Nails 0,002 

Carpenter labor 0.057 

Total $0,093 

Cost of Labor on Reinforcing Steel. — Table XI omits entirely the 
first cost of the material. After it is received at the site of the 
work in the shape sold by the manufacturer, these prices cover the 
cost of fabricating into units for columns or beams, bending the 
stirrups, placing and all incidentals whatsoever prior to the actual 
embedding in concrete. In the case of the highest cost, a coal 
pocket, there was very limited storage space, 1%-in. bars had to be 
bent diagonally so as to pass over the top of the support at columns, 
and there were numerous stirrups, all of which had to be made by 
hand. The job was too small to justify any mechanical arrangement 
for bending or for handling material. The next highest, office build- 
ing, Portland, Me., there was a sufficient amount to require proper 
machinery. The hoops for columns were all welded. The vertical 
bars were all wired inside of these hoops. There was a mushroom 
head of bent and circular bars wired together at the top and great 
numbers of long bars of small section spread in all directions over 
the floor. The lowest price, filter at Lawrence, was made entirely 
of straight bars placed loose, the only expense being cutting them 
in a hand shear to length and placing them. 



BUILDINGS. 



1159 



Table XI. — Steel. 

Weight. 
Location. Tons. 

Office building, Portland, Me 3241/2 

Fire station, Weston, Mass 8 1/^ 

Mill, Ciielsea, Mass 65^4 

Coal bins, Dalton, Mass 8 1/^ 

Dam, Auburn, Me 55 

Filter, Warren, R. 1 19 

Tank, Lincoln, Me 8 1^ 

Tar well, Springfield 15% 

Monument, Provincetown 24^! 

Mill, Greenfield 92% 

Machine shop, Milton, Mass 20^ 

Coal pocket, Lawrence, Mass 28 

Mill, Southbridge 53% 

Mill, S. Windham, Me 293 

Mill, Attleboro, Mass 49% 

Garage, Newton, Mass 20 

Mill, Southbridge, Mass 30 

Coal pocket, Hartford, Conn 195 

Filter, Lawrence, Mass 44% 

Warehouse, Portland, Me 62 

Standpipe, Attleboro, Mass 199% 

Highest 

Lowest 

Average of 21 



Cost of Cost per 



handling. 

$5,115.32 

40.26 

548.81 

61.75 

506.76 

102.59 

69.38 

59.21 

136.84 

1,232.01 

177.16 

461.16 

142.76 

3,079.60 

286.02 

86.55 

100.03 

2,316.60 

112.84 

462.99 

1,547.00 



ton. 
$15.76 
4.74 
8.41 
7.26 
9.18 
5.40 
8.16 
3.82 
5.58 

10.20 
8.75 

16.47 
2.67 

10.51 
5.78 
4.33 
3.34 

11.88 
2.54 
7.47 
7.75 

16.47 
2.54 
8.52 



Cost of Reinforced Concrete Building Construction.* — Mr. T. 

Herbert Files is author of the following : 

The costs here given are those of labor only, as labor costs are 
usually the unknown ones in estimating, the material costs being 
easily obtained from the schedule of quantities and the market 
prices. 

These costs are taken from different work which the writer has 
been on and are known to be correct for that kind of work. They 
are not obtained from rough figures after the work was finished, but 
from carefully kept cost records. All of the costs are from jobs 
consisting of a number of buildings. 

The cost analysis was kept in the following manner. Each job 
had a cost keeper whose only duties were those of keeping the 
average weekly cost of the different work of construction. The 
distribution of the time was taken either from foreman's reports or 
from time cards. Most of the costs given in this article are obtained 
by means of time cards. 

Time cards are rather difficult to get from the ordinary labor 
employed on construction work, but this difficulty was overcome by 
having the foreman of the labor gangs make out cards for each man 
in his crew. The carpenters and better class of laborers made out 
their own cards. Elach man had to pass in a time card as he checked 
out at the timekeeper's window at night. In this way the record of 
each man's time and how it was spent, was passed into the office 
each night, and no special men were lost, as usually happens when 
the distribution is taken from foremen's cards. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 7, 1909. 



1160 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost keeper would go over these cards the next day and 
enter the totals of the labor of each class of work on the cost 
keeping sheets. The record was divided into different accounts, 
one for each division of the work, such as excavation, concreting, 
forms, floor finish, steel, etc. All time was charged against its 
proper account in such a way as to show the date, kind of work, 
total time, and wage rate, as shown by the accompanying form. 

The total number of hours in the analysis was checked up each 
day with the total number of hours on the timekeeper's sheets. 
At the end of each week the total cost of each kind of work for 
the week and the unit cost were figured up and a summary made of 
the totals of the different accounts. This total was then compared 
with the pay-roll. If everything has been carried through correctly, 
the two totals should check within a few dollars. They will not 
check exactly, as average wage rates are used in the cost keeping. 

Wages. — As cost figures do not mean much unless the rates of 
wages are known, the average rates paid will be given. They are 
as follows: 

Common labor, as used in excavating, unloading materials, and 
unskilled work, 17% cts. per hour; foreman, 30 cts. ; concrete labor, 
19 cts. per hour; foreman, 40 cts.; steel labor, 25 cts. per hour; 
foreman, 30 cts. ; form labor, used for stripping and rough carpenter 
work, 30 cts. ; carpenters 41 cts. per hour, and foreman, 50 cts. 

Cost of Unloading Materials. — Cement is usually unloaded by 
laborers carrying the bags on their shoulders from the car, or by 
wheeling in wheelbarrows. If a car can be unloaded direct from the 
car into the storage shed, with very little carrying, six men can 
unload 600 bags equivalent to 150 bbls., in 3 hours, at a unit cost of 
2 cts. per bbl. If unloaded by wheelbarrows with a distance of 100 
ft., it will cost 4 cts. per bbl., but may run up to 5 cts. or 6 cts. if 
the men are not handled in the proper manner. 

Sand and gravel will cost on an average of 8 cts. per cu. yd. for 
unloading, laborers shoveling it from the car to the storage pile 
nearby. The cost varies from 6 to 10 cts., depending upon con- 
ditions. 

Reinforcing steel bars can be unloaded at a cost varying from 
35 cts. to $3.00 per ton, depending upon the carrying distance. Here 
are some actual costs: 

Unloading % in. x 20 ft. twisted steel, from box cars and piling 
it on ground beside car 32 cts. per ton. 

Unloading from gondola cars, carrying 300 ft. and piling on racks 
in steel shed, $3.00 per ton. 

The imloading of lumber differs considerably in cost, same 
depending upon the distance carried and the size of the sticks. It 
was found, however, from our records that it cost from 70 cts. to 
$1.00 per 1,000 ft. B. M. to unload, haul 200 ft. and pile, form 
sheathing. 

Form Work. — The cost of form work is the most difficult cost 
to get in reinforced concrete construction. This is especially so in 
regard to the making of forms, as the work on construction jobs is 
usually done in such a manner that it is hard to distribute the costs 



BUILDINGS. 1161 

properly and have the correct amount of work done, reported. The 
cost work here referred to was not started in the best way to give 
good costs of the making of forms and for that reason tlie costs 
of making forms will not be as complete as might be. Tlie unit costs 
were figured on tlie number of square feet of form surface in contact 
with the concrete. 

The following are some of the labor costs of forms made in a field 
carpenter shop, which consisted of two saw machines, a planing 
and a boring machine, with a shop foreman in charge. 

Per sq. ft. 
of surface. 

Columns cts. 

Girders and beams 5 cts. 

Floor panels 2 cts. 

Wall panels 3 cts. 

The cost of setting forms for the floors, which included time 
spent in the moving of the form.s from one floor to another, erecting 
and setting the forms of columns, beams, and floor panels and the 
falsework supporting them, was figured per sq. ft. of floor surface. 
The costs of different floor set-ups varied, because the men at first 
were unskilled and not well organized. From 1,300 to 1,800 sq. ft. 
of floor were set up in a day. These costs ranged from 13 cts. per 
sq. ft. for the first set-up to 4.7 cts. for the roof set-up, making an 
average of 8.4 cts. per sq. ft. 

The stripping of the floor forms cost from 2.5 cts. to 1.5 cts. per 
sq. ft., or an average of 1.9 cts. per sq. ft. of floor. This makes 
the cost of setting up and stripping of forms for floors average 10.3 
cts. per sq. ft. of floor. 

The curtain walls, between columns, were put in place after the 
floors and cost from 6 to 10 cts. per sq. ft. of form surface for 
setting up, or an average of 8 cts. The cost of stripping these was 
% ct. per sq. ft. Partition walls and outside plain walls cost from 
4 to 8 cts. per sq. ft. of form surface or an average of 5 ct& for 
setting and % ct. per sq. ft. for stripping. 

Reinforcing Steel. — The steel used for reinforcing was twisted 
rods. The column cages, beam and girder reinforcements were 
made up into units in the steel yard. From there they were carried 
and hoisted to the different floors, as they were made ready for 
concreting, and were put in place by the steel gang before con- 
creting. The floor steel was placed as the floor was concreted. 

The cost of the steel work is divided as follows: 

Per ton. 

Unloading $ 2.00 

Making up steel 5.50 

Carrying 1.75 

Placing 1.00 

Total $10.25 

Concreting. — The labor costs in concreting vary a great deal with 
the plant and method of conveying. On this work, the concrete 
was machine mixed, the materials being run into storage hoppers 



1162 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

over the mixer, by a self dumping car, on an inclined track, from 
the material pile, where it was loaded by hand. The concrete after 
being mixed, was raised to the proper floor by a hoist, which dumped 
automatically into a hopper. Prom this hopper the concrete was 
wheeled to the desired location by means of concrete carts. The 
greatest wheeling distance was 350 ft. and the least 50 ft., making 
the average distance 200 ft. The costs of concreting columns and 
floors ranged from 2.8 cts. to 4.2 cts. per cu. ft., or an average cost 
of 3.5 cts. per cu. ft. 

In concreting footings, the material was moved to the mixer by 
means of wheelbarrows instead of self dumping cars, and wheeled 
to the desired location over plank runs. Under these conditions the 
cost of concreting was 5 cts., with the carrying distance the same 
as for the floors. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Factory.* — Mr. D. L. C. Raymond 

gives the following relative to a building erected in 1907 at Walker- 
ville, Ontario. It is a two story factory, 100 x 100 ft., with 18 ft. 
clearance on the first floor and 12 ft. on the second. It is skeleton 
type of construction, 16 x 16 ft. floor panels, and 6-in. curtain walls. 
Steel rods were used for reinforcement with wire mesh in the slabs. 
A 1 :2 :4 mixture was used, the mortar finish on the floors being 1 :2. 

The columns and beam forms were 2-in. dressed pine, supported 
by 4 X 4 stuff. The floor forms were 1 in. laid on 2 x 4 pieces spaced 
18 ins. 

The men were all green at the work. There were 847 cu. yds. of 
concrete, the cost of which was as follows : 

Materials: Total. Per cu. yd. 

Cement at $2.05 per bbl % 3,314 $ 3.91 

Sand and gravel at $1.25 per cu. yd 1,054 1.25 

Reinforcement at $55 per ton 2,314 2.73 

Lumber for forms at $27 per M 4,944 5.84 

Nails 107 0.13 

Total materials $11,733 $13.86 

Labor: 

Building runs, mixing and hoisting concrete. $ 872 $ 1.03 

Placing and tamping concrete 562 0.66 

Placing reinforcement 221 0.26 

Stripping and cleaning forms, etc 380 0.45 

Carpenters building and setting forms 2,010 2.38 

Superintendence 714 0.84 

Tools and depreciation of plant 338 0.40 

Total labor $ 5,097 $ 6.02 

Grand total 16,830 19.88 

It will be noted that no salvage is allowed for the lumber, and 
that 216 ft. B. M. were used per cu. yd. of concrete. The carpenter 
work on the lumber cost $11 per M. The cost of stripping lumber 
and cleaning up amounted to a little more than $2 per M. 

There were 100 lbs. of . reinforcement per cu. yd., and the labor 
of placing it was only a trifle more than % ct. per lb. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 29, 1908. 



BUILDINGS. 1163 

This building contained about 320,000 cu. ft. of space. Hence tlie 
cost of the concrete alone was 514 cts. per cu. ft., which is a low 
cost. The cost per square foot of floor area (2 stories) was 84 cts., 
not including windows, etc. 

Cost of a House of Separately Molded Concrete Members.* — The 
construction of a kiln house of separately molded reinforced concrete 
columns, girders and slabs for the Edison Portland Cement Works 
at New Village, N. J., was described in our issue of Oct. 2, 1907. 
(See also "Concrete Construction," by Gillette and Hill.) This 
article gave for the first time costs of molding and erecting sepa- 
rately molded concrete structural members for building work. Since 
it was published the same company has built a cement storage 
house for which the columns, girders and roof slabs were separately 
molded and erected. In a paper by Mr. W. H. Mason, superintendent 
Edison Portland Cement Works, some of tlie costs of this later 
work were given. We give these costs in different form and more 
fully analyzed in the following paragraphs. 

The storage house is 144 x 360 ft., in plan witli a clear height 
of 30 ft. The exterior walls are of retaining wall section, they 
having to take the thrust of the stored cement, and they were built 
in place. Between walls are five longitudinal rows of columns ; the 
rows are spaced 24 ft. apart and the columns in each row are 12 ft. 
apart. Transverse roof girders 12 ft. apart cap the columns and 
carry a roof of 6 x 12 ft. x 4-in. slabs. For column footings 
5 X 5 X 5-ft. plain concrete cubes with 20-in. square sockets molded 
in their tops were used. 

Materials and Labor. — The concrete used was a 1 :6 mixture, using 
crushed run stone, all of which would pass a %-in. screen. The 
Edison company furnished both cement and stone, charging up the 
cement at $1 per barrel and the stone at 60 cts. per cu. yd. The 
lumber, of which 7,000 ft. B. M., were used, cost $27 per thousand. 
The reinforcing steel, of which 201,400 lbs. were used, cost delivered 
2.03 cts. per pound. A force of 23 men was employed ; eleven of 
them were classed as carpenters at an average wage of 24 cts. per 
hour and 12 as laborers at an average wage of 15 cts. per hour. 

Casting Floor and Plant. — The casting floor on which the columns, 
girders and slabs were molded, was located some half a mile from 
the building. A % cu. yd. Ransome mixer was set up under the mill 
conveyor which carries crushed cement rock for cement making to 
the stock house and from this conveyor the stone was chuted directly 
into the mixer stock bins as wanted. The mixer discharged directly 
into 3 cu. yd., cars which ran out on a track between casting floors 
on each side. The casting floors consisted of trowel finished con- 
crete slabs 4 or 5 ins. thick laid on a 4-in. sub-base of compacted 
cinders. These casting floors cost, Mr. Mason states, 4 cts. per 
square foot. So far as possible, members were cast side by side and 
in tiers so as to reduce floor siiace and form work. The concrete 
cars discharged by spout directly into the molds, the mixture being 
made wet enough to flow easily. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 18, 1908. 



1164 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Molding Columns. — There were 141 columns, having 18 x 18-in. 
shafts 32 ft. long with two triangular braclcets at the top for girder 
seats, and each column contained very closely 2.8 cu. yds. of 
concrete and 275 lbs. of reinforcement or closely 98 lbs. of steel 
per cubic yard of concrete. These quantities are computed from 
drawings. The construction of the forms for molding the columns 
is shown by Pig. 7. Each complete form contained about 535 ft. 
B. M. of lumber and seven were used for molding 141 columns and 
were still in good condition after the work. The seven molds con- 
tained about 3,745 ft. B. M. of lumber and molded 141 X 2.8 = 395 



J 3/4^^-gg^v 



f Cut frorr)Z"i4 




r 



Fig. 7. 



cu. yds. of concrete, so that the amount of form lumber used per 
cubic yard of concrete molded was about 9.7 ft. B. M. The costs 
of molding per column and per cubic yard were as follows : 

Item. Per col. Per cu. yd. 

Steel reinforcement % 7.57 $2.70 

Concrete materials 5.48 1.96 

Labor, carpenters 4.27 1.52 

Labor, concrete and steel 1.95 0.70 

Total cost $19.27 $6.88 

Molding Girders. — There were 187 girders, each 12 x 26 ins. x 24 
ft. and each containing 1.9 cu. yds. of concrete and about 320 lbs. of 
steel or about 168 lbs. per cubic yard of concrete. A complete 
girder form is shown by Fig. 8. A complete form contained ap- 
proximately 370 ft. B. M. of lumber and five forms, or 1,850 ft. 
B. M., were used for molding 187 girders, or about 5.2 ft. B. M. 
per cu. yd. of concrete in girders. It should be noted that many of 
the girders were molded between other girders without using any 



BUILDINGS. 



1165 



wooden forms at all. The average cost of molding a girder complete 

was as follows : 

Item. Per girder. Per cu. yd. 

Steel $ 5.53 $2.91 

Concrete material 3.51 1.90 

Carpenter labor 2.26 1.18 

Labor, mixing, placing, etc 1.34 0.70 

Totals $12.64 .$6.69 




24' 6 



4-"Cir7a0r5 



EncfrCCTTtr 

Fig. 8. 

Molding Roof Slals. — The roof slabs were 6 x 12 ft. x 4 ins. 
and each contained 0.88 cu. yds. of concrete and about 83 lbs. of 
reinforcing steel or about 95 lbs. of steel per cubic yard of concrete. 
The slabs were molded in tiers, using the form shown by Fig. 9, 
made 8 ins. deep so as to be clamped onto each slab in molding the 
slab above. There are about 52 ft. B. M. in a slab form, as 28 forms 
molded 720 slabs, about 2% ft. B. M. of form lumber were required 



^ 












EjK^-contr 




HUi ij*,^ air 



-- 3Z'0"- 



Fig. 9. 



per cubic yard of concrete. The cost of molding roof slabs was as 

follows : 

Item. Per slab. Per cu. yd. 

Steel $1-69 $1.92 

Concrete material 1.85 

Carpenter labor 0.*423 

Labor 0-405 



2.10 
0.48 
0.46 



Totals $4.36? 



$4.96 



1166 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Bach slab covered 6 x 12 = 72 SQ. ft. of roof, so that the cost 
of moldmg was 6.06 cts. per sq. ft. or $6.06 per 100 sq. ft. 

In casting columns, girders and slabs side by side and in tiers 
in contact the fresh concrete was prevented from adhering to the 
member already molded by coating the contact surface of the 
molded member with two coats of ordinary whitewash. This method 
proved far superior to using paper, as had been done in previous 
work. The paper stuck to the concrete so fast that it was difficult 
to remove it. It should be noted also that in the preceding cost 
figures the cost of form lumber is apparently included in "carpenter 
labor." There was 7,000 ft. B. M. of form lumber at $27 per M. ft. 
required for molding 1,048 members, or about 1,384 cu. yds. of 
concrete. The cost of form lumber per cubic yard of concrete was, 
therefore, $189 -^ 1,384 = 13.65 cts. 

The labor cost of erecting the molded concrete members with a 
Browning locomotive crane was as follows: 

Per ou. yd. 

Columns $2.63 

Girders 1.57 

Roof slabs 1.75 

The details of this cost of erection and ihe methods are given in 
'Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction." 

Comparative Cost of Constructing Two Identical Reinforced Con- 
crete Buildings — One of Separately Molded Members and One of 
Members Molded in Place.* — Mr. Mason D. Pratt is author of the 
following : 

In 1904 the Central Pennsylvania Traction Co. of Harrisburg, Pa., 
built a car barn and a repair shop of reinforced concrete, probably 
the first buildings in this country built entirely of this material for 
this purpose. The buildings are one story in height and were con- 
structed in the usual manner by erecting wooden forms and casting 
all concrete work in place. The same company has just completed 
a second barn adjacent to the one above described of the same 
dimensions as the first barn, viz. : 75 ft. wide by 360 ft. long. The 
last barn is also of reinforced concrete, but owing to conditions 
which seemed favorable for the purpose, an entirely different mode 
of construction was followed. All of the members for that portion 
of the building above the foundation and floors, including columns, 
beams, wall and roof slabs, were separately molded on the ground 
and afterwards erected by means of a traveling stiff -leg derrick. 
This method of construction proved economical and owing to the 
close similarity of the two buildings in size and gener&l design it is 
possible to make an accurate comparison of the costs. In describing 
the two buildings, Barn A refers to the original building and Barn B 
the last one erected. 

Barn A was built on ground which was from 2 to 10 ft. below the 
floor level. The column footings were placed on solid ground 6 to 
12 ins. below the sod and carried up within 1 ft. of floor level, the 
ground being filled in after the building was under roof. In general 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 19, 1910. 



BUILDINGS. 1167 

plan the building had three rows of non-reinforced hexagonal col- 
umns spaced 15 ft. centers longitudinally and 37 ft. centers trans- 
versely. The roof consisted of transverse beams, resting on the 
columns, longitudinal purlins and a 3-in. slab cast in place, the col- 
umns being connected longitudinally with beams 6 ins. thick and 2 
ft. deep. After the forms were removed from tliis skeleton the three 
longitudinal walls were filled in place. Provision was made for 
future e.Ktension laterally by casting brackets in the columns to 
support roof girders for an adjacent bay. The barn also had a wing 
16 ft. wide and 90 ft. long, containing barn foreman's office, lockers 
and lavatory for the use of motormen, conductors and barn men. 

Concrete for this building was mixed in a rotary batch mixer, into 
which the aggregate was dumped directly from wheelbarrows, and 
the concrete distributed from the mixer to the job in wlieelbarrows 
by means of runs and an elevator operated by a power hoist. 

Barn B was built entirely independent from Barn A, the first wall 
being placed 37 ft. beyond the wall of Barn A, thus permitting the 
increase of the plant by one addition bay in the future by simply 
adding a roof between tlie two buildings. Column spacing was made 
the same as Barn A, but tlie columns were square. In order to 
get roof slabs of a size wliicli could be conveniently handled, the 
roof beams were spaced 10 ft. centers and alternated in the two 
bays. Thus on the outer walls a roof beam came at every other 
column, while on the center wall each column carried a beam and a 
longitudinal beam between columns supported the ends of two roof 
beams. The roof proper consisted of slabs, 3% ins. thick, 10 ft. 
long and 6 ft. and 7 ft. wide, which were laid directly on the roof 
beams. Two slabs at the center of every alternate 10 ft. bay were 
omitted to allow placing skylights. The walls were 6 ins. thick, as 
in the case of Barn A, but were made up of slabs of various sizes. 
These slabs were all tongued and grooved, as were also the columns. 
Three-eighths of an inch was allowed for all joints, the horizontal 
joints being mortared as the work was laid up and the vertical joints 
filled and pointed after everything was in place. A small percentage 
of reinforcement was placed in all slabs as an insurance against 
breakage in handling. 

The concrete for this building was mixed in the same mixer used 
on Barn A, located at a central point, the materials being moved in 
wheelbarrows as before. 

Barn A had about 290 ft. of open pits under each track, 60 ft. 
of the front end of each bay being paved with granolithic floor and 
used as space for washing cars. Barn B had the same arrangement 
in one bay, the other bay, which was intended for storage purposes 
only, had granolithic floor from end to end. The ground on which 
Barn B was 'built had been filled in with various materials, mostly 
cinder from a' nearby steel plant, and excavations had to be made 
for all foundations. In the figures given below, all labor for 
excavation in bbth buildings is omitted. In Barn B each column 
had a separate • fodting as in Barn A, which, however, was carried 
to a point 15 ins. above floor level, and provided with a pocket to 



1168 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

receive the column. A layer of sand was put in each pocket to 
give the column good bearing and to adjust height. A beam 12 ins. 
wide and 2 ft. deep connected these footings, being cast at the same 
time with the footings. 

The tracks were laid in the storage bay and the granolithic floor 
-east in place at the time of starting excavations for the foundations, 
and as soon as the floor was in place the casting of beams, columns 
and slabs began. The beams and columns were nested by casting 
the alternate pieces a suitable distance apart, and after removing 
the forms these became the forms for the intermediate pieces. The 
slabs were cast in piles, the ends being offset to enable rapid hand- 
ling. The pieces were separated by nreans of 40-lb. waxed manila 
paper. No difficulty whatever was experienced during the erection in 
separating. In some instances soap was used, but the results were 
not as satisfactory anli the cost was higher than with the paper. 
The surface of the pieces formed by paper separation showed a 
close, smooth, dull surface, except for the wrinkles formed by 
the paper, which was not heavy enough to prevent wrinkling. The 
paper was also responsible for other defects in the surface finish, 
owing to the mortar running in between joints where the paper 
overlapped and forming thin slivers. The paper was easily removed 
with water from a 1-in. hose, with nozzle % in. The top surfaces 
of all pieces, of course, were troweled. This gave a rather variegated 
wall surface to the structure, but a coat of cement wash using a thin 
mixture of about equal parts of cement and limestone dust applied 
with whitewash brushes produced a fairly uniform appearance. 
This method of construction involved the use of slightly more 
reinforcing steel and a larger yardage of concrete, but the saving 
in forms, lumber and carpenter work was more than sufficient to pay 
for this difference and the additional cost of derrick and erection 
labor. 

The number of loose pieces required was 1,400. These were com- 
pletely erected in 33 working days, with a loss of only three slabs 
from breakage. 

The derrick used was a standard stiff-leg with 60-ft. boom and 
38-ft. mast, mounted on a truck so that it could be moved around 
the work. Power was furnished by a regular street railway motor 
through a gear bolted to the flywheel on the driving shaft of a 
two-drum hoist, the motor being equipped with standard street 
railway controller and suitable resistance coils. A traction com- 
pany motorman operated the hoist and a rigger crew placed the 
material. The heaviest pieces handled were the roof beams, which 
weighed 7% to 8 tons. A number of special devices were used to 
handle the various pieces. For the heavy beams a loop was formed 
at the quarter points by bending a reinforcing rod, bringing it flush 
With the top of the beam and scooping out a portion of the concrete 
while green, and a special hook used to engage this loop. These 
hooks entered the slotted ends of a steel spreader. The rig was 
thus adjustable for variable spacing of the loops and for bala,ncing. 
The slabs were handled by means of slings, holes being formed in 



BLILDIXGS. 116& 

Table XII. — Cost of Concrete in Separately Molded Concretb 

Car Barn. 
Barn B. 
Foundations and Floors, 710 cu. yds. : 

Materials: Total. Per cu.yd. 

Stone at $1.25 cu. yd $ 856.00 $ 1.20 

Sand at $1.30 cu. yd 432.00 .61 

Cement at $1.15 bbl 1,082.50 1.53 

Steel 120.00 .17 

Lumber 633.00 .89 

Tools 100.00 .14 

Total $ 3,223.50 $ 4.54 

Labor: 

Placing reinforcement % 19.00 $ 0.03 

Forms 771.00 1.09 

Concreting- 1,015.00 1.43 

Total $ 1,805.00 $ 2.55 

Total materials and labor $ 5,028.50 $ 7.09 

Building above Foundations, 948 cu. yds. : 

Material: 

Stone. at $1.28 cu. yd $ 1,085.00 $ 1.16 

Sand at $1.30 cu. yd 546.00 .58 

Cement at $1.15 bbl 1,735.00 1.86 

Steel 1,755.00 1.87 

Tools 140.00 .24 

Lumber 220.00 .15 

Total $ 5,481.00 $ 5.86 

Lahor: 

Forms $ 818.00 $ 0.87 

Bending and placing reinforcement 360.00 .39 

Concreting 1,152.00 1.23 

Erection 1,776.00 1.89 

Pointing and cement wash 617.00 .66 

Total $4,723.00 $5.04 

Total labor and materials $10,204.00 $10.90 

Totals, 1,648 cu. yds 15,232.50 9.245 

Area covered by building, 360 X 75 ft. = 27,000 sq. ft. 

Cost of foundations and floors 18.5 cts. per sq. ft. 

Cost of building 38.0 cts. per sq. ft. 

Total 56.5 cts. per sq. ft. 



1170 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table XIII. — Comparison of Cost Between Car Barns, Separately 
Molded and Cast in Place. 

(Average including Foundations and Superstructure.) 

Per cu. yd. 

Barn B. 
Barn A. (Separately 

Materials : ( Cast in place. ) molded pieces. ) 

Stone, sand and cement $ 3.480 $3,480 

Steel reinforcement 915 1.140 

Lumber 1.335 .480 

Paper .040 

Tools, wheelbarrows, etc 145 .145 

Total $5,875 $5,285 

Labor: 

Carpenters $ 3.250 $0,965 ' 

Bending and placing steel 095 .230 

Concreting 2.210 1.685 

Erection 1.080 

Total $ 5.555 $3,960 

Total cost per cu. yd $11,430 $9,245 

9.245 

Dif. in favor Barn B $ 2.185 

the slabs with a short section of %-in. gas pipe for receiving bolts. 
In setting up tlie side walls, these holes were used to fasten 3 x 4-in. 
sticks on each side of the three wall slabs of each bay, thus keeping 
them in line, and by means of props, in a vertical position until 
erection had proceeded far enougli to remove them. 

Table XII gives complete detailed cost of all tlie concrete work in 
Barn B. 

Table XIII is a comparison of the average costs of all the con- 
crete work on Barns A and B, the figures covering all charges 
except general supervision. The concrete aggregate is put at same 
figure in each to eliminate any difference in unit cost of these 
materials. The mix was practically the same in each, the largest 
percentage being 1 :2 :4. Unit costs for labor were the same in 
both cases, viz. : ordinary labor, $1.25 per day, and carpenters, $2.50 
per day. 

It will be noted more steel was required in B, but very much less 
form material and labor. The roof of Barn B required more con- 
crete, as all beams and slabs liad to be treated as simple members, 
whereas in Barn A full advantage was taken of the T sections. 
Making full allowance for these differences the actual cost of the 
concrete structure of Barn A over Barn B was 15 per cent. Both 
buildings were constructed by day labor from plans made by the 
Writer and under his direct supervision. 

Cost of Metal Forms For Concrete Building Work.* — In Engi- 
neerinff-Contracling for Sept. 16, 1908, we describe a system of 



^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 10, 1909. 



BUILDINGS. 1171 

metal column and floor forms for concrete building work that had 
been worlted out by Mr. "W. L. Caldwell of Canton, Ohio. In a 
paper read at the recent annual convention of the National Cement 
Users' Association Mr. Caldwell gives some estimates of the cost 
of these forms which are of interest. These costs are based on a 
16-in. square column, with a girder beam 8 ins. wide and 18 ins. 
deep below floor slab, and witli the lateral beams 6 ins. wide and 
12 ins. deep, and floor slab 4 ins. thick. 

For a structure of this character, Mr. Caldwell recommends the 
use of 10-gage material for the angles at the four corners of the 
columns, 14-gage for the lining of the columns, 14-gage for the 
girder boxes, 16-gage for the lateral beam boxes and 18-gago 
material for the channel boards forming the intercolumn area for 
carrying the floor slab, with all necessary reinforcing angles, bolts, 
etc., to set up the work complete ready for receiving the concrete. 

The costs are as follows : 

Column centering per lineal foot $1.75 

Girder centering per lineal foot 1.00 

Lateral beam centering per lineal foot 0.50 

Floor area per. square foot 0.13% 

Adjustable girder and beam box posts per lin. ft.. . 0.05 

Throwing the cost of all of these items against the floor area, 
the average is about 45 cts. per sq. ft. 

This price is arrived at by taking a building 50 x 100 ft. with 
28 columns and 18 bays or intermediate column spaces, each space 
or bay containing 237 sq. ft., in round numbers, each bay divided by 
two intermediate cross beams, or three spans to each bay. These 
figures will vary somewhat with the different types of buildings but 
will give, it is stated, a fair idea of the average cost. 

Under ordinary conditions these centers can be erected at a cost 
of approximately 1% cts. per sq. ft. for labor. 

Cost of Concrete Building Blocks. — Mr. L. L. Bingham gives the 
following data. Letters were sent (1905) to more than a hundred 
makers of concrete blocks in Icwa. Most of the replies gave data 
relating to blocks for walls 10 ins. thick. The average cost per 
square foot of blocks for a 10-in. wall was: 

Cts. 
Sand 2.0 

Cement, at $1.60 per bbl 4.5 

Labor, at $1.83 per day 3.8 

Total, per sq. ft 10.3 

The labor of making the blocks includes mixing, molding, sprink- 
ling, piling and re-piling during or after curing. The average out- 
put per man was 48% sq. ft. (1% cu. yds.) per day. 

The 10% cts. however, does not include all costs of manufacture, 
for it does not include interest, depreciation and repairs, purchase 
of improved machinery, superintendence and office expense. One 
maker who turned out 20,000 blocks (40 car loads) had a general 
expense of nearly 5 cts. per sq. ft., besides the above given 10% cts. 
The selling price of 10-in. blocks averaged 21 cts. per sq. ft. of wall. 



1172 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Concrete Buildings, References. — For further data on this 
subject consult "Concrete Construction" by Gillette and Hill. 

Weight of Steel in Buildings. — Mr. H. G. Tyrrell states that 
weight of steel for buildings not more than 11 stories high is 
approximately as follows per sq. ft. of floor area : 

Per sq. ft. 
Lbs. 
Apartment houses and hotels, with outside frame.. 14 

Apartment houses, without outside frame 9 

Office buildings, with outside frame 23 

Office buildings, without outside frame 15 

Warehouses, with outside frame 28 

Warehouses, without outside frame 18 

Mr. Edward Godfrey gives the following: 

The Phipps Power Building, Pittsburg, Pa., is 100 x 100 ft, 10 
stories high, the first three stories being 24 ft., the rest being 13 ft. 
floor to floor. The live load was assumed at 250 lbs. per sq. ft. The 
total weight of steel and castings was 5,742,500 lbs., or 3.5 lbs. per 
cu. ft. of volume of building. Of this weight, 1,829,400 lbs. were in 
the columns, and 305,500 lbs. in the 38 cast iron column bases. 
The following is the weight of steel in other Pittsburg buildings: 

Lbs. per 
cu. ft. 

Arrott Building 2.8 

Farmers Bank Building 2.3 

Empire Building 2.1 

Oliver Building 1.8 

Mr. J. S. Branne gives the following estimate of the cost of the 
steel framework of an office building. The building is 50 x 100 
ft., 16 stories high in the front and 13 stories high in the rear. 
The first story is 17 ft. high, and all others are 12 ft. high from 
floor line to floor line. All curtain walls (outside walls) are 13 ins. 
thick ; inside tile partitions 4 ins. thick ; floors of concrete. Live 
loads are assumed at 60 lbs. per sq. ft. ; dead loads are 75 lbs. 
per sq. ft. Using outside dimensions, there are 745,000 cu. ft. in 
the building, and the steel weighs 795 tons, or 2.13 lbs. per cu. ft. 
of building. The price of the steel is estimated at 3 cts. per lb. 
in place. 

Weight of Park Row BIdg., New York,— The main part is 26 
stories high, surmounted by two 4-story towers. The area covered 
is 15,000 sq. ft. It rests on 3,500 piles. The basement was ex- 
cavated 34 ft. below the street level. 

The weight of the building is: 

' Tons. 

Steel 9,000 

Masonry and other materials 56,200 

Total 65,200 

The estimated cost (in 1906) was $2,000,000. 

The total height from street level to top of cupolas on towers 
is 386 ft. The first story is 17 ft. high in the clear, the second is 



BUILDINGS. 1173 

13 ft, the third and fourth are 12 ft., the fifth is 11 ft., the 
rest are 9 ft. 11 ins. in the clear. 

Weight of Steel Dome. — The steel dome of the Emporium build- 
ing, San Francisco, is 102 ft. diameter and 52 ft. high, su mounted 
by a "lantern," 22 Ms ft. diameter and 15 ft. high. The weight is 
200 tons. 

Weight of Largest Steel Dome. — The largest steel dome in the 
world forms the roof of the West Baden Hotel, West Baden, Ind. 
Its span is 195 ft. c. to c. of pins. It is an aggregation of two- 
hinge arches, a drum at the center forming their common connec- 
tion. The weight, including the steel framework and its covering 
is 475,000 lbs., or about 15 lbs. per sq. ft. of horizontal projection 
of roof surface. 

Weight of Steel Arch Roof. — The Government building at the 
St. Louis Exhibition in 1904 contained steel roof trusses, which 
were three-hinged arches of 172 ft. .span and 70 ft. rise. The 
trusses were spaced 35 ft. c. to c. The weight per square foot of 
horizontal projection was: 

Per sq. ft. 
Lbs. 

Steel 13.1 

Roofing , 6.6 

Tin covering 0.5 

Total 20.2 

Weight of Steel Fink Roof Trusses. — Mr. H. G. Tyrrell gives the 
following formula for the weight of steel roof trusses, based upon 
data of 146 separate trusses. The weight includes trusses complete, 
with rafter clips and shoe plates, but without ventilators. 

S 12 

W = — — H . 

20 D 

W = weight (lbs.) per sq. ft. of ground. 
S = span in feet. 
D — distance (in feet) c. to c 

Steel Frame, St. Louis Coliseum. — Mr. B. W. Stern gives the fol- 
lowing relative to a coliseum built in 1897. The steel frame for the 
roof is an oblong dome, 186 x 298 ft. The 4 main trusses are three- 
hinged arches, 176 ft. span. There are 6 radial trusses at each end 
of the building. A traveler derrick, 63 ft. long, 31 ft. wide, and 
42 ft. high, carried two derricks used to erect the trusses. The total 
weight of steel was 9.500 tons. There were 4,188 days' labor spent 
on the work in the shops, and 3,550 days' labor for erection, the 
average number of men in the erecting force being 50. 

Each of the main arches weighed 64,000 lbs. ; each radial arch, 
21,000 lbs. 

Materials In Large Grain Elevator. — A fireproof grain elevator, 
having a capacity of 3,100,000 bushels, was built in 1900 for the 
Great Northern Ry., at West Superior, Wis. It is 124 x 364 ft. in 



1174 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

plan and 246 ft. high. It has 505 steel bins. It rests on a pile and 
grillage foundation. The following are the quantities : 

Foundation and Walls in Main Story: 

Piles, number 4,570 

Timber and sheet piling, M 380 

Excavation, ,cu. yds 23,000 

Masonry, cu. yds. 1,500 

Concrete, cu. yds 3,000 

Cut stone, cu. ft 1,300 

Brick, cu. ft 45,000 

Superstructure : 

Structure below bins, tons 1,850 

Bins proper, tons 6,500 

Cupola, tons 1,450 

Legs and spouts below bin floor, tons 450 

Legs and spouts above bin floor, tons 350 

Total steel, tons 10,600 

There are 42 electric motors, having a total of 2,110 hp. 

Cost of Fabricating and Erecting Steel Mill and Mine Buildings 

The following is a summary of data given in Ketchum's "Steel 
Mill Buildings," a book containing much excellent information on 
estimating steel work : 

The drawings for steel mill buildings usually show only the 
dimensions of the "main members." The estimator usually calcu- 
lates the weights of these main members and adds a percentage to 
provide for the weight of the "details." The "details" are the plates 
and rivets used in fastening the main members together. The 
weight of the "details" of trusses will commonly be 25 to 35% of 
the weight of the "main members," being usually nearer 25%. 
After computing the actual weights of details for a few buildings, the 
estimator will seldom blunder in computing by percentages. 

In estimating the weight of corrugated steel, add 25% for laps 
where the side lap is two corrugations, and the end lap is 6 ins. ; 
add 15% where the side lap is one corrugation and the end lap is 
4 ins. Corrugated steel is usually made with corrugations 2% ins. 
wide (from ridge to ridge) and %-in. deep. The thickness of the 
steel is usually given in U. S. Standard Gage. The following are 
the weights per 100 sq. ft. of black corrugated steel: 

Gage, No 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 

Lbs. per 100 sq. ft. 275 220 165 138 111 84 69 

Add 16 lbs. per 100 sq. ft. if the steel is galvanized. 

The cost of steel mill buildings is divided into four items: (1) 
cost of steel ; ( 2 ) cost of shop work ; ( 3 ) cost of transportation, 
and (4) cost of erection. The price of structural steel may be found 
in current numbers of "Iron Age," published in New York. The 
price is now (1905) about 1.8 cts. per lb. at New York. 

The following are actual shop costs, in a shop having a capacity 
of 1,000 tons per month, and with labor estimated at 40 cts. per hr., 
which includes also the cost of management and the cost of operating 
and maintaining the shop equipment: 



BUILDINGS. 1175 

Cost of shop-work: 

Columns, made of 2 channels and 2 plates, 1,000 lbs 0.8 

Columns, made of single I-beam, or single angle 0.5 

Columns, Z-bar 0.8 

Columns, plain, cast iron 0.8 to 1.5 

Riveted roof-trusses, 1,000 lbs. each 1.2 

Riveted roof-trusses, 1,500 lbs. each 1.0 

Riveted roof-trusses, 2,500 lbs. each 0.8 

Riveted roof-trusses, 3,500 to 7,500 lbs. each 0.6 to 0.75 

Plate-girders, for crane girders find iloors 0.6 to 1.3 

Eye-bars, % x 3 ins. x 16 to 30 ft 1.2 to 1.8 

Eye-bars, large 0.5 to 0.8 

Steel frame transformer building-, 60 x SO ft., with 20-ft. 
posts, pitch of roof 1/4, 55,700 lbs. steel framework, 

including drafting . i.O 

Smelter building, 270 tons, including drafting 0.86 

Six gallows frames, including drafting 1.0 to 2.0 

Drafting design of "details" for 

Ordinary buildings 0.1 to 0.2 

Headworks for mines 0.2 to 0.3 

Roof-trusses 0.3 to 0.4 

With skilled labor at $3.50 and common labor at $2 per 9-hr. day, 
the cost of erecting small buildings. is about 0.5 ct. per lb., or $10 
per ton, if trusses are riveted and other connections bolted. 

The cost of erecting small buildings in which all connections are 
bolted is about 0.3 ct. per lb., or $6 per ton. 

The cost of erecting heavy machine shops, all material riveted, is 
about 0.45 ct. per lb., or $9 per ton, including labor of painting. 

The cost of erecting 6 gallows frames was 0.65 ct. per lb., or $13 
per ton. 

The cost of laying corrugated steel roof is about $0.75 per square, 
or $9 per ton for No. 20 steel, when laid on plank sheathing; 
it is $1.25 per square, or $15 per ton, when laid directly on the 
purlins; it is $2 per square, or $24 'oer ton, when laid with anti- 
condensation roofing. The erection of corrugated steel siding costs 
$0.75 to $1.00 per square, or $9 to $12 per ton for No. 20 steel. 

Cost of Erecting the Steel in Buildings.— The costs are given in 
tons of 2,000 lbs. On a four-story, fireproof hospital the cost of 
erecting the steel and cast iron was $4.50 per ton ; hand derricks 
were used, and the work was all done by common laborers, at $1.50 
per day. With a steam derrick the cost might have been reduced to 
$3.50 per ton. On a three-story business block, under the same con- 
ditions as before, the store fronts were erected for $5 per ton. 

On a large railroad machine shop, with structural steel workers 
at 40 cts. per hr., the cost of erecting was $8 per ton. In this case 
the work was all heavy, the lightest truss weighing 5 tons. On train 
sheds, and where lighter sections were used, and where there were 
more field rivets to the ton, the cost was $10. Ordinarily there are 
about 10 field rivets to the ton, and it is safe to allow 10 cts. each, 
or $1 per ton for riveting alone. There are buildings in which 25 
field rivets per ton are required. The foregoing costs of steel erec- 
tion include unloading from cars, setting derricks and scaffolding. 

The cost of erecting large electric cranes is about $3 per ton if 
put in place directly from the cars. Add $1.50 per ton if unloaded 
from cars before erecting. 



1176 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The steel frames of modern ofHce buildings are usually erected by 
derricks high enough to erect two or three floors without shifting. 
The cost of erecting and riveting the steel is $10 to $15 per ton. 
The trusses of small roofs can be erected cheaply by the use of one 
or two gin poles. 

Area of Passenger Stations. — In the Proc. Am. Ry. Eng. and Mn. 
of Way Assoc, 1904, a committee report gives the average area of 
passenger stations for cities of 10,000 to 15,000 population on 31 
different railways, as follows: 

Sq.ft. 

Waiting rooms 1,160 

Toilet rooms 186 

Baggage rooms 433 

Ticket offices 218 

Total 1,997 

Such a station would measure about 24 x 84 ft. inside. 

Cost of Moving a Frame Dwelling House.* — This building was 
moved at Secaucus, N. J., during the month of July, 1906, under con- 
tract, to make room for freight yard extensions. The house (weigh- 
ing about 50 tons) was 30 ft. square, two stories in height, with a 
one-story extension in the rear 12 x 18 ft, all resting upon brick 
piers standing 2 ft. above level of ground. The building was first 
raised about 14 ins. with jack screws and blocking. Several long 12- 
in. X 12-in. timbers were then placed under the joists lengthwise and 
crosswise, all properly cleated and fastened, care being taken to sup- 
port the two chimneys. The movement was accomplished with wind- 
lass, team, driver and about 1,000 ft. of 2-in. manilla rope passed 
through the blocks, the building sliding forward upon greased sup- 
ports of way of long timbers blocked up to the proper height. It 
Was moved forward a distance of 115 ft., then turned about 90° and 
pulled backward a distance of 435 ft. to its new location, making a 
total distance traveled of 548 ft. 

During the moving the force was kept busy greasing timbers with 
soap and carrying blocking forward. At intervals the moving 
was stopped, the team detached from the windlass and used to 
haul the long timbers ahead. In moving it was necessary to cross 
over two roads and pass under three lines of light and telephone 
wires. Men were stationed upon the top of the house to lift the 
wires over the roof and chimneys. Previous to moving, the building 
was strengthened to prevent racking, by placing several temporary 
bents in rooms on first floor. The only damage occurred from 
plaster cracking around chimneys, and this was slight. The tenants 
occupied the house during the moving period. 

Wages for laborers were $2.00 per day, hours from 7 a. m. to 6 
p. m,, and half days on Saturday, for which they received a full 
day's pay. The foreman received $3.50 per day, utility man $3.00 
per' day, night watchman $2.00 per day. Teams were paid at the 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 30, 1907. 



BUILDINGS. 1177 

rate of $1.50 per day and 75 cts. per day was paid for a horse. 
During tile moving drivers worlved as laborers. 
The actual labor cost is divided as follows : 

Per cent. 
Hauling blocking, lumber and tools (9 miles 

for round trip) $ 27.00 9.1 

Placing and removing blocking timbers, rais- 
ing anJ lowering before and after moving 102.00 34.5 
Moving building (548 ft.) 166.75 56.4 

Total moving 1295.75 100.0 

The time occupied in doing the work including the time lost for 
Sundays, holidays and rain was 24 days. Actual number of days 
worked was 16. The total cost of this moving to contractor was 
?357.50, the extra ?61.75 (added to $295.75) being wages paid to 
foreman, 2 drivers and watchman for Sundays, holidays and days 
lost on account of rain. 

For the above information we are indebted to Mr. A. L. Moore- 
head, C. E. 

References. — Any one engaged in estimating the cost of very 
many buildings will do well to consult Arthur's "Building Esti- 
mator," Tyrrell's "Mill Buildings," Ketchum's "Steel Mill Buildings," 
and Kidder's "Architects' and Builders' Pocket Book." 

The prices of hardware may be obtained from "The Iron Age 
Standard Hardware List" ($1), published by The Iron Age, New 
York City. The current discounts are given in The Iron Age, a copy 
of which costs 10 cts. 

The prices of lumber are quoted weekly in sucli papers as the 
"New York Lumber Trade Journal." Different mills issue catalogs 
giving prices of mill work. 



SECTION XI. 
RAILWAYS. 

Cross- References on Cost of Grading The reader is referred to 

the Earth Excavation and Embankment Section, and to the Rock 
Excavation Section, for costs of grading. The cost of tunneling is 
given on page 1180, etc. 

Cross- References on Bridges, Culverts and Buildings For data 

on these subjects, consult the "Bridges and Culvert Section," the 
"Timberwork Section," and the "Building Section," of this book. 
Use the index for the item in question. 

Cost of Transporting Men, Tools and Supplies on Railroads for 
Grading.* — In carrying on construction work it is the custom of 
railroads to charge to construction certain rates of fares on the 
men employed, and freight on tools and supplies. This charge 
against the new work is credited to the operating department. En- 
gineers in the employ of a railroad company in making up esti- 
mates for new work must include these charges, else the cost of the 
work is likely to overrun the estimate. To do tnis there must be 
some basis of the amount of work that a man, horse and machine 
will do in a given time, and an appro.Kimate tonnage of machines 
and supplies needed to excavate a given unit. 

The same assumption applies to track work, bridges and build- 
ings, but in this article we consider only the grading of a railroad. 

The following figures have been used by one of the editors of this 
journal in estimating the cost of railroad construction. The fig- 
ures of work done, and men, horses and tools and supplies needed 
are based on large jobs of construction, and are safe averages. ' 
The fares for men and the freight rates are those ordinarily 
charged by railroads for such movement of men and freight. 

The costs follow : 

One horse plus iy2 men readily excavate ai.d move 15 cu. yds. of 
earth per day. Hence allow 360 cu. yds. per month per horse and 
250 cu. yds. per month per man. 

One man requ'res transportation at 1 ct. per mile, and freight 
on 200 lbs. of bedding, cooking utensils, tents, small tools, etc. 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 8, 1908. 

1178 



RAILWAYS. 1179 

Hence for 100 miles transportation eacli way, or 200 miles round 
trip, we have 

200 passenger miles at 1 ct $2.00 

1/10 ton bedding, etc., 200 miles at i^ ct. per 
ton mile 10 

Total $2.10 

Since one man will excavate 250 cu. yds. per month, it costs $2.10 
divided by 250, or 0.8 ct. per cu. yd., if the job lasts only one 
month; but if the job lasts four months it costs 0.8 ct. divided by 
4, or 0.2 ct. per cu. yd., because in that time a man will move 4 
times 250 cu. yds., or 1,000 cu. yds., and will only require transporta- 
tion once at a cost of $2.10. Other months are in proportion. For 
any other haul than 100 miles multiply accordingly. 
Each horse requires the following equipment : 

Lbs. 

% wheel scraper, at 500 lbs 250 

% wagon, at 2,000 lbs 1,000 

Tents, harness, etc 250 

Total 1,500 

Allowing 16 horses per car of 24,000 lbs., each horse stands for 
freight equivalent to 1,500 lbs, hence: 

Lbs. 

Equipment for each horse 1,500 

Weight of horse 1,500 

Total, 1% tons or 3,000 

For each 100 miles of haul we have, therefore, 200 miles round 
trip; hence 200 miles X IVa tons X 0.4 ct. = $1.20. 

Since each horse moves 360 cu. yds. per month, we have $1.20 -r- 
360, or 0.3 ct. per cu. yd., if the job lasts only one month. But if 
the job lasts four months we have % of 0.3 ct., or 0.075 ct. per cu. 
yd. Other lengths of time and other hauls are in proportion. 

Each horse consumes % ton of food per month ; hence if food 
is hauled 100 miles we have 1/2 ton X 100 miles X 0.4 ct. = 20 cts. 

Since the horse moves 360 cu. yds. per month, we have 20 cts. 
-^ 360, or 0.05 ct. per cu. yd. for each 100 miles of haul. 

Summing up, we have the following costs : 

Cost per cu yd. for transportation 
100 miles and return. 
Men. Horses. Food. Total. 
Duration of work. Cts. Cts. Cts. Cts. 

1 mo 0.80 0.30 0.05 1.15 

4 mos 0.20 0.08 0.05 0.33 

6 mos 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.23 

8 mos 0.10 0.04 0.05 0.19 

12 mos 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.15 

Note. — If the haul is 300 miles, multiply by 3. If the haul is 500 
miles, multiply by 5. If the haul is 1,000 miles, multiply by 10. 

The above is for work done by wheel scrapers and wagons and 
carts, but for steam shovel work the following would be the ap- 
proximate cost for transportation : 



1180 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Tons. 

1 shovel 70 

60 dump cars 120 

Rail 65 

Cross ties (6"x6"x6') 75 

Three small locomotives 35 

Pumps, drills, etc 35 

Total 400 

400 tons X 100 miles X 0.4 ct. = $160. 

Such a shovel as this will average at least 20,000 cu. yds. per 
month, hence we have $160 -^ 20,000, or 0.8 ct. per cu. yd. for 
transporting the shovel 100 miles. This is equivalent to 1.6 cts. for 
transporting the shovel the round trip of 200 miles, when the job 
lasts only one month. For four months the cost would be % of 1.6 
cts., or 0.4 ct. per cu. yd. Other months would be correspondingly 
in proportion. 

Such a shovel does not consume more than 60 tons of fuel and 
supplies per month ; hence we have 60 tons X 100 miles X 0.4 ct. = 
$24. Since with this 60 tons of fuel there are 20,000 cu. yds. exca- 
vated, we have $24-^20,000, or 0.12 ct. per cu. yd. With such a 
shovel there will never be more than 40 men engaged in operating 
the shovel, operating the dump cars and trains, as well as in making 
temporary roadways and repairing equipment ; hence each of these 
40 men averages 500 cu. yds. per month, which is double the out- 
put where men are working with wheel scrapers, carts, etc., as 
above given ; therefore the cost of transporting men per cu. yd. on 
shovel work is approximately one-half the amount given in the 
previous table. 

Sunmiing up we have the following: 

Cost per cu yd. for transportation 

100 miles and return. 
Shovel. Men. Fuel. Total. 
Duration of work. Cts. Cts. Cts. Cts. 

1 mo 1.60 0.40 0.12 2.12 

4 mos 0.40 0.10 0.12 0.62 

6 mos 0.26 0.07 0.12 0.45 

12 mos.. 0.13 0.03 0.12 0.28 

The above is for a haul of 100 miles, and for any other hauls 
multiply according to the length of haul. 

If the workmen are of a restless disposition, and remain only a 
month or two on the job before quitting, the cost of their transporta- 
tion varies not with the length of the job but with the average time 
they remain on it. When they quit of course their- return fare is 
not paid. 

Cost of Three Short Single-Track Tunnels.* — Short tunnels are 
usually constructed at less cost than long tunnels, not only because 
of the less cost of hauling and "muck" and the ease of ventilating the 
tunnel, but because a very inexpensive plant can be used. In limestone 
and sandstone formations the present contract prices average about 



*Engineering-Contractmg, Aug. 21, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. 1181 

145 per lin. ft. of single-track tunnel for all lengths up to 1,000 ft. 
or so, even where common laborers receive $2.25 a day. The fol- 
lowing data give the cost (at contract prices) of three tunnels built 
in the West, and, both as to prices and as to quantities, these e.x- 
amples will be useful to engineers and contractors : 

Tunnel No. 1 (900 Lin. Ft.). 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavating tunnel $45.00 

2.7 cu. yds. enlargement for lining, at $3.00 8.10 

350 ft. B. M. timber lining, at $20 7.00 

5.7 lbs. iron, at $0.03 0.17 

Total $60.27 

Tunnel No. 2 (600 Lin. Ft.). 

Per lin. ft. 
Excavating tunnel $45.00 

2.7 cu. yds. enlargement, at $3.00 8.10 

370 ft. B. M. lining, at $20.00 7.40 

5.5 lbs. iron, at $0.03 0.17 

Total $60.67 

Tunnel No. 3 (400 Lin. Ft.). 

Per lin. ft. 
Excavating tunnel $42.50 

2.8 cu. yds. enlargement, at $3.00 8.40 

400 ft. B. M. lining, at $20.00 8.00 

7.4 lbs. iron at $0.03 0.22 

Total $59.12 

In addition to the above costs which are based on the contractor's 
final estimate, there was a cost of $3 per lin. ft. (or about 5%) 
for engineering and superintendence, and a cost of $0.50 per lin. ft. 
for train service. 

Cost of the Stampede Tunnel.* — Mr. Charles W. Hobart gives the 
following data on the Stampede or Cascade Tunnel of the Northern 
Pacific R. R. Bids were opened in New York Jan. 21, 1886, for a 
single-track tunnel, 9,844 ft. long, to be completed in 28 mos. Of 
the 12 bids, that of Mr. Nelson Bennett was lowest and was 
accepted. A forfeit of $100,000 and 10% of the contract price for 
failure to complete within the time was required. Mr. Bennett tele- 
graphed his general manager to gather men and clear a road to 
get the machinery on the ground. The plant was purchased for 
$100,000 in New York and shipped. It consisted of 5 engines, 2 
water wheels, 5 air compressors, 5 boilers of 70-hp. each, 4 fans, 
2 electric arc light plants, 2 miles of 6-in. wrought iron, 2 miles of 
water pipe, 2 machine shop outfits, 36 air drills, 2 locomotives, 60 
dump cars, 2 saw mills and other necessaries. This plant had to be 
transported on wagons and sleds from Yakima, Wash., a distance of 
82 miles to the east portal of the tunnel and 87 miles to the west 
portal. The first wagon loads started Feb. 1, and the first boiler 



♦Gillette's "Rock Excavation.' 



1182 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Feb. 22. By June 19 the plant for the east portal, and by July 15 
the plant for the west portal had reached its destination. On 
Feb. 13 hand drilling was begun on the east portal and 411 ft. 
of tunnel had been driven when the machines began June 19. On 
March 15 hand drilling started at the west end and by Sept. 1, 
when the machines started, 488 ft. had been driven. The last 1& 
miles of the hauling before reaching the mountains was in mud, so 
that wagons were hauled by block and tackle, planks being laid 
down in front of the wheels and taken up as fast as the wagons 
passed. About one mile a day was covered in this way. When the 
mountains were reached sleds were improvised and hauled by block 
and tackle with teams. "Wagons lightly loaded with provisions trav- 
eled 12 miles a day. 

The cost of clearing the way and getting the machinery and ma- 
terials on the work was $125,000,* and 6 mos. time was required. 
The tunnel was to be 9,950 ft. long, 161/2 x 22 ft. in the clear; 900 
ft. had been driven by hand, leaving 9,050 ft. to be driven in 22 mos. 

An 8-ft. heading was driven along the top of the tunnel and was 
kept 30 ft. ahead of the bench. The tunnel was timbered as work 
progressed. The average number of men employed, after the ma- 
chinery was installed, was 350. They worked 10-hr. shifts, receiv- 
ing $2.50 to $5 a day. Contractor boarded men at 75 cts. a day. A 
bonus of 25 cts. a day was paid each laborer for every foot gained 
during the month over the necessary average of 13.6 ft. a day in 
both headings combined, and each driller received a bonus of 50 cts. 
per day per ft. gained. Every day of the year was worked, requir- 
ing two shifts of 75 men each, beside the engineers, firemen, car- 
penters, machinists, etc., making a monthly payroll of $30,000. 
The best month's progress was April, 1888, when a total advance 
of 540 ft. was made in the two headings, or 9 ft. a day per head- 
ing. The average progress for 21% mos., with power drills, was 413 
ft. per month for the two headings. On May 3, 1888, the headings 
met, and on May 14 the excavation was completed, 7 days before 
the time limit. The track was laid in two days more and on May 
22 the first regular train passed through the tunnel. 

The total explosives used were 309,625 lbs., as follows: 

No. of 50 lb. boxes. 

Giant No. 1, 60 per cent 403% 

Giant No. 2, 45 per cent 2,1231/2 

Hercules No. 1, 60 per cent ". 1,609 1/2 

Hercules No. 2, 45 per cent 1,781% 

Nitro glycerin No. 2 - 232 

Forcite No. 2 41% 

Total No. of 50-lb. boxes 6,192 

The average price of all explosives was $10 a box, or 20 cts. per 
lb. The total number of men killed in the two years was 13. The 
following data were furnished by Mr. Andrew Gibson, Assistant 
Engineer. The American center-cut system of blasting was used ; 



♦Wages were $2.50 for laborers, which is a high price. 



RAILWAYS. 1183 

20 to 23 holes, 12 ft. deep, being drilled in the heading, and about 
18 holes in the bench. Each drill, in medium hard rock, would 
make 6 or 7 holes in 5 hrs., although at times in an exceedingly 
hard layer 15 hrs. would be required. About 400 lbs. of dynamite 
were used at each blast in each of the headings and benches. This 
would break 8 to 12 lin. ft. of tunnel, althougli in very hard rock 
at times only half this progress was made. The rock is basaltic,* 
with a dip of 5° to the west. It required immediate timbering, 
which delayed the drillers and muckers about 25% of the time. 
During the period of hand drilling there were 17 men, with about 23 
muckers, employed in each heading, and 4 lin. ft. of tunnel in 
24 hrs. were averaged. During the period of air drilling, 10 drills 
were used, 5 in each end, and the progress was 6.9 ft. in 24 hrs. 
per heading, or 207 ft. per mo. of 30 days. While the contract sisse 
of the tunnel was 16% ft. wire, and 22 ft. from subgrade to face 
of arch, tlie timbered sections had to be excavated 19% ft. wide by 
24 ft. high, thus requiring 15.7 cu. yds. of excavation per lin. ft. 
where timbering was used, as against 12.36 cu. yds. where no timber 
was used. Timbers were 12 x 12 Ins., except the 8 x 12-in. sills. 
Five segments were used in the arch, lagged with 4 x 6-in. pieces. 
Bents were spaced 2 to 4 ft. Water gave no trouble. 

Mules were used for hauling up to the first half mile ; then 
small locomotives, which hauled 8 to 12 cars. A "go-devil" or plat- 
form on wheels was used to great advantage in loading cars. The 
men wheeled the rock on plank runways from the heading to the 
"go-devil," dumping directly into cars below ; and the muckers on 
the heading never interfered with those on the bench. It was also 
a great convenience in timbering. Before blasting the drills were 
loaded upon the "go-devil," and it was pushed back some distance 
from the face. Endless belt conveyors for removing muck to the 
"go-devil" were contemplated, but they were never used, as with the 
large force of men at work they would have been in the way. 

The swelling of the shale on exposure often reduced a 12-in. tim- 
ber to 4 ins. ; hence it was necessary to line the tunnel witli 
masonry. Concrete side walls and a brick arch were used for 
lining. The concrete mortar was brought in on cars and run back 
of the forms througli spouts, without shoveling ; then the broken 
rock was shoveled into the mortar from a flat car. 

The total cost of the tunnel to the N. P. R. R. under Mr. Ben- 
nett's contract (which did not include masonry lining) was $118 
per lin. ft. Mr. Bennett's brother was the superintendent of the 
work. The actual cost of tunnelling the west end during the month 
of November, 1887, was $75.75 per ft. for the 258 ft. driven, dis- 
tributed as follows: 



*Elsewhere it is stated that the rock was shale. 



1184 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

Superintendent, % mo., at $500 $ 250.00 

Superintendent, 1 mo., at $250 250.00 

Master mechanic, % mo., at $150 75.00 

Engineers, 4 x 30 = 120 days, at $4 480.00 

Machine repairers, 3 x 30 = 90 days, at $3.50 315.00 

Firemen, 4 x 30 = 120 days, at $2.50 300.00 

Blacksmiths, 2 x 30 = 60 days, at $4.00 240.00 

Blaelismiths helpers, 2 x 30 = 60 days, at 

$2.50 150.00 

Carpenters, 396 days, at $3.00 1,188.00 

Foremen, 160 days, at $4.50 720.00 

Drillmen, 294 days, at $3.50 1,029.00 

Chuckmen, 293 days, at $3.00 879.00 

Muckers, 1,138 days, at $2.75 3,129.50 

Nippers, 60 days, at $2.50 150.00 

Dumpmen, 60 days, at $2.50 150.00 

Car drivers, 60 days, at $2.50 150.00 

Timekeeper, 30 days, at $2.50 75.00 

Lampmen, 60 days, at $2.50 150.00 

Laborers, 662 days, at $2.50 1,655.00 

Bonus for daily progress over 6 ft 500.00 

Total labor for 258 ft, at $45.90 per ft $11,835.50 

Material. 

78,000 ft. B. M. timber, at $10 $ 780.00 

800 lbs. wrt. iron, at 6 cts 48.00 

641/2 cords wood, at $3 193.50 

240 tons coal, at $4 960.00 

900 caps, at 1 ct 9.00 

14,400 ft. fuse, at 1 ct 144.00 

13,800 lbs. dynamite, at 16 cts 2,208.00 

Total materials for 258 ft, at $16.80 per ft$ 4,342.50 
Plant. 

6 per cent of $50,000 plant 1 mo $ 250.00 

1/28 of 75 p. c. depreciation * of $50,000 plant 1,339,28 
10 p. c. on all above to cover all possible 

omissions fl. 776.72 

Total plant charges for 258 ft, at $13.05. .% 3,366.00 



*Note that a liberal but not unusual allowance is made for 
plant depreciation. 

tThis 10 per cent, practically covers the cost of installing the 
plant. 

Summary of cost per ft. 

Labor ' $45.90 

Material 16.80 

Plant 13.05 

Total $75.75 

During this month the entire length was lined with timber, the 
rock being a soft basaltic rock that drills well but goes to pieces 
rapidly on exposure. There were no accidents or delays. 

On the east end during this same month, with an equal force, the 
progress was 246 ft., at a cost of $72.70 per ft. It will be noted 
that wages were high. It will also be noted that the cost of haul- 
ing and installing the plant is not included, although a liberal al- 
lowance is made for plant depreciation and in the 10% added to 
cover omissions. 



RAILWAYS. 1185 

The contractor received for his month's work on the west end 
of the tunnel : 

258-ft. tunnel, standard sections, at $78 $20,124 

862 cu. yds. extra excav., at $4.50 3,879 

78,000 ft. B. M. lining, at $35 2,730 

258 ft. of tunnel, timbered, at $103.62 $26,733 

The best month's record in driving a heading was 274 ft. but, as 
before stated, the average progress with the air drills was 207 ft. 
per mo. per heading, although in the month of November, 1887, 258 
ft. were progressed on the west end, wliich was 25% better than 
the average progress. Assuming that 15.7 cu. yds. were excavated 
per lin. ft. of tunnel, the total excavation at the west end for 
November was 4,052 cu. yds. It is probable that the SG2 cu. yds. 
extra excavation, above given, are included in this estimate, because 
the "standard section" differed from the timbered section by 3.3 
cu. yds. per lin. ft., and in 258 ft. this would amount to 852 cu. yds. 
On this assumption (of 4,052 cu. yds.) the labor cost $2.92 per cu. 
yd. ; the materials, $1.07 per cu. yd. ; and the plant, $0.83 per cu. 
yd. ; total, $4.82 per cu. yd. for the best month's work. 

Further data on this tunnel are given in the following para- 
graphs. 

Cost of the Stampede Tunnel and Its Masonry Lining.* — The 

Stampede Tunnel on the Northern Pacific Ry. is 9,844 ft. long and 
was built in 1886 to 1888 by contract. The contract work included 
the excavation of this tunnel and the timber lining. Subsequently 
this timber lining was replaced with a masonry lining by the rail- 
way company's own forces. This article gives in detail the cost 
of the permanent masonry lining. To make the cost figures com- 
plete, however, we itemize the contract costs of the original con- 
struction as follows : 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavation, standard section, at $78 $ 78.00 

Extra excavation, 3.2 cu. yds., at $4.50 14.40 

Timber lining, 305 ft. B. M., at $35 10.68 

Traffic charges 0.77 

Total $103.85 

Ballast 0.90 

Track materials 1-23 

Track laying 0.18 

Track surfacing 0.16 

Engineering • 5.00 

Total $111.32 

The above figures are the contract costs to the Northern Pa- 
cific Ry. 



* Engineering-Contracting, June 3, 1908. 



1186 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The permanent masonry lining work, whose cost is given here, 
was begun June 16, 1889, and completed Nov. 16, 1895, the progress 
in lineal feet per year being as follows: 

Walls. Arch. 

1889 1,176 

1890 1,280 538 

1891 2,549 871 

1892 ■.. 5,038 1,402 

1893 2,930 911 

1894 3,229 2,812 

1895 2,301 2,887 

The side walls were of concrete and the arch was of brick, there 
being 30,259 cu. yds. of concrete side walls and 18,426 cu. yds. of 
brick arch, or a total of 48,683 cu. yds. of masonry lining in the 
9,311 lin. ft. that were lined. There were, therefore, 3% cu. yds. 
of concrete side walls and 2 cu. yds. of brick arch, or a total of 
5% cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. 

The average cost of the lining was as follows : 

Concrete Side Walls: Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

Cement, at $2.90 per bbl $4.27 $13.95 

Rock, at 31 cts. per cu. yd 0.24 0.80 

Sand, at 21 cts. per cu. yd 0.12 0.40 

Traffic charges 0.35 1.13 

Train service 0.96 - 3.12 

Labor 2.10 6.87 

False work 0.08 0.27 

Tools, lights, etc 0.10 0.33 

Engineering and superintendence. . 0.16 0.53 

Total $8.38 $27.40 

Brick Arch: Per cu. yd. Per lin. ft. 

Cement, at $2.90 per bbl $ 2.93 $ 5.80 

Brick, at $7.12 per M 3.56 7.04 

Rock backing, at 59 cts. per cu. yd. 0.41 0.81 

Sand, at 40 cts. per cu. yd 0.14 0.27 

Traffic charges 0.36 0.71 

Train service 1.21 2.39 

Labor 4.20 8.32 

Falsework 0.22 0.43 

Tools, lights, etc 0.21 0.41 

Engineering and superintendence.. 0.25 0.50 

Total $13.49 $26.68 

Since the concrete side walls cost $27.40 per lin ft. and the brick 
arch cost $26.68, the total cost was $54 per lin. -ft. of tunnel, 
which, if added to the $111 above given, makes a grand total of 
$165 per lin. ft. Had the masonry lining been built in the first 
place, the cost would have been considerably less. 

The item of "traffic charges" covers freight on materials at 1 ct. 
per ton-mile. The item of "train service" covers hauling of sand, 
rock, etc., with a work train. 

The cost of this lining was very much higher during the first 
years of the work. This was due partly to the greater thickness of 
the lining used at first, but it was principally due to the inexperi- 



RAILWAYS. 1187 

ence of the men and the higher cost of materials. The following 
table sliows the cost by six-month periods : 

— Brick Arch. — — Concrete Wall. — 



6 


mos. 




Lin. 


Cost 


Lin. 


Cost 


Total 


ending 


'. 


ft. 


per lin. ft. 


ft. 


per lin. ft. 


per lin. ft. 


June 


30. 


1889. . 


• • ■ • • 




33 


$61.72 




Dec. 


31, 


1890. . 


• • • • 




1,143 


61.72 




June 


30, 


1890. . . 


. 257 


63.24 


> • • ■ 


• • . * 


$124.96 


Dec. 


31, 


1890. .. 


. 281 


63.24 


1,280 


56.92 


120.16 


June 


30. 


1891... 


. 600 


51.64 


733 


40.94 


92.58 


Dec. 


31, 


1891. .. 


271 


51.64 


1,816 


40.94 


92.58 


June 


30. 


1892. . 


.. 517 


34.90 


2,422 


22.06 


56.96 


Dec. 


31, 


1892. . 


.. 885 


27.13 


2,616 


19.80 


46.93 


June 


30. 


1893. . 


. . 496 


25.35 


2,219 


19.48 


44.83 


Dec. 


31. 


1893. . 


. . 415 


20.96 


711 


19.40 


40.36 


June 


30. 


1894. . 


.. 904 


20.21 


3,229 


16.55 


36.76 


Dec. 


31, 


1894. . 


. . 1,898 


19.40 








June 


30, 


1895.. 


. . 1,225 


18.90 


2,187 


18.04 


36.94 


Dec. 


31, 
al . 


1895. . 







114 
18,503 






Tot 


. . 9.311 





The foregoing shows the progressive decrease in the cost per 
lineal foot. The following table shows the decrease in the cost per 
cubic yard : 

Brick Arch. Concrete Walls. 

Six mos. Cost Cost 

ending. Cu. yds. per cu. yd. Cu. yds. per cu. yd. 

June 30,1889 83 $12.26 

Dec. 31, 1889 2,876 12.26 

June 30, 1890 617 $26.35 

Dec. 31,1890 674 26.35 3,224 11.30 

June 30,1891 1,740 17.90 1,303 11.51 

Dec. 31,1891 786 17.90 3,228 11.51 

June 30, 1892 1,092 16.53 3,582 7.33 

Dec. 31,1892 1,634 14.69 3,488 7.42 

June 30, 1893 916 13.72 2,951 7.32 

Dec. 31.1893 751 11.58 1,139 6.05 

June 30,1894 1,645 11.10 4,720 5.66 

Dec. 31,1894 3,479 10.55 

June 30,1895 2,322 10.21 3,495 5.64 

Dec. 31,1895 2,770 . 170 

Total and av 18,426 $13.49 30,259 % 8.38 

The cost of lining the tunnel during the six months ending Dec. 
31, 1892, represents about an average of the whole job. It was as 
follows : 

Concrete Side Walls. 
Materials: Per cu. yd. 

Cement, 1.5 bbls., at $2.36 $3.54 

Sand, 0.33 cu. yd., at 36 cts 0.12 

Rock, 0.5 cu. yd., at 55 cts 0.2 8 

Dry rock backing, 0.04 cu. yd., at 55 cts 0.02 



Total $3.96 

Traffic Charges: 

Cement '. $0.24 

Sand 0.17 

Rock 0.18 

Total $0.59 



1188 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Work Train Service: 
Hauling concrete, removing old timbers and excavating ma- 
terial, 0.031 day of work train, at $26.90 $0.83 

Labor: 

Mixing cement dry, 0.104 day, at $2.50 $0.26 

Building w^alls, 0.247 day, at $2.84 0.70 

Removing timbers, excavating and preparing panel for concrete, 

0.226 day, at $2.83 0.64 

Placing rock backing, 0.02 day, at $2.50 0.05 

Total $1.65 

Engineering, Superintendence and Miscellaneous: 

Engineering $0.29 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.06 

Lights, wear on tools, etc 0.03 

Interest and depreciation of plant, 10% per annum on $1,500, 
for 3 1/2 mos 0.01 

Total $0.3& 

Total per cu. yd. in place $7.42 

The proportions were 1 cement, 3 sand and 5 rock. The dimen- 
sions of each side wall were 2 ft. 3 ins. thick and 16 ft. high. There 
were 1.33 cu. yds. of concrete per lin. ft. of side wall, or 2.66 cu. 
y.ds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. The average daily force, not including 
the work train crew, was : 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 
1 foreman, at $3.75 per day. 
1 foreman, at $3.25. 

3 carpenters, at $3. 
22 laborers, at $2.50. 

4 laborers, at $2. 

The average daily progress was 38.75 cu. yds. per day. 
The average daily force "building the side walls" was : 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

2 foremen, at $3.25 per day. 
4 carpenters, at $3. 

12 laborers, at $2.50. 

The average daily force engaged in "removing timbers, exca- 
vating, etc." : 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

2 foremen, at $3.75 per day. 
2 carpenters, at $3 per day. 

14 laborers, at $2.50 per day. 

The cost of the brick arch during the same period was : 

Brick Arch. 
Materials: Per cu. yd. 

Brick, 526, at $7 per M $ 3.68 

Cement, 1.18 bbls., at $2.40 '. 2.83 

Sand, 0.263 cu. yd., at 82 cts 0.21 

Dry rock backing, 0.483 cu. yd., at 75 cts 0.36 

Total materials $ 7.08 



RAILWAYS. 1189 



Traffic Charges: 



Brick $ 0.89 

Cement 0.19 

Sand 0.13 

Total $ 1.21 

Work Train Service: 

Hauling brick and cement and removing debris and old timber, 

0.046 day, at $26.70 $ 1.23 

Labor: 

Mixing mortar and building arch, 0.78 day, at $4.06 $ 3.16 

Placing rock, backing, 0.135 day, at $2.66 0.36 

Moving centers, preparing for work and removing timber 

0.383 day, at $2.87 1.10 

Total $ 4.62 

Engineering, Superintendence and Miscellaneous: 

Engineering and superintendence $ 0.44 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.05 

Changing lights, wear on tools, etc 0.04 

Interest and depreciation of plant, 10% per annum on $1,500, 

for 21/2 mos 0.02 

Total $ 0.55 

Total per cu. yd $14.69 

The brick arch was 5 rings thick, or 1 ft. 9 ins., and 28% ft. 
around the arc. The bricks were 2 1^ x 3 % x 8 ins. There were 
1.85 cu. yds. of brick masonry per lin. ft. of tunnel, making the 
cost $27.13 per lin. ft. for the brick arch. The average daily prog- 
ress was 25.9 cu. yds., with the following force, not including v/ork 
train crew: 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

1 brick mason foreman, at $6.50 per day. 

1 foreman, at $3.75 per day. 

1 foreman, at $3.25 per day. 

7 brick masons, at $6 per day. 

3 carpenters, at $3 per day. 
25 laborers, at $2.50 per day. 

The average gang engaged in "mixing mortar and building arch" 
was: 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

1 foreman, at $3.75 per day. 

2 brick foremen, at $6.50 per day. 
7% brick masons, at $6 per day. 

1 carpenter, at $3 per day. 
21 laborers, at $2.50 per day. 
The average gang engaged in "placing rock backing" was: 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

2 foremen, at $3.25 per day. 

4 carpenters, at $3 per day. 
30 laborers, at $2.50 per day. 



1190 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The average gang engaged in "removing timbers, excavation, etc.," 
was: 

1 foreman, at $135 per mo. 

2 foremen, at $3.75 per day. 
5 carpenters, at $3 per day. 

12 laborers, at $2.50 per day. 

As above stated, the cost during the last year of the work was 
very much reduced. 

During the six months ending June 30, 1895, the cost of lining 
was as follows : 

Concrete Side Walls. 

Materials: Per cu. yd. 

Cement, 1.33 bbls., at $2.25 $2.99 

Sand, 0.47 cu. yd., at 18 cts 0.09 

Rock, 0.79 cu. yd., at 39 cts. 0.31 

Total $3.39 

Work Train Service: 

Hauling concrete, removing debris and old timber, 0.022 day, 
at $22.90 $0.51 

Labor: 

Mixing cement, 0.07 day, at $2.14 $0. 

Building walls, 0.28 day, at $2.40 0.66 

Removing timbers, excavating and preparing panel for con- 
crete, 0.21 day, at $2.62 0.54 

Total $1.35 

Engineering and Miscellaneous: 

Engineering and superintendence $0.22 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.06 

Tools, lights, etc 0.10 

Interest and depreciation of plant, 10% per annum of $1,500, 
for 3 mos 0.01 

Total $0.39 

Total per cu. yd $5.64 

It will be noted that "traffic charges" (freight on the materials 
for concrete) appear to have been omitted. 

The proportions of the concrete were 1:3:5. The side wall was 
2 ft. 7 ins. thick by 16 ft. high, and each side wall contained 1.6 
cu. yds. per lin. ft. The average progress per day was 46 cu. yds., 
and the working force was as follows : 
1 foreman, at $112.50 per mo. 
1 foreman, at $90 per mo. 
1 foreman, at $3.50 per day. 

1 blacksmith, at $3 per day. 

2 carpenters, at $3 per day. 
19 laborers, at $2.25 per day. 

7 laborers, at $1.75 per day. 



RAILWAYS. 11!)1 

The cost of the brick arch during the same period was as follows : 

Brick Arch. 

Material. Per cu. yd. 

Brick, 500, at $6.35 $ 3.18 

Cement, 0.98 bbi., at $2.25 2.21 

Sand, 0.34 cu. yd., at 28 cts 0.09 

Total $ 5.4 8 

Work Train Service: 

Hauling material, debris, etc., 0.037 day, at $24.25 $ 0.91 

Labor: 

Mixing mortar and building arch, 0.57 day, at $3.15 $ 1.80 

Placing rock backing, 0.09 day, at $2.29 0.21 

Removing old timbers, excavating and preparing for arching 

and moving centers, 0.32 day, at $2.48. . 0.80 

Total $ 2.81 

Engineering and Miscellaneous: 

Engineering and superintendence $ 0.23 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.09 

Tools, lights, etc 0.20 

Interest and depreciation of plant, 10% per annum on $1,500, 

for 3 mos 0.02 

Total $ 0.54 

Total per cu. yd $10.21 

It will be noted that the item of "traffic charges" appears to have 
been omitted. 

There were 5 rings of brick in the arcli, giving a thickness of 1 ft. 
9 ins., and the length of the arc was 28 ft. There were 1.85 cu. yds. 
of brick masonry per lin. ft. of tunnel. The bricks were 2 % x 3 % 
X 8 ins. 

The average progress per day was 44.2 cu. yds. with the follow- 
ing force : 

1 foreman, at $112.50 per mo. 
1 foreman, at $90 per mo. 
1 foreman, at $3.50 per day. 
1 brick mason foreman, at $5.50 per day. 
8 brick masons, at $5 per day. 
1 carpenter, at $3 per day. 
1 blacksmith, at $3 per' day. 
27 laborers, at $2.25 per day. 

The gang when engaged in "mixing mortar and building arch" 
was as follows: 

1 foreman, at $112.50 per mo. 

2 foremen, at $3.50 per day. 

2 mason foremen, at $5.50 per day. 

1 timekeeper, at $60 per mo. 

17 brick masons, at $5 per day. r ■ 

1 blacksmith, at $3 per day. 

25 laborers, at $2.25 per day. 



1192 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The gang when engaged in "placing rock baclcing" was as 
follows : 

1 foreman, at $112.50 per mo. 
% timekeeper, at $60 per mo. 
% blacksmith, at $3 per day. 
% carpenter, at $3 per day. 
22 laborers, at $2.25 per day. 

The gang when engaged in "removing old timbers, etc.," was as 
follows : 

1 foreman, at $112.50 per mo. 

3 foremen, at $90 per mo. 

1 timekeeper, at $60 per mo. 

3 blacksmiths, at $3 per day. 

1 carpenter, at $3 per day. 
17 laborers, at $2.25 per day. 

Cost of the Cascade Tunnel.— The tunnel is 13,813 ft. long through 
the Cascade Mountains on the line of the Great Northern Ry. The 
Width in the clear is 16 ft., and the height from top of rail to bot- 
tom of arch is Ziy^ ft. It was begun, from two headings, Aug. 20, 
1897, and completed Oct. 13, 1900. A top heading, 10 x 20 ft, was 
driven from each end ; and the bench was taken out in two lifts. 
The average monthly progress was 175 ft. at each heading, or 5.76 
ft. per day of 24 hrs. The best year's work was from June 1, 1899, 
to June 1, 1900, in which time 5,575 ft. were driven from the two 
headings, the monthly average being 232 ft. per heading. The best 
month's progress was 527 ft. from two headings; the best week's 
progress was 143 ft. from two headings; the best month's prog- 
ress from a single heading (east) was 301 ft. The rock was 
medium hard granite, very seamy and very wet. Although hard to 
drill and blast, the granite disintegrated so rapidly that a tem- 
porary timber lining was necessary throughout, and it was after- 
Ward replaced with concrete. 

The work was all done by day labor, no contracts being let, and, 
in consequence, it cost considerably more than would have been the 
case had it been built by contract. Three 8-hr. shifts were worked. 
There were 600 to 800 men employed, and they were not very 
efficient. 

Pour columns in a heading carried 6 drills (3i/4-in. size). From 
24 to 28 holes were drilled 12 ft. in the heading, and fired in three 
rounds by electricity. Including the bench work there were 14 
drills used at each end of the tunnel. Rock from the heading and 
top bench was wheeled in barrows out onto the "jumbo," or "go 
devil," and dumped through into cars below. A compressed air 
hoist on the "jumbo" served to lift large rock and to shift the 
"jumbo" back before firing. Eight electric motor cars were used 
to haul the muck, etc. One motor hauled 16 to 20 dump cars of 
1 cu. yd. each up the 1.7% grade to the east portal, at 10 miles 
an hour. The rails were 50-lb. rails laid to a gage of 2 ft. 

Large power houses were built at each portal. The east power 
house contained 1 Ingersoll-Sergeant duplex compressor, 18 x 24 



RAILWAYS. 1193 

Ins. ; 1 straight line compressor, 18 x 24 ins. ; 1 Rand duplex com- 
pressor, 20x36 Ins.; 1 Buclieye high-speed engine, 12x16 Ins.; 
1 Cliandler & Taylor high-speed engine, 13 x 14 ins. ; 6 150-hp. 
boilers ; pumps, dynamos, fans and water heaters. Compressed 
air was delivered through 6-in. mains to the drills, at an initial pres- 
sure of 100 lbs. 

The tunnel was lined with concrete from end to end, the tem- 
porary timber lining being removed. Tlie concrete is nowhere less 
than 2 ft., and in places it is 3 1/^ ft. thick ; spawls and broken 
stone were packed above the concrete where necessary. To place 
the concrete without interfering with the muck trains, a platform 
500 ft. long was erected, and the cars loaded with concrete were 
hauled up an incline by a compressed air hoist. The concrete was 
dumped on the platform and shoveled into the forms. While this 
was going on another 500-ft. platform was being built in advance. 
Side walls were built in alternate sections 8 to 12 ft. long, the 
weight of the timber arches being thus transferred to the walls. 
The concrete arch centers were made in 12-ft. lengths, of which 
there were 10 in each end of the tunnel. When the concrete had 
set, the 12-ft. arch center was lowered with screw jacks onto 
"dollies," pushed forward 12 ft. and jacked up again. Concrete 
was mixed, 1 cement, 3 sand and 5 parts rock. About 95,000 bbls. 
of Portland cement were used in lining the tunnel, an average of 
7 bbls. per lin. ft. of tunnel. Work of lining was begun in De- 
cember, 1899, and finished November, 1900 ; more than 1,000 ft. 
of lining having been placed in October, 1900, in the west end, 
although the general average was about 600 ft. of lining per month 
from each end. The tunnel was opened for operation Dec. 20, 1900. 
. Mr. Willard Beahan says that it was a serious mistake to have 
driven the heading in rock by hand 300 ft. in advance of the bench 
while waiting for the power plant to arrive, for the long heading 
overtaxed the transportation so that work on the heading had to 
be stopped until the bench was brought up. The use of four drill 
columns he regards as novel, and adds that there was plenty of 
room in which to work six drills, and that it was not necessary to 
shift any of the columns in drilling a set of holes. 

The actual cost of this tunnel, as originally printed in Engi- 
neering-Contracting, Dec. 8, 1908, was as follows: 

Per lin. ft. 

Engineering $ 4.30 

Labor excavating tunnel 60.60 

Explosives 7.40 

Power 22.50 

Tools ($137,000) 10.00 

Machinery ($223,000) 16.20 

Buildings 3.50 

Timber lining 9.40 

Concrete lining 43.50 

Personal injuries 2.10 

Hospital expenses 1.10 

Permanent track through tunnel 2.80 

Total $183.40 



1194 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



A comparison of this cost with that of the Stampede Tunnel, 
through the same mountain range, shows that the Stampede Tun- 
nel was built at less cost, although high contract prices were paid. 

Wabash R. R. Tunnels.* — I am indebted to Mr. T. H. Loomis, Div. 
Eng. P., T. & W. R. R. (Wabash system) for much of the follow- 
ing data kindly furnished by him when I went over the line in 
1903 studying the methods and cost of excavation. Bight double- 
track tunnels were under way, the cross-section of each being as 
shown in Fig. 1. The material encountered was shale, sandstone, 
fire clay and occasional seams of coal — characteristic of eastern 
Ohio and western Pennsylvania. The section above the wall plates 
(i. e., the longitudinal timbers on top of the posts) requires an ex- 




Fig. 1.- — Double Track Tunnel. 



cavation of 15 cu. yds. per lin. ft. The clear width between wall 
plates is 34 % ft. The segmental arch timbers are 12x12 ins., 
lagged with 4-in. plank, the arch ribs being 3 to 4 ft. c. to c. The 
favorite method of attack, as shown in Fig. 2, was by what I will 
term the twin-heading method ; two 8 x 8-f t. headings being driven 
as shown, and afterward enlarged. The floor of the^e headings is 
12% ft. above subgrade, thus leaving a 12i4-ft. bench, AC DE, to 
be taken out. One machine drill is operated in each heading (two 
could be worked) for the drilling is easy. The rivalry between the 
two drilling gangs in these twin headings appeared to me to be one 
of the best features of this method of attack. It is certain that no 
hitherto published data show as low a cost per cubic yard for 
tunnel work as the data which I secured on this work. The weekly 



♦Gillette's "Rock Excavation." 



RAILWAYS. 



1195 



progress was not rapid, but, as all the tunnels were comparatively 
short, there was no necessity of going to great expense in securing 
rapid progress — a fact that tunnel contractors should bear in mind. 
Steam drills weie used in some of the short tunnels. The following 
is the actual cost of excavating and timbering the section of a 
tunnel above the wall plates (15 cu. yds. per lin. ft.), using air 
drills, for a distance of 100 lin. ft: 

Labor $2,527.45 

2,000 lbs. 40% dynamite, at 12 cts 260.00 

470 gals, kerosene oil, at 12 cts 56.40 

1,875 gals, gasoline, at 12 cts 225.00 

3,000 bus. coal for compressor, at 9 cts 270.00 

Machine and lubricating oils 62.50 

Blacksmith shop 150.00 

41,649 ft. B. M. timber, at $23 957.93 

Total cost of 100 lin. ft $4,509.28 

Cost per lin ft. above wall plates 45.09 

Cost per cu. yd. including timber • • • • 3.06 

Cost per cu. yd., excluding timber 2.60 

The material in this case was sandstone. 

On another tunnel the section above the wall plates was exca- 
vated by hand at a cost $40.90 per lin. ft., or $2.73 per cu. yd., 
for a distance of 110 ft., the material being hard fire clay in the 





Fig. 2. 



Fig. 3. 



upper half and shale in the" lower half of the section excavated, 
making easier excavation than in the sandstone. The force engaged 
in hand drilling, by the twin-heading method, was : 

Wages per 
10-hr. shift. 

1 general foreman $ 4 

1 foreman 3 

1 blacksmith 3 

2 carpenters, at $3 \ 6 

10 miners, at $2 20 

10 muckers, at $1.50 15 

1 team • 4 

Total per shift (10-hr.) $55 

While these men took out the whole section above the wall plates 
(16 cu. yds. per lin. ft.) for $2.73 per cu. yd. for labor and ex- 
plosives (not including cost of timber), working in shale and fire 



1196 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

clay, they excavated a 7 x 8-ft. heading in sandstone for $3.75 
per cu. yd., distributed as follows: 

Per 
10-hr. shift. 

Labor on 7 x 8 heading $18.00 

Dynamite 3.84 

Repairs 90 

Light 32 

Total per shift $23.06 

Bach shift excavated 6.2 cu. yds. of this 7 x 8-ft. heading, making 
the cost $3.75 per cu. yd., as above stated, equivalent to an aa- 
vance of 3 ft. per shift. 

No night shifts were being worked on the eight tunnels, and the 
progress per week in shale was 25 ft. when working by hand and 
excavating 15 cu. yds. per lin. ft. ; and 50 ft. a week working 
with machine drills. In hard sandstone the weekly progress was 
about 15 ft. by hand and 30 ft. with machine drills, in all cases 
working only 1 10-hr. shift in the 24-hr. day. 

The following is the actual cost of timbering on one job : 

Per M. 

Georgia pine f. o. b. cars $23.60 

Hauling 6 miles 3.00 

Cost of framing 5.00 

Cost of erecting 3.00 

Total per 1,000 ft. B. M $34.60 

The carpenters received $3 per 10-hr. day, and laborers erecting 
received $1.50. The cost of framing and erecting, including super- 
Vision, was $8 per M, which was about $2 more than it should have 
cost had there been more workers and fewer bosses. Over the 
rough roads each team hauled about 1,000 ft. B. M. per load and 
made one trip of 6 miles each way in a day. The cost of "pack- 
ing" (i. e., placing small stones) above the lagging was 80 cts. per 
cu. yd. 

We now come to what I have said are the lowest records of tun- 
neling cost yet made public : 

Tunnel heading in sandstone, double track full section above the 
wall plate grade (15 cu. yds. per lin. ft.) : 

Cu. yd. 

Drilling .' . . .$0.60 

Explosives 40 

Mucking -. 85 

Total $1.85 

Tunnel bench in same tunnel ; 

Cu. yd. 

Drilling . .' $0.40 

Explosives 20 

Mucking 22 

Total $0.82^ 



RAILWAYS. 1197 

The sandstone was very hard, breaking in large blocks, which 
liave to be drilled and shot before mucking. A steam shovel is 
used In the bench, and material of heading is carried about 100 ft. 
and dumped over the breast of bench, whence steam shovel loads it 
along with bench material. 

In another tunnel, in a formation of practically level strata of 
slate, limestone (thin) and fire clay (a stone hard as limestone to 
drill, but disintegrating in the air) the cost was as follows: 

Heading — full double-track sections — all above wall plates : 

Cu. yd. 

Drilling $0.48 

Explosives 30 

Mucking 80 

Total $1.38 

Bench — same tunnel — full section : 

Cu. yd. 

Drilling $0.30 

Explosives 20 

Mucking .18 

Total ?0.68 

In the case of another tunnel in coal formation with a 5-ft. vein 
of coal running all through on the wall plate grade ; steam drills 
used in rock, and steam coal augers in the coal, with steam shovel 
for mucking, the costs were as follows : 

Headings — per cubic yard — double track : 

Labor $0,966 

Explosives and materials 090 

Total $1,056 

Bench — same tunnel and formation : 

Cu. yd. 

Labor * $0.38 

Explosives and materials 04 

Total $0.42 

This last may seem too low, but it was in all probability the 
cheapest material a tunnel is ever built in, and the organization 
was so good that it was worked with extreme economy. A core 
of about 2 cu. yds. per lin. ft. was left in the middle of the heading 
(between the twin headings) and taken out along with the bench. 

Mount Wood and Top Mill Tunnels.— Mr. W. J. Yoder gives the 
following data: The tunnels (built in 1888-1889) are within the 
northern city limits of Wheeling, W. Va., and the material pene- 
trated was for the most part shale of the coal measures. The shale 
disintegrates rapidly upon exposure and must be supported. The 
block or American system of timbering was used for lining, and was 
kept never more than 50 ft. back of the face. All drilling was done 
by hand. A top heading 10x34 ft. was driven, and then widened; 
the bench was taken out in two lifts. The first or cut holes in the 
heading were drilled so as to blast out a long horizontal wedge 



1198 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of rock near the roof ; these holes being 5 to 6 ft. deep. Then a 
lower row of 5-ft. lift holes was fired. Finally the bottom of the 
heading was taken out like a bench by a row of vertical holes and a 
row of horizontal holes. In all 33 holes were fired in the heading, 
aggregating 160 lin. ft., and requiring 60 lbs. of 40% Porcite to load 
them. The effect of the firing was to make an advance of 2 14 ft., 
displacing 25 cu. yds. [The heading gang consisted of 1 foreman, 
14 drillers, 12 muckers and 1 nipper.] About 25 lin. ft. of drilling 
was considered a day's (10 hrs.) work for 2 men. The muck was 
wheeled in iron barrows to a traveler and dumped down chutes into 
cars. The heading gang timbered and placed the packing above the 
arch ; two 10-hr. shifts per week being needed for this work, leaving 
10 shifts per week for advancing the heading. The timbering is 
fully described ; 660 ft. B. M. of white oak were used per lin. ft. 
of tunnel. The bench holes were 8 ft. deep, churn drills being 
used except for the corner holes and for blockholing. The bench 
force consisted of 1 foreman, 6 drillers, 18 muckers, 2 mule drivers, 
3 dump men and 1 nipper. The average haul was about 800 ft. 

The maximum monthly progress (working two 10-hr. shifts) in 
a heading on the Mount Wood Tunnel was 130 lin. ft., the average 
monthly progress being 84 ft. The maximum monthly progress on 
the bench was 125% ft., the average being 97 ft. The average ex- 
cavation was 10.2 cu. yds. per lin. ft, of heading and enlargement, 
and 18 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of bench. The total excavation in both 
tunnels was 49,670 cu. yds., and the excavation in approaches was 
25,751 cu. yds. 

The number of men employed was 350. The heading men were 
composed of two-thirds negroes and one-third Austrians. The 
foremen were Irish. The best drillers were negroes. No work 
was done Sundays or Saturday nights. The scale of wages (10-hr. 
shift) was as follows: 

Heading Gang* 

1 foreman $4.00 

14 drillers 1.75 

10 muckers 1.50 

1 nipper 1.25 

Bench Gang' 

1 foreman $3.00 

6 drillers 1.75 

16 muckers 1.50 

2 men (lagging) 1.50 

1 nipper 1.25 

2 drivers ,. . . . 1.50 

3 dumpmen 1-50 

2 mules 

Miscellaneous. 

1 carpenter $2.50 

4 sawyers 1.75 

1 trackman 2.50 

3 blacksmiths 3.00 

1 walking boss 4.00 

1 timekeeper 2.25 

1 engineer and fireman 2.50 

1 electrician . 2.50 



RAILWAYS. 1199 

Cost of Labor Per Lin. Ft. of Tunnel, 

Labor excavating (heading, $22.79 ; bench, 

$20.95) $43.74 

Hauling and dumping 5.65 

Labor timbering 4.19 

Labor framing timber 77 

Blacltsmithing 1.00 

Traclc repairs 21 

Labor electric lighting 88 

Superintendence and accounts 2.00 

Total labor $58.44 

Cost per cu. yd 2.06 

Tlie above does not include the cost of timber, oil, fuel, wear of 
tools or explosives. About 1 lb. of 40% Forcite was used per cu. yd. 
of tunnel excavation, or 28 lbs. per lin. ft. The labor cost was 
$2.34 per cu. yd. of heading, and $1.10 per cu. yd. of bench exca- 
vation, making an average of $1.55 per cu. yd., not including the 
items of timbering, etc. The labor cost of erecting arch and packing 
back of it was $3.19 per lin. ft. of tunnel; or $7.80 per 1,000 ft. 
B. M. The labor cost of erecting plumb posts and side lagging and 
packing same was $2.33 per lin. ft.; or $4.27 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 
The contractors were Paige, Carey & Co., of New York, whose super- 
intendent was Mr. Frank Moran. 

Tunnel Driven by Hand on the B. & O. — Mr. J. G. G. Kerry gives 
description and cost of a short single-track tunnel built in 1891 on 
the W. Va. & P. R. R., a feeder of the B. & O. system. The tunnel 
is on a 14% grade falling to the south, with a length of 624 ft., in 
a soft blue clay shale, nearly dry and showing little stratification. 
This shale disintegrates rapidly on exposure. The width was 23 ft., 
height from floor to spring line 13 ft. ; semi-circular arch of 11% ft. 
radius. The area of the heading was 208 sq. ft. ; bench, 299 sq. ft. ; 
total, 507 sq. ft. Work was all done by hand. The heading gang 
consisted of 1 foreman, 8 miners, 6 muckers and 1 nipper. Common 
laborers were paid $1.45 and miners $1.75 per 10-hr. day. Three 
sets of holes (2 wet and 1 dry) were drilled in the heading; 
each set consisting of 4 holes about 4 ft. deep ; and 24 ft. of 
holes was considered a good day's work for two miners. Bach 
hole was loaded with 4 to 6 sticks (% lb. per stick) of dynamite; 
and the average advance from a blast was 2% ft. A scaffold 
car, or go-devil, was used in handling the muck. It was provided 
with a derrick and also used for handling timbers, lagging and 
packing. 

The bench gang consisted of 1 foreman, 8 drillers, 10 muckers 
and 1 nipper. The bench was shot down in 4-ft. holds or lifts, 
two half-depth blasts being made for each hold. Each blast con- 
sisted of four holes, two being center holes, and two nearly vertical 
under the wall plate. The charge was 10 sticks to an outside hole 
and 15 sticks to a center hole. Muck was taken out in 1 cu. yd. 
dump cars in trains of two. Stone flat cars with platforms flush 
with top of wheels were used for handling large rocks. The 
bench was kept two wall plate lengths behind the heading, making 



1200 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the same progress, 2% ft. per shift. The actual excavation was 
at the rate of 5 ft. per shift, but the time consumed in pointing 
down projections, timbering and packing being equal to the time 
spent in excavation, reduced the average progress to 2% ft. per 
shift. The work was done by contract, and it cost the company 
at contract prices as follows : 

11,726 cu. yds. of excavation at $2.85 $33,419 

742 cu. yds. of packing, at $1.75 1,298 

256 cu. yds. of fallen rock, at $1.25 320 

303,000 ft. B. M., at $30.00 9,090 

Total 624 lin. ft. of tunnel, at $70.70 $44,127 

The actual cost to the contractor was about $35,000. 

The method of handling and placing the segmental arch timber- 
ing is described in detail. The timbering consisted of a 7-segment 
arch of 12 x 12-in. white oak resting- on 12 x 14-in. wall plates 
on top of the posts. The 16-ft. wall plates were jointed by halving 
for a foot at each end, so that the forward end always showed 
the lower half of the joint. The arches were 8 ft. c. to c. The 
segments of the arches were erected on temporary centers made of 
2-in. plank. These centers were erected in two parts and joined 
at the crown by bolts ; a long dog-hook, fastened to the center, 
was driven into the preceding arch to hold it in place laterally. The 
arch timbers were wedged solidly against the roof, and the centers 
withdrawn. The lagging was close laid, all voids being packed 
with broken sandstone. 

Each end of the tunnel was lined with masonry for 50 ft., the 
centers used in this lining being 25 ft. long and mounted on 
rollers. During use the centers were supported on wedges, which 
upon being struck lowered the center enough to clear the rock- 
faced voussoirs. A hole was left in the crown of the arch-center 
lagging so that the voussoirs could pass through. Above this a 
piece or two of the tunnel lagging was removed, and an iron bar 
placed on the timber arches. A set of blocks was hung from this 
iron bar, and used to raise the voussoir stone. Gas pipe rollers 
were put under the stone to roll it to place on the center lagging. 
The stone was then canted up, and a rope slung around it, six 
men then sliding it to place. 

The contract prices were $9 per cu. yd. for portal masonry, $8 
for side walls and $14 for arch sheeting. The cost at contract 
prices per lin. ft. of that part of the tunnel which was lined 
(excluding portals, fallen material, etc.), was: 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavation, at $2.85 per cu. yd $ 53.55 

Packing, at $1.75 per cu. yd 2.08 

Timbering, at $30.00 per M 14.75 

Side walls 20.56 

Arch 21.42 

Total per lin. ft $112.36 



RAILWAYS. 1201 

Cost of the Busk Tunnel.— The Busk Tunnel Ry. Co. built a tun- 
nel 9,395 ft. long on the Colorado Midland R. R. through the 
Rocky Mts., 11.7 miles S. W. of Leadville. The contract was let 
to Keefe & Co., and work was begun Sept. 15, 1890. After all but 
921 ft. had been driven the work was turned over to the railway 
company and finished under the direction of their chief engineer, 
Mr. B. H. Bryant. The tunnel is single track, 15 x 21 ft, with 10.2 
cu. yds. per lin. ft. excavation in rock and 13.8 cu. yds. where 
timbered. The heading was 7 ft. high and the full width of the 
tunnel. The first 8 holes, 8 ft. deep, were drilled in two rows 
from the top to bottom, holes being about 2 ft. apart at surface 
and converging toward the center. The firing of these holes made 
a V-shaped opening. A second set of holes was drilled parallel 
to the sides of the tunnel, and when fired the remaining rock was 
blown into the V-shaped opening. The bench was excavated in 
the same way. The progress was as follows: 

Driving the 2 headings 1,118 days 

Av. daily progress 8.4 ft. 

Av. daily progress, best month 10.9 ft. 

Best month's (28 days) progress, 1 heading 202.5 ft. 

The rock was granite, and in places it disintegrated on exposure, 
requiring timbering ; in other places it was so full of seams as to 
require timbering; so that 78 per cent of the tunnel was timbered. 
The contractor was paid for the tunnel as follows: 

9,393% ft. of tunnel at $62.50 $587,103.75 

32,575 cu. yds. enlargement for timbering at $2.50 81,437.50 

Cost of timber, 2,723,000 ft. B. M. at $30 81,690.00 

Labor timbering at $12 per M 32,676.00 

Total 9,393% ft. at $82.30 $782,907.50 

The plant at the Ivanhoe end consisted of three 100 hp. boilers, 
two 20 X 24-in. IngersoU compressors, one 20 x 24-in. Norwalk 
compressor, one 10 hp. engine to drive electric light dynamo, one 
20 hp. engine to drive a No. 6 Blake blower, 14-in. air pipe, two 
pumps with 14-in. steam cylinders and 10-in. stroke, six 3%-in. 
Ingersoll drills (4 in the heading and 2 on the bench), a small 
traction engine running on a 20-in. gauge track hauling nine 3-yd. 
dump cars. Coke was used as fuel for the traction engine, so that 
the smoke did not inconvenience the tunnel workmen. 

Cost of a Tunnel Near Peekskili, N. Y. — The following data are 
given by Mr. Geo. "W. Lee, engineer for Sundstrom & Stratton, the 
contractors who built the double track tunnel described. The 
tunnel is only 275 ft. long, and is on the line of the New York 
Central R. R., 21/4 miles north of Peekskili. The yardage as shown 
on the plans was 7,028 cu. yds., but as the rock lay in strata dipping 
at an angle of 45°, it broke out on the uphill side so as to leave 
large pockets, in consequence of which the contractor took out 
10 per cent more rock than he was paid for. Owing to the seamy 
condition of the rock, and the proximitj' of the tunnel to the main 
line traffic, very light charges of dynamite were used, which 



1202 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

increased the cost and delayed the progress. Rand steam drills, 
3-in., were used. A heading 8 x 10 ft. was run and the bench 
was kept close behind. Rock from the heading was removed in 
small narrow gage cars ; rock from the bench was loaded into 
standard gage cars by derrick cars. The following was the cost 
of the tunnel excavation : 

Equipment (less present value), supplies and 

repairs $ 2,893.52 

Dynamite and exploders 1,604.58 

Coal 570.80 

Oil, waste, etc 92.80 

Lumber for houses and shops 129.88 

-Miscellaneous 92.10 

Labor ; 22,212.86 

Total $27,596.54 

Average cost per cu. yd. paid for 3.93 

Average cost per cu. yd. taken out 3.54 

The tunnel was lined with 1:2:4 concrete; 692 cu. yds. in the 
bench walls; 932 cu. yds. in the arch; the portal head walls were 
of 1:3:6 concrete, 324 cu. yds. The cost of the concrete was as 
follows for the 1,948 cu. yds. : 

Cement at $1.63 per bbl $ 5,755.50 

Sand at 75 cts. per cu. yd 662.94 

Crushed stone at 80 cts. per cu. yd 1,303.20 

Lumber. 

Mixing platforms and runways $336.89 

Ribs, including hand sawing 234.10 

Backing boards 134.44 

Lagging 341.04 

Sheathing 268.49 

Plates, sills, studs and braces 182.75 

1,497.71 

Coal 118.73 

Oil 16.12 

Hardware, nails, spikes, etc 224.39 

Tools 181.10 

Freight on stone, cement, etc 3,089.86 

Labor, including supt., foreman, etc , 8,036.31 

Total, $10.72 per cu. yd $20,885.86 

In the approaches to the tunnel and in widening cuts south 
of the tunnel 45,698 cu. yds. of rock were removed. On account 
of proximity to traflfic, blasting could be done only at limited periods, 
which made the cost of excavation high. Rock was loaded on flat 
cars with stiff leg derricks provided with bull wheels. The cost 
was as follows: 



-RAILWAYS. 1203 

Equipment (less present value, supplies and 

repairs $11,673.60 

Dynamite and exploders 6 5 88 82 

Coal 2,490.13 

Oil, waste, etc 370.59 

Lumber for buildings 634.22 

Miscellaneous 373 19 

Labor 69,550.66 

Total $91,681.21 

Average cost per cu. yd. paid for 2.24 

Average cost per cu. yd. taken out 2.01 

Cost of Tunnelling, Alaska Central Railway.— From data com- 
■ piled by Mr. G. A. Kyle, and given in a great detail in Engineering- 
Contracting, April 7, 1909, I have prepared the following condensed 
summary. 

The work comprises seven short tunnels located on the Alaska 
Central Ry., between miles 4 8 and 52. The work was begun by 
a contracting firm, but taken over by the railway and finished with 
company forces. The costs are all high, not only because wages 
were high and because of location in an inaccessible country, but 
because work done with company forces is almost invariably more 
expensive than work done by contract. 

Table I shows the length of each tunnel, and the cross-section. 
It is worthy of note that the "overbreak" averaged 12.1%. The 
rock was a "hard blocky slate with fractures at right angles to the 
axis of the tunnels." It broke easily and almost to the theoretical 
lines of the tunnel, and required no timbering. 

Th'fe standard cross-section was 14 ft. between side walls and 21 
ft. between top of rail and top of tunnel. 

Txmnel No. 1 was. built by company forces and was begun Jan. 
16, 1906. This tunnel was located I14 miles from the end of com- 
pleted track. The tunnel was driven entirely from the north end 
on account of a snow slide on the south end, making it impossible 
to work on that end, as the work was mostly done in the win- 
ter months. The tunnel is 699 ft. long. The first 250 ft. was 
driven with steam power and drills. The character of ma- 
terial is of a hard rocky slate and is evidently in an ancient 
slide from the mountains, as the strata were badly broken up, 
which caused a great amount of overbreak outside of the standard 
sections, the same being 27 per cent. This tunnel was on a 14" 
curve and was widened to give a minimum clearance of 18 ins. 
for the maximum length passenger car. The size of the tunnel 
was 17 ft. wide between timbers, and. 21 ft. from top of rail to 
clearance at top of tunnel. Timber was used for 396 ft. in the 
north end. The balance was left unlined, but later had to be lined 
nearly its whole length at an extra high cost, which is not 
included in the costs as shown below. 

The steam plant used in driving the first 250 ft. of the tunnel 
was one 40 hp. boiler, one 10 hp. boiler; three 314-in. Rand drills 
were used in the heading. The work carried on with the followina 



1204 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






< 
p 
O 

to 

o 

M 

% 

M 



o 
2; 






53 » 



03 (M 









o 
W 

02 o 



00 £ 



-t-j O -t-» ••.•.■•• 






C3 to O 

TJ o'lj 

Cl f- O 

rt u cu 



OCKM 

mo 



• O CO CD 



C C005 

>-< 02 o °0N 

ra 03— c a>o5 

-i-i O -►-' - - 

O t^ U (MCO 



, _l^ oo 
0) aJ ooco 



fi t, o oco 

Ctf O 0) >H 



ra . cno 






•"^COt— I 



^ 



•CO (M oo 

• c— t-co 



• oirqo • -00 

• OOOO • • t— 
•MOqiM • •CD 






4> 

P. 

(Do 

bto 
dm 

>> 

hD 
<uo 

.^^ 



Ph 



• oast-t- • .1:000 



o G 



RAILWAYS. 1205 

force in each shift of 10 hours (although work was carried on 
with day and night shifts during a short period) : 

1 foreman. 

3 macliine drillers. 

3 macliine driller helpers. 

1 muck boss. 

10 muckers, 2 in head and 8 on bench. 

1 light tender. 

1 man on dump. 

1 man on cars. 

1 horse. 

1 engineer. 

1 fireman. 

1 blacksmith. 
Making 24 men and 1 horse per shift. 

The timbering was not kept up with the bench, as the material 
stood sufficiently well for the men to work, although it was con- 
sidered dangerous at times. 

There were used in blasting 21 or 22 holes in the heading 8 to 10 
ft. deep, and the bench was taken out in two lifts generally. The 
heading was run from 40 to 60 ft. ahead of the bench and scaffold- 
ing used to dump the muck from heading directly into the cars 
from above, two plank runways supported on trestle being used for 
the purpose. 

The steam plant was discontinued on April 14, 1906, as the heat 
from the escaping steam at the drills made the tunnel too hot for 
the men to work. The progress with the steam plant was satis- 
factory with the above exception and seemed to be about the limit 
that steam can be used economically, viz., 250 ft. from the end of 
tunnel. The steam was carried from the boilers to the drills in a 
21/^ -in. pipe and the escaping steam was carried from the drills back 
out of the tunnels in a 2-in. pipe enclosed in a wooden bo.x with 
the 21/i-in. steam pipe to decrease the heat. The progress during 
the 84 days that the steam plant was used was 250 ft., and the 
progress made while the air drills were working was about 26 ft. 
per day, so that about the same progress was made during the 
steam plant's operation as with the air plant, which was 26.? ft. 
This might be accounted for by the fact that from the time that 
the steam plant was discontinued, April 14, 1906, until April 28, 
1906 (14 days), when the air plant was started, there was not 
much work done in the tunnel excepting to work on the bench, 
which was considerably behind at that time. From the time the 
air plant was installed until Sept. 25, 1906, 150 days, the tunnel 
was worked continuously and was practically finished. The time 
from Sept. 25 to Oct. 8, the time that the tunnel is shown as 
completed in Table II, was employed in dressing up and completing 
the timbering of tunnel. The actual days worked on the tunnel 
were 234, making the actual progress while work was going on 3 
ft. per day. Considerable trouble was had in keeping the force 



1206 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 











5C 


CO 


... to 


CO 










3 






o 


o 


. . . o 


o 




^ 




t-^ 




■* 


"<< 


... 1 


iO 


in 


02 00 c 




c 


o 




w 




CD • • • M 


tH 


'S" 


■^ C<I T 


- 


p 


^ 




>. > 


tH ' ' • 




r-i 




H t^ 






oj 


o 


cd 


-t-j 






< 

m 








§^ 


: : : g 


CJ 

o 












to 


CO 


CO 


CD 












o 


o 


o 


o 








C 
c 


CO 

d 




1 

00 

T-i 


t- 


^ : : : S 


in 
1-1 


O 


CO o •« 

M cq r- 




^ 






> 

o 


r-l . . . » 

. c 

. 1-5 


o 
O 


TH 




« 








o 


CO 

o 












II 


Irt 






CO 


M • • • • 








in r- 

CO' 00 r- 


M 


c 


o 






•*;;;; 








(M r-l C- 


3 


1 




6 

p 




iH , . , , 










o 






















b 








CO 


CO 












!5' „ 








o 


o 












M "q; 


T)H 




1 


o 










la iS 


II 

o 






W 


M 


cq ; ; ; ; 








00 CD C 


d 




C 
1-5 


> 

o 


CO ... * 

tH . . . . 








e<i iH (N 


p 








CO 


CD 


CO 


CD 








■d 




o 


O 


o 


O 








c 




oo 


tH 


«, ' i I °° 


T^ 




m t- 








M 


tH 


" : : : N 


j—t 


CO 


O Co' 1(5 


TO o 


5. 


1-} 








CO , , , 




CO 


in c^ CO 


W C 


3 

r 


o 






T-( . . . . 

. .a 
- . • fa 


3 

1-5 


IH 




& 


) 


^ 




LO 


CD 


CD 


CO 






^ ^ 








o 


O 


O 


O 






J p 


J' 


.OJ 




rf 


1— 1 


! ! ! 00 


tH 






^^ 


H 


^ 




tH 


i~l 


"^ . . . N 


tH 


CO 


CO CO CO 












tH . , . 




C--5 


■* eo CO 




3 




d 


>> 


''^ : : - : ^ 


>J 


IH 




g 




o 




<D 


9 


• ^i* 


3 

»-5 






o 




m 




P 


^-5 


• • ■ h 






M 








lO 


CO 


• ■ ITj 


CO 






TO 








o 


o 


. o 


o 






§ g 




oi 




o 


1 


1 

. o 


c^ 




in '=^ 


8 £ 




d 




01 


03 


M • • • M 
^ '. '. ', 

'-'... CJ 

CD 




CO 


CO c^ "^ 


o 








p^ 


• : ■ p 


^ 






§ a 








CO 


CO 


CD CO C£3 


C£3 






1 




d 




o 
1 

CD 


o 
1 

00 


O O O 

1 r .1 

' O • r«< oo 


O 
U5 




in 




^ 




t-) 

c 


CJ 


oj »■ ft 




O 

in 

1H 




M 








>-i 


o 


H,. <^ <^ 


02 






M 






1 

i 

o 




. 0) 




•.b 


: be 


•>^-ic^ : 


s 

H 








„iL,5-i!> .|i .OS .W .•« 'CO 

|So;^ :5 : s^ -.2 -g 


. o 
. ;.. 
.ft 

•3 


:^ :ft5 • 

: :3=* : 

.-u 0) aj • 






S 


O 

(3 






.TO„|=^ 
to oj O £ B 

01 _, *? S I'-ti 






+-> 

M 




s 


25 

rt o 














p 




P^ 


P' P H P P 


^ 







02 <^ 



RAILWAYS. 



1207 



in C 
O 

o 



CO ^ 

CO C 

o 
O 



-o>. 



lo o c 
O >i 



CO 



o 
U 



O rH 



o 
O 



O O M 

eq ~ rH 



o 

u 



rH '^ 






01 S-. 

(V 60, 

■so 



o c 

d 

i| 












S o Bs 
^^ ^ 

CO 



O— • C ;> 



2d«>£ 

P,3 >• P, 



•■ tao- 



Ipl 



c 
« c 

^ <D — 
be J3^ 

I_. 'Z' ^ L 



Ci 
CO 



to . .^ 

^: :^ 

■a o a* - 
cacco 

tMi3 O ft 
O <D 

oit>P 
^ --- 






p. O ,D 

•H bjo-g 

m ^ o 

3^ '^ c5 

o<M <^ "3 

° *S 

c o " 

C o c >< 



I 

c 


0) 

c 
c 


c • 
> • 

<D • 




3 


W - 
1-1 . 







. 


^ 


^ 





03 


X • 




rt 


<u . 


4-) 


Cy 


0) . 







^ 


■M 




C/3 




t4 


t- >» 


CM 


<u<v a 


CO n-a 



1208 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



up to the standard number in this tunnel on account of the dan- 
gerous character of the rock. 

The cost of this tunnel was as shown in Table III (the length 
being 699 ft., involving 12,988 cu. yds. excavation) : 



Table III — Cost of Tunnel. 

Per 

Compressor and Steam Plant. lin. ft. 

Lighting compressor house, 125 gals, oil at 40c.... $ 0.072 
Dep. of boilers comp. plant drills, etc., 30% of 

original cost at end of track 3.044 

Lubricating oil for compressor 0.086 

Freighting machinery for plant, 25 tons at 50c per 

ton mile 0.072 

Lubricating oils for drills 0.046 

Machinist repairing plant 0.153 

Building for compressor plant (mtls. $184, labor 

$330) 0.470 

Total compressor and steam plant $ 3.943 

Fuel. 

Coal at end of track (266 tons at $8.80) $ 3.346 

Freighting 266 tons coal from end of track, at 50c 

per ton mile 0.761 

Miscellaneous labor hauling coal and ashes 8 mos. 

at $85.00 0.972 

Horses, hauling coal and ashes 8 mos., at $48.00. . . 0.549 

Total fuel $ 5.628 

Enginemen, Etc. — Compr. Plant. 

5 mos. engrs., at $250 per mo. (2 men) $ 1.788 

150 days firemen, at $3.00 0.644 

82 days firemen, at $6.00 (2 men) 0.704 

Total engineers and firemen $ 3.136 

Pipe Line. 

Dep. of pipe line and fittings, 60% of 1st cost $ 0.359 

Hose and parts, 1st cost 1.762 

Laying pipe line, 800 ft. at 20c 0.229 

Total pipe line $ 2.350 

Lighting Tunnel. 

Candles $ 0.705 

Coal oil 1.043 

Gasoline 0.300 

Buckeye lights and torches (dep., 50% of $160, first 

cost) 0.113 

Freight hauling 17 tons 4 miles, at 40c per ton mile ■ 0.039 

Labor, 245 days, attended lights, at $6 day 2.103 

Total, lighting tunnel $ 4.303 

Blacksmithing. 

265 days, at $9.00 (2 men) $ 5.686 

14.8 tons coal, at $20 per ton, at end of track 0.423 

14.8 hauled from end track to tunnel, at 40c per ton 

mile, = $1.60 per ton 0.034 

Depreciation of tools (50% of $316, first cost) 0.226 

Total blacksmithing $ 6.369 



Per 
cu. yd. 

$0,004 



RAILWAYS. 1209 

Engineering and Stiperintendence. 

Engineering $ 2.861 $0,155 

Superintendence 2.575 0.139 

Total engineering and superintendence ■$ 5.436 $0,294 

Labor Excavating. 

Bonus $ 2.111 $0,114 

Labor, including siiift bosses 76.226 4.116 

Horses, 496 days at $1.50 • 1.064 0.058 

Total labor in tunnel e.xcavation $ 79.401 4.288 

Explosives. 

Explosives, powder $ 11.273 $0,600 

Fuses, caps, exploders, lead wires 1.072 0.059 

Total explosives $ 12.345 $0,668 

Materials. 

Tools, hand $ 0.193 $0,011 

Tools, drill steel, dep. 50% first cost 0.317 0.017 

Cars, tracks, dep 0.556 0.030 

Miscellaneous hardware and sundries 0.614 0.033 

Lumber for scaffolding and miscl., 39,383 ft. B. M., 

at $12.00 0.684 0.037 

Hauling above material, 112 tons, at $1.60 0.256 0.014 

Total materials $ 2.620 $0,142 

Total making roads and trails $ 1.717 $0,093 

Total excavation $ 96.083 

Total timber lining (see Table IV) $ 11.205 $0,605 

Total cost of tunnel .' $138,453 $7,477 

Per Per 

Su7ninary. lin. ft. cu. yd. 

Compressor an-:! steam plant .- $ 3.943 $0,212 

Fuel compressor and steam plant 5.628 0.304 

Engineers and firemen compressor plant 3.136 0.169 

Total compressor plant $ 12.707 $0,685 

Pipe line connections, etc 2.350 $.126 

Grand total compressor plant $ 15.057 $0,811 

Lighting tunnel 4.303 0.232 

Blacksmithing 6.369 0.344 

Labor on excavation 79.401 4.288 

Explosives 12.345 0.668 

Material used in excavation for scaffolding, etc 2.6'?0 0.142 

Roads and trails 1.717 0.093 

Timber lining 11.205 0.605 

Engineering and superintendence 5.436 0.294 

Total cost of tunnel $138,453 $7,477 

There were 63.3 lbs. of dynamite used per lin. ft. of tunnel, or 
3.57 lbs. per cu. yd. 

There were nearly 30 lin. ft. of hole drilled per lin. ft. of 
tunnel, or 1.6 lin. ft. of drill hole per cu. yd. The extravagantly 



1210 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

expensive cost of this drilling Is seen when reduced to the cost 
per lin. ft. of drill hole : 

Per ft. 

of hole. 

Total compressor plant charges ($15,057 per lin. ft. of tunnel) .$0.51 

Wages of drillers and helpers 0.23 



Total per ft. of drill hole $0.74 

The plant used on this tunnel was as follows : 

1 40 hp. firebox, water bottom boiler with stack injector and 
feed pump. 

1 12x12x14 inch Franklin straight line air compressor, steam 
driven, capacity 350 cu. ft, of air per minute. 

1 30-inch by 10 ft. air receiver. 
750 ft. 4-inch gas pipe. 

400 ft. 21/2 -inch gas pipe. 

300 ft. 1-inch gas pipe. 

450 ft. 1-inch armored rubber air hose. 

150 ft. 2-inch armored rubber air hose. 

2 3% Rand drills. 

4 3V^ Rand drills. 

2 2% Rand drills. 

5 tripods. 

3 columns. 
5 arms. 

1,000 lbs. X steel. 

Blacksmith outfit. 

Pipe tools. 

Pipe fittings. 

Repair parts for drills. 

Table IV — Cost of Timber Lining. 

Per 
Company force, 148 ft. tunnel lining. Total. lin. ft. 

80 cords wood, at $3.32 per cord $ 266.57 

80 cords wood, at $3.00 per cord 240.00 



Total cord wood $ 506.57 

5,400 ft. B. M. timber, at $22.22 1,199.88 

566 lbs. iron, at 5c 28.33 

5,400 ft. B. M. timber, at $12 648.00 



Total for timber , $1,876.21 



Total for 148 ft. lin. lining $2,382.78 $16,010 



RAILWAYS. 



1211 



Contract for 248 lin. ft. 

952 lbs. iron, at 5c 47.60 

Lumber on hand 667.76 

106,530 ft. B. M. timber, at $12, at end of track.. 1,278.36 

106,550 ft. B. M. timber, at $20 2,130.60 

Timber framed on liand 84.00 



Total timber for 248 ft. tunnel $4,208.32 

99.74 cords wood, at $4, labor 398.96 

90.56 cords wood, at $3, labor 271.68 

190.30 cords wood, at $3, material end track.... 570.90 



$ 0.192 
2.693 
5.154 
8.591 
0.339 

$16,969 



Total for 396 lin. ft. tunnel lining $7,832.64 



Total cords wood back filling $1,241.54 $ 5.006 

Cost of 248 lin. ft. lining $5,449.86 $21,975 

$19,782 
$11,205 

Per day. 



Total for 699 lin. ft. tunnel lining $7,832.64 



The wage scale was as follows : 
Position. . 



Per month. 



Superintendent *$300 



Walking boss. 

Shift bosses 

Muck bosses 

Machine drillers. . . 
Machine helpers. . . 

Carpenters 

Blacksmiths 

Powder thawer. . . . 

Machinist 

Engineers 

Firemen 

Muckers 

Carmen 

Other general labor 



175 



125 
125 



t$5.00 
t 4.00 
4.00 
3.00 
4.00 
4.50 
3.50 



t 3.00 
t2.75 to 3.00 
t2.75 to 3.00 

t 2.75 



*And board. fPaid their own board at $6 per week. 



The prices of explosives were as follows : 

Per lb. 

Dynamite, 70 per cent $0,186 

Dynamite, 60 per cent 0.170 

Dynamite, 40 per cent 0.160 

Black powder 075 

Champion powder 110 

Vigorite 120 

Trimiff 110 

per 100. 

Caps $0.90 

Per 

100 ft. 

Fuse . $0.75 

Electric exploders, 4' to 14' leads, average all lengths, 10 ft. .. 5.00 

Tunnels Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 7. — The character of rock in all these 
tunnels was practically the same, being a hard blocky slate with 
fractures at right angles to the axis of tunnels. The rock drilled 
and broke easily and almost to the theoretical lines of the tunnel, 
and did not require any timbering, for the present at least. 



1212 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The standard cross section was 14 ft. wide between side walls 
and 21 ft. between top of rails and clearance at top of tunnel. 

The lighting was with torches and Wells standard lights, one 
of the latter in each face of tunnel, and gave good satisfaction, the 
electric lighting plant that was bought for the purpose not being 
used. 

Lbs. 

Explosives used in these tunnels were 90, .394 

Per lineal foot of tunnel 44.7 

Per cubic yard in tunnel 3.57 

Per lineal foot of hole drilled in tunnel 1.46 

The work was carried on in the same manner as tunnel No. 1, 
viz. : using 21 holes in the heading, 8 ft. deep, and the bench 
taken out generally in two lifts, the muck taken from the headings 
on wheelbarrows by two men and wheeled on planks supported 
by trestles and dumped directly into the cars from the wheel- 
barrows. The work was carried on in shifts of 10 hours each, 
part of the time day and night, with the following force in each 
shift, viz. : 

1 horse. 

1 foreman. 

1 muck boss. 

3 machine drillers. 

3 machine driller helpers. 

1 light tender. 

8 muckers, 2 in heading, 6 on bench. 

1 dump man. 

1 car man. 

1 blacksmith. 

1 engineer. 

1 fireman. 

Making 23 men and 1 horse in all per shift. 

When the company took these tunnels over from contractors, 
Mr. Martin Moran, who is an experienced tunnel man, was hired as 
general superintendent to look after the work. 

There was also trouble in keeping men on these tunnels on 
account of scarcity of labor at that time, and a system of paying 
a bonus of so much per foot to each man connected with the work 
after a certain number of feet per day was driven, was put into 
effect, which is shown in Table II. 

The actual work of driving tunnel No. 2 by air w.as begun Feb. 
20, 1906, and finished May 12, 1906, requiring 81 days to complete 
the remaining 280 ft. or an average of 3.46 ft. per day. 

Tunnel No. 3 was driven from both ends ; from the south end 
529 *t. and from the north end 426 ft. by air drills! 75 ft. of the 
south end was driven by hand, and the remaining 454 ft. by air 
drills. Work on the south end began with the air drills on Feb. 
20, 1906, and finished July 11, 1906. The north end was begun 
Feb. 28 and finished July 11, 1906, an average of 3.20 lin. ft. per 
day on the south end and the same on the north end. 



RAILWAYS. 1213 

Tunnel No. 6 was begun with air June 18, 1906, and finished Oct. 
15, 1906, requiring 120 days to finish at an average per day of 1.61 
lin. ft. The slow progress of this tunnel is evidently on account of 
the lack of power to run three headings at a time, as they were 
working in tunnel No. 7 at both ends at the same time, and it was 
impossible to carry all the headings on full force at once. 

Tunnel No. 7 was driven from both ends at once time, but the 
exact data are not available to segregate the number of feet 
driven on each end. This tunnel was begun May 24, 1906, and 
finished Nov. 4, 1906, requiring 145 days to complete at an average 
of 4 ft. per day. 

See Table II for other data. Wages and prices of materials were 
the same as for tunnel No. 1, above given. 

Tliese four tunnels (Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 7) had a total length of 
2,024 ft., involving the excavation of 25,257 cu. yds. of rock. 
There were 31.5 ft. of drill hole per lin. ft. of tunnel, or 2.43 ft. 
of drill hole per cu. yd. 

The itemized cost of the work on these four tunnels averaged as 
given in Table V. 

Table "V. — Aveeiage Cost of 4 Tunnels. 

Per Per 

Compressor Plant: lin. ft. eu. yd. 

Dep. compressor plant, interest, etc. (30% first 

cost $ 2.402 $0,192 

Lubricating oil for compressor 0.032 0.003 

Compressor building 0.207 0.016 

Machinist labor repairing plant 0.092 0.007 

Freighting machinery (60 tons, at $2.50) 0.074 0.006 

Lighting compressor building (125 gals, coal oil, 

at 40 cts.) 0.024 0.002 

Total compressor plant $2,831 $0,226 

Pipe Line: 
Pipe and fittings (60% first cost, for dep. and in- 
terest) 0.563 0.045 

Hose and parts 0.246 0.020 

Lubricating oil for drills 0.059 0.005 

Laying pipe line from compressor to tunnels. ... 0.673 0.054 

Hauling (35 tons pipe, at $2.50) 0.043 0.003 

Total pipe line $1,584 $0,127 

ii'ue Z.- 
Coal at end of track (980 tons, at $8.80) $ 4.261 $0,341 

Hauling (at $2.50 per ton) 1.211 0.097 

Miscellaneous labor hauling coal and ashes (8 

mos., at $125) 0.494 0.039 

Fire wood 0.13S 0.011 

Horses hauling coal and ashes, at compressor 8 

mos., at $72) 0.284 0.023 

Total fuel for compressor $ 6.388 $0,511 

Enginemen, Etc.: 

Engineers (8 mos., at $250) $ 0.988 $0,079 

2 firemen (245 days, at $6.00 per day) 0.726 0.058 

Total engineers and firemen $ 1.714 $0,137 



1214 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Excavating: 

Bonus $1,853 $0.1482 

Labor, including shift bosses and muck bosses. . . 50.845 4.0676 

Horses on cars, etc 0.563 0.0451 

Total labor on tunnels $53,261 $4.2609 

Total roads and trails $ 0.791 $0.0633 

Explosives: 

Explosives^powder $ 7.593 $0,608 

Fuse, caps, exploders, lead wire, etc 0.722 0.057 

Total explosives $ 8.315 $0,665 

Tools: 

Hand tools $ 0.130 $0,010 

Drill steel (50% original cost for dep.) 0.214 0.017 

Cars, tracks, etc., depreciation 0.374 0.030 

Total tools $ 0.718 $0,057 

Materials: 

Miscellaneous hardware and sundries $ 0.414 $0,033 

Lumber for scaffolding (77,837 ft. B. M., at $12) 0.461 0.037 

Hauling (216 tons lumber, at $2.50) 0.267 0.021 

Total lumber and hardware $ 1.142 $0,091 

Engineering, Etc.: 

Superintendence $ 1.253 $0,100 

Engineering 1.778 0.142 

Total engineering and superintendence $ 3.031 $0,242 

Lighting: 

Candles $ 6.474 $0,038 

Coal oil 0.704 0.056 

Gasoline 0.202 0.016 

Buckeye lights and torches (50% original cost 

dep. and interest) 0.077 0.006 

Hauling (33 tons at $2.50 per ton, 5 mi.) 0.041 0.003 

Labor attending lights (245 days, at $6) 0.726 0.058 

^ Total lighting tunnel $ 2.224 $0,177 

Blacksmithing : 

284 days blacksmithing, at $4.50 $ 0.631 $0,050 

500 days blacksmithing, at $4.00 0.988 0.079 

663 days blacksmithing at $3.00 0.983 0.079 

19.82 tons blacksmith coal, at $20.00 end track... 0.196 0.016 

19.82 tons freight same, $2.50 per ton 0.025 0.002 

Blacksmith tools, dep. 50% cost 0.104 0.008 

Total blacksmithing $ 2.927 $0,234 

Grand total $84,927 $6,791 

The following is a summary of the foregoing: 

Per Per 

Compressor Plant: lin. ft. cu. yd. 

Machinery dep., lighting, frt. on same, etc $ 2.831 $0,226 

Fuel for compressor 6.3'88 0.511 

Engineer and fireman 1.714 0.137 

Total compressor plant $10,933 $0,874 

Pipe line $ 1.584 $0,127 



RAILWAYS. 1215 

Excavating: 

Tools $0,718 $0,057 

Labor (compressor plant, drilling, etc.) 53.261 4.261 

Roads and trails 0.791 0.063 

Explosives, cap and fuse 8.315 0.665 

Lumber, etc 1.142 0.091 

Engineering and superintendence 3.031 0.242 

Total excavation $67,259 $5,379 

Total lighting tunnel $ 2.224 $0,177 

Total blacksmithing $ 2.927 $0,234 

Grand total $84,927 $6,791 

The very high cost of the drilling is shown by the following cost 
per lin. ft. of drill hole : 

Per lin. ft. 

Compressor plant ($12.52 per lin. ft. tunnel) $0.41 

Drillers and helpers 0^22 

Total $0.63 

Tunnels Nos. i and 5. — These tunnels were driven by contract, 

and hand drills were used entirely. See Table II for time data as 

to these tunnels, and Table I for "overbreak" data. 

The advantage of doing this work by contract is well shown by 

the following costs, which were the costs to the railway company 

at contract prices. 

Cost of Tunnel No. 4 (404 Lin. Ft.). 

Per Per 

Total. lin. ft. cu. yd. 
2,078 cu. yds. tunnel excavation, at $4.50 

per cu. yd $ 9,351.00 

972.6 cu. yds. tunnel excavation, at $5.. 4,863.00 

1,403.5 cu. yds. tunnel excavation, at $4.75 7,094.12 

4,544.1 cu. yds. tunnel excavation $21,308.12 $51.47 $4,497 

Use of 2 cars 160 days, at $1.00 160.00 .38 .034 

Horses for cars 70.00 .17 .015 

Engineering 670.00 1.62 .141 

Superintendence 392.46 .95 .083 

Total $22,600.58 $54.59 $4,770 

Cost of Tunnel No. 5 (304 Lin. Ft.). 

Per Per 

Total. lin. ft. cu. yd. 

3,726 cu. yds. tunnel excavation, at $4.50 . $16,767.00 $55.15 $4.50 

Use of two cars 136 days, at $1 per day. . 136.00 0.45 .04 

Engineering 530.00 1.74 .14 

Superintendence 389.60 1.28 .10 

Total cost $17,822.60 $58.62 $4.78 

It will be seen that the tunnels driven by company forces cost 

50% more than the tunnels driven by contract. 

Cost of the New Raton Tunnel.* — Mr. Joseph Weldel, Asst. Etigr., 

A., T. & S. F. Ry., gives the following: 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 3, 1909. 



1216 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

During the latter seventies of the past century, when the Santa 
Fe Railway was built westward and southward through Colorado 
and New Mexico, a tunnel was found to be necessary in crossing the 
divide of the Raton Range, a spur of mountains projecting eastward 
from the Taos Range in southern Colorado. This tunnel was built 
during the years of 1878 and 1879, and while it was under con- 
struction a switch back was used in crossing the range. Its 
length is 2,037 ft., and it is on an ascending grade of 2% from 
the east ; the summit being at the west portal. The grades ap- 
proaching the tunnel, from either end, are 184.8 ft. per mile. The 
tunnel is 18% ft. high above top of rail and has a clear width of 
14 ft. About 50% of the tunnel is lined with timbers. 

This original tunnel had been in constant use for about 29 years 
when the increase in trafflc, size of rolling stock, and loads, and the 
necessity of e.Ktensive repairs forced the company to build a new 
tunnel. The new tunnel occupies a site adjacent to the old one and 
at the east portal the two are only 40 ft. apart, center to center. At 
the east portal the subgrade of the new tunnel is about 12 ft. lower 
than the subgrade of the old tunnel. The new tunnel is on an 
ascending grade of 0.50% from the east; the summit being at the 
west portal. 

The new tunnel is 2,786 ft. long, 17 ft. wide at spring line, and 24 
ft. high above top of rail and is lined throughout with a concrete 
wall of an average thickness of 24 ins. There are two shafts ap- 
proximately 6x10 ft. in the clear. One of these shafts is 686 ft. 
from the east portal and the other 1,100 ft. from the west portal. 

The contract for the construction of the tunnel was awarded to 
The Lantry Contracting Co., a Kansas corporation, organized for 
this particular purpose. The papers were signed on April 5, 1907, 
and stipulated that the tunnel was to be completed, ready for track 
laying, by March 1, 1908. There was a penalty and premium clause 
in the contract of $100 per day for every day's variation from the 
stipulated time of completion. 

In what follows, it must be borne in mind that the contractor had 
not hitherto been in the business of tunnel building and he conse- 
quently found himself without a suitable working plant or organiza- 
tion at the time the contract was signed. 

Mr. Charles E. Higbee, of Denver, Colo., was engaged- as Super- 
intendent of Tunnel Excavation and Mr. S. A. Maley, of Kansas 
City, Mo., was engaged as Superintendent of Concrete Work. Both 
of these gentlemen had had wide experience in their respective 
fields, and it was under their direction that the work was success- 
fully completed. 

A central power plant was installed near the west end of the 
tunnel. The principal items of this central plant were, one bat- 
tery of two horizontal tubular boilers of 100 hp. and 80 hp., re- 
spectively ; one Sullivan Straight Line Air Compressor W. B. 2, 
20 X 22-in. cylinder; one 90-hp. Armington & Sims steam engine for 
driving the generators ; two 25-kilowatt Bipolar Edison Generators 
of 125 volts; together with pumps, tanks, steam and water pipes 



RAILWAYS. 1217 

and such other appliances as are needed in an up-to-date power 
house. 

A secondary steam plant was located on top of the mountain for 
the purpose of supplying power for operating the hoists at the 
shafts. A 100-hp. boiler was installed and the steam was carried 
in pipes laid on the surface of the ground, from the boiler to the 
hoist, for a distance of 500 ft. each way. 

From the central power plant at Lynn a 4-in. air line was laid 
along the surface of the ground, over the top of the mountain, to the 
Wootton portal. At the Lynn portal, as well as each of the shafts, 
2-in. tees were inserted, from whence the air was carried down 
into the headings and shafts by 2-in. pipes. 

The drilling machinery consisted of 10 Sullivan piston and ]0 
Jeffrey rotary power drills. For ventilating, 2 No. 4% Baker's 
rotary blowers were secured. These were operated by 2 T^-hp. 
motors of 230 volts and 281/2 amperes. This outfit was moved from 
place to place as needed. The cages in the shafts were operated by 
hoisting engines, using either compressed air or steam. 

For excavating the bench, a No. 20 Marion steam shovel was 
used. This shovel was operated by compressed air from the central 
power plant. Three dinky engines kept the shovel supplied with 
cars. Ten 3-cu. yd. dump cars were needed to supply the shovel, 
5 in a train. 

The rock crushing and concrete mixing plant consisted of 1 
Ajax boiler, an engine mounted on wheels, 1 Simmons No. 10 rock 
crusher, 1 %-cu. yd. concrete mixer of the Ransome type, 10 
11/^ -cu. yd. dump cars and an incline for hoisting the loaded cars 
from the tunnel grade onto the working platform at the spring line. 

There was also constructed an electric light and power line over 
the mountain for supplying light and power to the camps and tun- 
nel. A telephone system was also Installed. 

The grading outfit was of the usual kind. 

Owing to the lack of water on top of the mountain the company 
shipped in four tanlc cars full every 24 hrs., approximately 40,000 
gals, being required for all purposes each day. 

On April 25, 1907, ground was broken for the power plant at 
Lynn. While the camp and power plant were in course of con- 
struction work on excavating the approaches at "Wootton and Lynn 
was in progress. On April 3 work was begun excavating the shafts. 
The drilling was done by hand and the excavated material was 
hoisted by animal power. These shafts were dug about 8x12 ft. 
in the clear and were 109 and 115 ft. deep, respectively, measured 
from the crown of arch in tunnel. The material penetrated was soft 
sandstone, hard shale and some coal. 

By May 9, when the power plant was ready for service, the ex- 
cavation of the shafts had been practically completed, all of the 
work having been done by hand and animal power. For the benefit 
of those who may have occasion to construct shafts under similar 



1218 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



conditions, I submit the following table, which shows the cost of 

excavating Shaft No. 1 : 

Foreman, at $4.50 $ 375.25 

Shaft men, at ?3 1,792.50 

Nippers, at $2 32.00 

Thuber men, at $3.50 56.00 

Teams, at $2.50 132.50 

Teamsters, at $2 96.00 

327 cu. yds. excavation, at $2,484.25 

The cost per cubic yard of excavation was, then, as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor $7.60 

Explosives ^ 75 

Supervision ^ 65 

Total $9.00 

It may be stated that this includes the placing of approximately 
20,000 ft. B. M. of timber lining. 

On May 9 the actual work of tunnel excavation was begun by 
shooting the first round of holes in heading No. 6 at the Lynn portal. 
On May 24 heading No. 5 was started and on May 28 heading No. 1 



/0^^^^^,r^g^//7y 




Fig. 4. — Cross-Sections of Tunnel. 



was started. On July 9 headings No. 5 and No. 6 met at Station 
7 + 12, Lynn end, and on same date headings Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were 
started. Headings Nos. 1 and 2 met on Aug. 8 at Station 8 + 10, 
Wootton end. Headings Nos. 3 and 4 met on Sept. 8 at Station 
2 + 00, Wootton end, thus completing a hole through the mountain 
2,786 ft. long in 122 days from time of beginning. 

In taking out the headings it was found that from 12 to 18 holes 
were necessary to cover the face in a satisfactory manner. The 
center set of holes was pointed so as to remove a wedge of rock ; 
other holes were then pointed straight ahead. Those at the sides, 
top and bottom were pointed slightly outward. The average depth 
of these holes was 8 ft. and the diameter 2% ins. Sullivan piston 
and Jeffrey rotary drills, the former mounted on tripods and col- 
umns and the latter on the usual frames, both operated by com- 
pressed air at 90 lbs. pressure, were used. 



RAILWAYS. 1219 

As soon as the drilling was finished the holes were cleaned by 
blowing compressed air into them. They were then charged with 
dynamite, which was exploded by fuse. Fuses instead of electric 
exploders were used because of the former permit of timing each 
shot in such a way as to give the best results from the explosives 
used. For instance, the central set of holes is fired first, removing 
a wedge so that the succeeding shots will have two free faces toward 
which they can break the rock. The "muckers" at the bottom are 
fired last. Their function is to throw back the debris so that the 
drillers will be delayed as little as possible before they can proceed 
with the next set of holes. 

The shots were generally fired just before meal time. Immedi- 
ately after they had been fired, compressd air was permitted to 
escape into the headings and the ventilating fans were started. It 
was thus possible to clear the headings of gases so that they could 
be entered after the meal hour without loss of time. Before firing 
the shots, sheets of boiler iron were spread on the ground just in 
front of the holes to facilitate the handling of debris after blasting. 
When the workmen returned from their meals the headings had 
usually been cleared of gases and fumes and the drillers and their 
helpers would enter and proceed to shovel back any rock that was 
found to obstruct the working front. As soon as this was done, they 
proceeded to drill a new set of holes for the next blast. The 
debris was loaded by from 6 to 10 laborers onto cars of 1% cu. yds. 
and % cu. yd. capacity. The former were used in the headings No. 
1 and No. 6, while the latter were used in headings Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 
5. The former were pulled by animal power to the portals and the 
latter were propelled by man power to the shafts. From the por- 
tals the 1% cu. yd. cars ran by gravity to the waste bank, the 
empties being brought back by horses or mules. The smaller cars 
at the shafts were raised to the surface by hoisting engines operat- 
ing cages. 

The following is a statement of the cost of excavating heading 
No. 6: 

Rate. Total. 

Machine foremen $4.50 $ 495.00 

Machine men 4.00 1,196.00 

Machine helpers 3.50 1,046.00 

Nippers 2.50 507.50 

Muck foremen 3.50 387.00 

Laborers 2.25 2,975.50 

Teams 2.50 315.00 

2,897 cu. yds. material extavated. . . $6,922.00 

The cost per cubic yard for excavation was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Field labor $2.39 

Labor operating power plant 0.31 

Labor in camp and supervision 0.88 

Powder, fuse and caps 0.55 

Coal 0.30 

Depreciation 0.65 

Total $5.08 



1220 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A summary of the total and unit costs of all 6 headings is given 
below : 

Length. Cost. 

No. Ft. Cu. yds. Total cost. per cu. yd. 

1 476 3,165 $17,534.10 $5.54 

2 210 1,026 5,550.56 5.41 

3 400 1,845 8,320.95 4.51 

4 600 2,334 13,233.78 5.67 

5 312 1,564 9,274.52 5.93 

6 788 2,897 14,716.76 5.08 

The material penetrated in heading No. 1 was soft sandstone, 
while the other headings were mixed sandstone, coal and shale. The 
most rapid progress was made in heading No. 6, where there was no 
timber lining to contend with. The average daily progress in this 
heading was 12y2 ft., while for the last nine days the daily average 
was 17 ft. This, of course, means per 24 hrs. About 55% of the 
headings were taken out through the shafts. 

In moving the bench, holes were drilled vertically about 7 ft. 
apart. These were shot as in open cut work. The muck was loaded 
by a No. 20 Marion steam shovel, operated by compressed air. Ten 
3-cu. yd. dump cars were used, five in a train. These trains were 
operated by three dinky engines, one switching at the shovel, one 
taking the excavated material to the waste dump and one in 
reserve. 

Following is the steam shovel monthly progress. 

July 50 ft. October 355 ft. 

August 420 ft. November 565 ft. 

September 540 ft. December 500 ft. 

About 88% of the bench was removed by steam shovel and 12% 
by hand. If we take into account the entire tunnel excavation, 
25% came out through the shafts and 75% through the portals. 

The steam shovel began work on July 29 and finished on Dec. 23, 
a period of 148 days. Below follows a table showing the cost of 
removing 29,417 cu. yds. of bench excavation by steam shovel: 

Rate. Total. 

Foremen ?4-50 $ 1,300.50 

Steam shovel engineer 6.50 1,839.50 

Crane men 3.50 897.00 

Dinky engineers 3.50 1,791.00 

Machine men 4.00 3,604.00 

Machine helpers 3.50 3,244.50 

Pit men 3.00 5,793.00 

Laborers 2.00 6,151.75 : 



29,417 cu. yds $24,621.25 

The cost per cubic yard was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Field labor $0.88 

Labor operating power plant 0.09 

Camp labor and supervision 0.26 

Powder, fuse and caps 0.17 

Coal 0.09 

Depreciation 0.19 



Total $1.68 



RAILWAYS. 1221 

In excavating the tunnel no unusual difficulties were encountered. 
Tliere was very little water to contend with and the material pene- 
trated was sandstone, shale and coal. About two-thirds of the en- 
tire tunnel had to be temporarily lined with timbers. The work was 
done in the following manner : 

As soon as the lieadings had advanced sufficiently a gang of drill- 
ers was set to worlc enlarging the section to the full semi-circle re- 
quired. Sills consisting of 12 x 12-in. timbers were bedded at the 
spring line on eacli side of tunnel, so that the outer face was a uni- 
form distance of 6 or 12 ins. from the face of tlie concrete. Engi- 
neers gave grade and centers for these and in placing them they 
were set 4 ins. higher than the theoretical requirements. This was 
done to allow for subsequent settlement during the excavation of 
the bench. As soon as the sills were bedded to proper grade, the 
segments, six in number, were placed. These were made of 10 x 12- 
in. pieces, or an equivalent section of 3 x 12-in. or 4 x 12-in., was 
built up. The sill, by the way, was also built up of 3x12 or 4 x 12- 
in. pieces, set edgewise. The segments were spaced 3 ft. on centers. 
Over the segments 3-in. lagging was placed, this having previously 
been cut into 3-ft. lengths by means of a circular saw. As soon as 
the lagging was placed, the void spaces between the lagging and 
the roof of the excavation were packed solid witli stones of various 
sizes. As fast as the bench was excavated by the steam shovel, it 
was of course necessary to support the sills at spring line. In this 
case ordinary piles about 12 ins. in diameter were used. These 
were spaced variously from 3 to 6 ft. apart, according to the load 
to be supported. Where the loads were light it was found that 
short stulls from 4 to 6 ft. long made of 8 x 8 -in. stuff answered 
very well for supporting the roof timbering. In such cases, hori- 
zontal struts had to be inserted to prevent the timbers from kick- 
ing in at spring line. 

The work of enlarging the section, the placing of timbers and the 
back filling was done by the same set of men. Owing to this cir- 
cumstance the records of cost data are somewhat less satisfactory 
in this case than in other portions of the work. Of these three 
items the records for the cost of enlarging the tunnel section are 
quite reliable. By subtracting this cost from the total cost of per- 
forming the different classes of work, we have an amount which rep- 
resents the cost of labor placing the timbers and the cost of labor 
placing the backfilling. 

The cost of enlarging the tunnel section was $2.55 per cu. yd. 
After repeated trials the cost of placing the timbers was ascer- 
tained to be $15.55 per M ft. B. M. By subtracting these two, the 
cost of enlarging the section and the placing of the timbers, the 
remainder was assumed to represent the cost of back filling. By 
this process of reasoning it was found that the cost of placing 
the backfilling was $1.50 per cu. yd. In the abstract such reason- 
ing may be correct, but practically the writer has little faith in the 
results. Summing up, then, it may be assumed that the cost of 
enlarging the section is correctly represented by $2.55 per cu. yd., 
that the cost of placing the timbers lies between $12 and $18 per M 



1222 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ft. B. M. and that the cost of placing the backfilling was not ascer- 
tained. 

While the steam shovel was taking out the bench a gang of men 
(vas excavating for the footing course of the concrete walls. As 
soon as portions of these trenches were excavated another gang 
placed the concrete in the foundation. The mixing was done by 
hand on sheets of boiler iron placed in front of the trenches. These 
were moved from place to place as required. However, before any- 
concrete was placed, carpenters erected a sufficient amount of forms 
to define the neat line of concrete at grade. For setting these forms 
engineers gave the grade and center points and after the concrete 
was once placed to this line no further instrumental work was re- 
quired. All of tlie foundation concrete, up to the grade line of the 
tunnel, was placed in the manner indicated above. 

For the real work of lining the tunnel the contractor installed a 
rock crushing and concrete mixing plant in the approach at Lynn, 
about 200 ft. from the portal. The rock was quarried from the ad- 
jacent hill, within 100 ft. of the crusher, which was a No. 10 Sim- 
mons. The mixer was of the Ransome type, mixing % cu. yd. per 
charge. The crusher was at the top of the approach slope, about 
20 ft. above grade. A bin, divided into three compartments, was 
placed above and to one side of the track in the approach. In the 
bottom of the compartments were chutes discharging into a meas- 
uring hopper. Immediately below the hopper was the mixer and 
below the mixer and a little to one side stood the cars that re- 
ceived the mixed concrete. The rock was carried from the crusher 
. into the bin by a small chain elevator and the sand was handled 
in a similar manner. The cement was carried to the bin in sacks. 
Water was supplied by a 2-in. pipe discharging into the mixer, the 
amount being controlled by a boy operating a valve. One man oper- 
ated the measuring apparatus and one attended the mixer. 

It will be seen that the entire process of handling the material 
from the crusher until the concrete reached the cars was mechan- 
ical and from the bin to the cars gravity did the work. 

The crusher was operated by a stationary engine and the mixer 
and elevators by independent electric motors. The cars were handled 
by dinky engines. The sand was shipped from La Junta. The 
crushing and mixing plant was a complete success from every point 
of view. 

Originally it was the contractor's intention to place all of the con- 
crete lining, above foundation line, off a movable platform at 
spring line. With this idea in view a standard flat car was secured 
from the railway company and by means of framework placed 
upon this car a platform 17 ft. wide and 50 ft. long was supported 
at the elevation of spring line. This car was carried on a track 
laid in the center of the tunnel. In order to elevate the concrete 
cars as they arrived from the mixing plant to spring line, an in- 
clined plane (Fig. 5) with a narrow gage track and mounted on 
wheels was coupled onto the platform mentioned above. On the flat 
car was mounted a hoisting engine operated by compressed air. 
The cars were pushed to the bottom of the incline by dinky engines. 



RAILWAYS. 



1223 



where a cable was hooked onto them and they were then hoisted to 
the top of platform by means of the hoisting engine. Once on top 
the concrete was dumped onto the platform and cars returned by 
gravity to tunnel grade. The concrete was then shoveled into the 
forms 'and the idea was that the arch ring would also be turned 



IB^^^ 




i^ 


' 






1 


1 


■pS'!*|ik» 




'-i^si*^ 


vlJ^Bi 


1 


^S^^^^^^^^H^ 


4 


m 


■■1 






■ 


^^^^^^^^^^^H 


^E^-'-^c^ 


^^^^^1 


^^^HH 


^^^^^^^^^^^^^1 


^MP^//>y^BB 


^^^^^^1 


^^HHHj 


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 


l^i^z/^naHH 


^^^^^^^1 


HBBBra| 


^^^^^^^^^^^H 


I^'^/'^jmH 


^^^^^1 


W^r^M 


^^^^^Hl 




^^1 


^^ 


^^^^^^^^^^^^ 


^' Ajf^^^H 


^^^^H 


E^^ 


^^^^^^^^H^,. 


''^-mBBM 


^^^H 


JFp't' ■ ' 


^■^^Kf/ 




HP 








■fi 


Hb| 


IPv'-'- 




^^^1 


^^^H 


HHi^y/' 




^^^^n 


HHHH 


HHk# i.^ 




^^^^H^B 


i^^^^HH^H 






>». 


9 


Bb 


' alW' 


wS^^£SL,£MiIi 


l^BJSfi- 


_.- 


1 



Fig. 5. — Method of Handling Concrete for Lining. 



at once before advancing the incline and platform to a new posi- 
tion. It was found to be impossible to turn the ring fast enough 
without delaying the placing of concrete in bench walls. A feature 
of the forms was to use two 40-lb. bent rails, one on each side and 
meeting at sofflt line, as ribs for supporting lagging for concrete. It 
is evident that a movable platform will not permit of bracing these 



1224 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ribs crosswise of the tunnel axis. Owing to this circumstance these 
ribs lacked stiffness and bulged out considerably when concrete was 
shoveled into the forms. The long and heavy bent rails were also 
very difficult to handle. Owing to these drawbacks, this method of 
placing the concrete was abandoned. 

During the short time that the above method of placing the con- 
crete was in vogue it became evident that, in order that work might 
be carried on without interruption, a platform of considerable length 
was necessary. It was decided, therefore, to erect a fixed platform 
at spring line 17 ft. wide and 500 ft. long. Instead of the bent 
rails for ribs, 6 x 8-in. vertical studding spaced 4 ft. on centers was 
used. These pieces extended from grade line to spring line and were 
cross braced about 10 ft. above grade line. On top of these uprights 
were placed 6 x 10-in. caps, which acted as beams for carrying the 
loose 2-in. platform floor. The lagging was placed directly behind 
the vertical studs, to which it was loosely nailed. Tlie old movable 
platform, mounted on a flat car, and the inclined plane, were then 
run up to the 500-ft. fixed platform and the concrete was hoisted 
as before. 

While the carpenters were placing the fixed platform, the mixed 
concrete was brought in and dumped onto sheets of boiler iron at 
grade line and from there was shoveled into the forms to a height 
of about 6 ft. above grade. By the time that this height was 
reached the platform was ready and all concrete above this 6-ft. 
line was then placed from the fixed platform at spring line. In the 
center of this platform, for its full length, was a track connecting 
With the track on the incline. The cars, after they had been hoisted 
to the platform, were pushed by men to different places and 
dumped. The cars were then pushed back to the incline and lowered 
to tunnel grade by gravity, controlled by hoisting engine on mov- 
able platform. The concrete was shoveled into the forms until the 
spring line was reached. As soon as a portion of the bench walls 
had reached spring line a gang of men erected rail ribs of a 40-lb. 
section bent into the form of a semi-circle to receive the lagging 
for turning the arch ring. These rails were generally made in two 
pieces and were spaced 4 ft. on centers. The lagging was 2-in. stuff 
and was placed as fast as the placing of concrete required it. 
The distance from spring line to soffit line is 8% ft. The placing of 
concrete in the arch ring for the first 6 ft., did not differ materially 
from the method of placing it in bench walls, only a little more 
tamping was necessary to fill the voids. After a point was reached 
where it was too high to cast in the concrete from the platform 
at spring line, a small movable platform on wheels, about 8x10 ft. 
and 4 ft. high, was pushed under the arch and the concrete was 
shoveled from platform at spring line onto this smaller platform 
and from there into arch ring until only a 3-ft gap remained to be 
closed. 

This was an awkward job and required the closest -attention on 
the part of the foreman to prevent the men from slighting their 
work. The concrete had to be shoveled in endwise and to facilitate 
this the length of the lagging for the last 3 ft. of arch ring was cut 



R.ilLir.lVS. 1225 

down to 3-ft. lengths. Tlie concrete for this was made dryer to pre- 
vent it from sloughing back wlien the tamper was withdrawn. 

"The temporary timber lining was imbedded in the concrete and had 
been so placed tluit at least G ins. of concrete was in front of all 
ribs and sills. In places whore the timber had settled or swung 
out of line, the timbers had settled to such an extent as to weaken 
the arch, the wooden ribs were replaced by bent rails. 

The progress made in lining the tunnel by months was as 
follows : 

Cu. yds. 

October 326 

November 1,000 

December 0S5 

January 1,986 

February 4,173 

March 2,931 

April 1,025 

Besides the tunnel lining proper, the two shafts were also lined 
witli concrete. This was done by force account. At the Wootton 
end a reinforced concrete portal wall was built and at the Lynn end 
one of plain concrete was constructed. 

The cost per cubic yard of placing concrete, exclusive of the cost 
of cement, was found from records kept by the assistant engineer 
to be as follows : 

Fer cu. yd. 

Forms and platforms, labor $0.63 

Forms and platforms, lumber 0.54 

Crushing and quarrying rock 0.89 

Cost of sand (no freight) 0.18 

Cost of handling sand at tunnel 0.18 

Cost of handling cement at tunnel 0.17 

Cost of housing cement at tunnel 0.04 

Mixing and transporting concrete 0.41 

Placing concrete into forms , 0.81 

Removing forms and pointing 0.32 

Supervision and camp labor 0.66 

Labor operating power house 0.20 

Coal 0.34 

Depreciation of plant 0.65 

Nails, oil and candles 0.03 

Rental on rails and ties 0.03 

Total $6.08 

The lining of the tunnel proper was completed on April 15, while 
tlie whole contract was finally completed on June 20, 1908, 444 days 
after ground was broken. 

The cost of the contractor's plant in this case was estimated at 
$55,000. The outfit was purchased especially for this contract and 
at the conclusion of the work the contractor offered to sell the plant 
at 50 cts. on the dollar. This fact accounts for the heavy depre- 
ciation charge in the unit costs. 

The unit costs given in this article are based upon records kept 
by the writer as assistant engineer in charge for the railway com- 
pany. A man was employed to keep this record, who had no other 
duties to perform, and the results were tabulated every day. From 
facts known to the writer it is his belief that 10% should be added 
to these figures to arrive at the actual total cost. 



122b 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The work was planned and carried on under the direction of Chief 
Engineer C. A. Morse, of Topeka, Kan., and Engineer P. M. Bisbee 
of La Junta, Colo. The field force consisted of Assistant Engineer 



/Z-x/S' Sidebar 




^ng^CoTj/j: Ofiqinal \ ground 

Fig. 6. — Cross-Section of Tunne: 




Original ground 

Fig. 7. — Longitudinal Section of Tunnel. 



Jos. Weidel with an instrument party and, latterly, during the con- 
struction of concrete work, one day and one night inspector. 

Cost of Driving a Tunnel in Earth.* — During the past decade a 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 1, 1908. 



RAILWAYS. 1227 

large number of descriptions have been written of driving tunnels 
through rock, but only a few tunnels excavated through soft ma- 
terials have been described in engineering literature, and then only 
those in which special methods were used, or unusual difficulties 
encountered. The tunnel described in this article could not be 
classed as unusual in any respect, nor were any novel methods used 
on the work, but inasmuch as we are able to give the itemized cost 
of the tunnel, it may prove of interest. 

The tunnel was on the line of one of the large western roads, on 
the outskirts of a town, crossing under some of tlie streets, but 
without many houses in that neighborhood. The length of this 
single-track tunnel was 2,360 ft. It was lined with timber as shown 
in Figs. 6 and 7. The cross-section was designed to have ultimately 
a lining of concrete. There were about 15 cu. yds. of excavation 
to the running foot figured for the cross-section as designed, which 
meant a total excavation of 35,385 cu. yds., not including any slips 
or falls. 

The material excavated was mostly a glacial deposit or till, there 
being at one end some cemented gravel that had to be blasted while 
the other end was mostly sand. Temporary timbers had to be used 
and some trouble was experienced with the earth slipping, as the 
method of putting In the timber roof shows. 

The work was done by company's forces and the following wages 
we're paid, the working day being 10 hrs. 

Resident engineer. . . -.,;,,,,. $250.00 per mo. 

Assistant engineer. ...' .'i'. 125.00 per mo. 

Transitman 85.00 per mo. 

Draftsman 75.00 per mo. 

Rodman 50.00 per mo. 

Chainman 40.00 per mo. 

Axeman 2.25 per day 

Extra chainman 2.25 per day 

Superintendent 225.00 per mo. 

Accountant 75.00 per mo. 

Purchasing agent 70.00 per mo. 

Material clerk 70.00 per mo. 

Clerk 40.00 per mo. 

Cook 45.00 per mo. 

Heading foremen 5.00 per day 

Bench foremen 4.00 per day 

Track foremen 2.50 per day 

Foremen 2.50 per day 

Miners 3.00 per day 

Muckers 2.00 per day 

Nippers 2.00 per day 

Team and driver 5.00 per day 

Horse and driver 3.00 per day 

Rail drillers 2.50 per day 

Trackmen 2.00 per day 

Dumpmen 2.00 per day 

Carpenter foreman 3.50 per day 

Carpenters 2.50 per day 

Blacksmith .' 3.00 per day 

Helper 2.00 per day 

Timber inspector 2.50 per day 

Timekeeper 2.25 per day 

Mortormen 2.75 per day 



1228 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following men were used at times and paid tae following 

wages : 

Electrician $100.00 per mo. 

Linemen $2.50 to 2.75 per day 

Carshop foreman 3.00 per day 

Carshop carpenter 2.50 per day 

Macliinists $2.50 to 3.50 per day 

Masons 4.00 per day 

Engineering and Superintendence. — Under this head is given the 
cost of superintendence and the engineering work. The superin- 
tendence was a cost that would have come under the contractor's 
item of general expense, if the work had been done by contract. 
The two items of engineering and superintendence were kept to- 
gether, but the superintendence was more costly than the engineering, 
as the resident engineer gave only part of his time to the tunnel 
work, and even the assistant engineer's salary was not charged 
in full against the tunnel. The items going to make up this 
charge were : 

Payroll $4,582.67 

Supplies and incidentals 174.81 

Board 663.99 

TeleDhone for office. . 21.30 

Light for office 61.16 

Engineering and superintendence $5,544.03 

This gives a cost of 16 cts. per cu. yd. of excavation and. a 
cost of $2.35 per lineal ft. of completed tunnel. 

Camp and Offices. — A camp was built near the tunnel site for the 
men to live in, and an office was also established for the superin- 
tendent and the engineers. A teniporary depot was built, and a 
freight house to store supplies. Electric lights were used in some 
of these buildings, and water was also placed in some, being 
procured from the town. 

The total cost of camp was $3,177.93, and, as some of the build- 
ings were sold and the depot was given to the operating department 
of the road, a credit of $492 was made to this account, making the 
net cost of the camp $2,685.93. This means a cost per cu. yd. 
of excavation of 8 cts., and a cost per lin. ft. of tunnel of $1.14. 
When work is done by contract the item of camp comes under 
general expense, but, as a contractor usually charges his men a 
small rental for houses or bunks, there are generally enough credits 
made to the camp account to balance it. 

Plant. — In spite of the length of this tunnel, bein^ such as to 
class it as a long tunnel, a compressor plant was not used, but 
an electric motor was installed and used in operating a motor car to 
haul material from the tunnel. The motor had been used on some 
other job and had to be repaired. The total charge for motor, 
supplies, repairs, operation and power was $3,132.29. When the 
tunnel was finished the mot6r was sent to another tunnel that 
was being driven and a credit was made for the motor of $1,606.36, 
and $360 for power furnished for other purposes, leaving a net 
charge of $1,165.93. The cost per cu. yd. of excavation was 3 cts., 



R.ULn\iyS. 1229 

while the cost per lin. ft. of tunnel was 49 cts. In contract work 
this item would be classed under the licad of plant. 

Tools. — The tools used on the job were small ones for the excava- 
tion and timber work, with tlie exception of the electric locomotives 
and the cars for hauling earth and timber. The cost of the tools 
and supplies was $6,520.04. The cost of repairing and maintaining 
these was : 

Labor $2,084.05 

Coal 133.38 

Lumber 195.76 

Iron 417.64 

Total ,' $3,433.73 

This makes a total expenditure for tools of $9,953.77. At the 
end of the job, a credit was made of $3,929.16 for tools and supplies 
sent to another job, leaving a net charge for tools of $6,024.61. 
This cliarge properly belongs under the item of plant, yet, inasmuch 
as the depreciation on small tools is much greater than on ma- 
chinery, it is well to keep a separate account of tools. The cost 
per cu. yd. for tools was 17 cts., while the cost per lin. ft. of 
tunnel was $2.55. 

Explosives. — A car load of Forcite dynamite was bought for the 
job, but only a small part of it was used. The strength was 40 
per cent, and it cost 121/4 cts per lb. Two 30-hole exploding 
batteries were bought, and electrical exploders to use with the 
batteries. The total cost of explosives was: 

Dynamite and exploders $2,638.48 

2 batteries 80.00 

Wire 40.00 

Total $2,758.48 

At the end of ths job, the batteries and unused explosives were 
sent to another piece of work. A credit of $60 was made for the 
two batteries, and $2,030.29 was credited for the explosives. 
Consequently tliere remained a net charge of $668.19 for blasting. 
This makes a charge of 2 cts. per cu. yd. and 28 cts. per lin. ft. 
of tunnel. 

Tunnel Excavation. — The excavation was done in the usual 
manner. The heading was excavated and timbered, then widened 
out and the roof supported in the manner shown in the illustrations, 
with the addition of temporary props. Then the bench was 
excavated and the permanent timbering finished. The excavated 
material was wheeled out of the heading in wheelbarrows, and 
horses were used in pulling the cars from the bench excavation to 
the dump, but as th3 havil became long, the electric locomotives 
previously referred to were used. Candles were used to give light 
in the headings, the expense for this being $116.71. Electric wire 
was strung for the motors and also for lighting purposes. The 
costs for the hauling has been included in that for plant, but this 
work for the lighting and the power rented, with the lights, wires, 
etc., cost $1,191.57, making a total cost of $1,308.28. This makes a 



1230 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cost of 4 cts. per cu. yd. for lights, and 55 cts. per lin. ft. of 
tunnel. 

Another item of cost was some incidentals on the outside of the 
tunnel, such as small drains at street crossings, some clearing, 
a temporary trestle, the blocking up of a warehouse, and other 
details on which $1,158.27 was spent for materials and labor. 
For these incidentals the cost per cu. yd. was 3 cts. and the cost 
per lin. ft. of tunnel was 49 cts. 

The expenses for labor and teams was $75,762.10, making a 
cost per cu. yd. of $2.14 and per lin. ft. of tunnel of $32.12. 

Tim'ber Lining. — The total amount of timber used was 2,434,200 
ft. B. M., costing $20,223.18. This is • exclusive of wedges, cord- 
wood and iron. Cordwood was used for packing, the plans calling 
for 533 cords, but only 451 cords were bought, the price per cord 
being $1.50. The deficiency was made up by using old pieces of 
temporary timbers and scraps. The cost of the cordwood was 
$658.16. Wedges were made from 2x12 boards, and cost to make 
from 1% to 2 cts. a piece. These were made by contract, about 
15,000 being used, costing $2,586.95. The iron and nails used cost 
$669.79. 

The amount of permanent timber called for by the plans was 
1,687,200 ft. B. M. The average price paid for this was $8.40 
per M. In addition to this 747,000 ft. B. M. were used as temporary 
timbers and for other purposes. This cost an average price of 
$8.10 per M. The cost of labor for framing and placing timber, 
exclusive of the time of the men from the mucking gangs that may 
have been used temporarily, was $8,615.40. This gives a cost for 
framing and placing per M. ft. of timber as called for by the 
plans of $5.10, while the cost per M. for the total amount of timber 
used was $3.54. Separate record was not kept of placing the 
cordwood. The total cost of the lining was : 

Lumber $20,223.18 

Cord wood 658.16 

Wedges 2,586.95 

Iron 669.79 

Labor 8,615.40 

Total $32,753.48 

The cost of each of these items per cu. yd. of excavation was : 

Per cu. yd. 

Lumber, at $8.30 $0.57 

Cordwood 0.02 

Wedges 0.07 

Iron 0.02 

Labor 0.24 

Total $0.92 

The cost of lining per lin. ft. of tunnel was : 

Per lin. ft. 

Lumber, at $8.30 $8.53 

Cordwood 0.28 

Wedges 1.09 

Iron 0.28 

Labor , 3.65 

Total $13.83 



RAILWAYS. 1231 

Personal Injury. — No one was killed in building this tunnel ; 
however, a number of men were hurt, but none seriously. Various 
expenses were incurred on account of those injured, there having 
been paid out $2,170.45, making a cost per cu. yd. of 6 cts., and per 
lin. ft. of tunnel of 92 cts. 

Summary of Cost. — The total cost of the entire work was: 

Engineering and superintendence $ 5.544.03 

Camp 2. 685. its 

PersoMal injury 2,170.45 

Plant 1,165.93 

Tools 6,024.61 

Expenses 668.19 

Tunnel Excavation: 

Light 1,308.28 

Incidentals 1.158.27 

Labor 75,762.10 

Timber Lining: 

Lumber 20,223.18 

Cord wood 658.16 

Wedges 2,586.95 

Iron 669.70 

Labor .' 8,615.40 

Total $129,241.27 

The cost per cu. yd. for each of these items was : 

Per cu. yd. 

Engineering and superintendence $0.16 

Camp 0.08 

Personal injury 0.06 

Plant 0.03 

Tools 0.17 

Explosives 0.02 

Tunnel Excavation: 

Light 0.04 

Incidentals 0.03 

Labor 2.14 

Timber Lining: 

Lumber 0.57 

Cord wood 0.02 

"Wedges 0.07 

Iron 0.02 

Labor 0.24 

Total $3.65 

The cost per lin. ft. of tunnel for each item was: 

Per lin. ft 

Engineering and superintendence . $ 2.35 

Camp 1.14 

Personal injury 0.92 

Plant 0.49 

Tools 2.55 

Explosives 0.28 

Tunnel Excavation: 

Light 0.55 

Incidentals 0.49 

Labor 32.12 

Timber Lining: 

Lumber 8.53 

Cord wood 0.28 

Wedges 1.09 

Iron 0.28 

Labor 3.65 

Total $54.82 



1232 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The total payroll on the job amounted to about $90,000 and it will 
be noticed that the amount paid out: tor personal injuries was 
$2,170.45. If liability insurance had- oeeri taken out for this job 
the rate would have been less than 2 per ceht; hence money would 
have been saved. It is always well on construction work to carry 
this kind of insurance. 

No record was kept of the slips and slides that occurred in the 
tunnel, but some must have occurred as glacial drift is apt to 
be treacherous material to tunnel through, and this must not 
have been an e.xception to the rule, as the large amount of tem- 
porary timber used bears witness. 

Considering the high wages paid, and the fact that the work was 
done by day labor, the cost is not excessive, but no doubt timber 
was wasted, yet the prompt use of temporary timbers in some 
places may have saved money when heavy slips were threatened. 

The engineering and superintendence together were less than 
5 per cent of the total cost. This would mean that the engineering 
expense did not exceed 2 per cent, and the cost of locating the 
work is included in this. The Item of general expense, as a 
contractor would have classified it, including superintendence, camp, 
and personal injury, was about 6 per cent. This could have been 
cut down a little by taking liability insurance, and charging rent 
for the camp. The plant and tool charge was a little more than 
5 per cent. The tunnel lining was 25 per cent of the total cost. 

The excavation of the heading was commenced in March. Work 
was started at both ends of the tunnel. During April no work 
was done inside the tunnel, but in May active operations were 
commenced and night and day forces were put to work. The 
headings were finished in August, and the benches cleaned up 
by the middle of September. Each heading foreman worked from 
9 to 10 men, while the bench foremen worked from 15 to 20 men in 
their gangs. At one end of the tunnel a bench sub-foreman with 
extra men were used for several months. When work first com- 
menced, the track gangs had from 10 to 15 men in them, there 
being a track gang for each end of the tunnel ; but, as soon as the 
work was well under way, these gangs were cut down to 6 men 
each, and at the end only 4 men were kept in a gang. The timber 
gangs, consisted of a foreman, from 7 to 10 carpenters and a timber 
inspector. There was a night and day gang of carpenters from 
May to September. 

Cost of Lining the Mullan Tunnel. — The tunnel is .3,850 ft. long, 
20 miles west of Helena on the Northern Pacific Ry. Falls of rock 
and fires in the tunnel had caused numerous delays. The original 
timbering consisted of sets 4 ft. c. to c. of 12 x 12-in. timbers, with 
4 -in. lagging. The size was 16 x 20 ft. in the clear. 

Concrete side walls (30-in. ) and four-ring brick arch were built 
in place of the old timbering. A 7-ft. section was first prepared 
by removing one post and supporting the arch by struts. Two 
temporary posts were sent up and fastened by hook bolts ; and a 
lagging was placed back of them to make forms to hold the 



RAILWAYS. 1233 

concrete. Several of these 7-ft. sections were prepared at a time, 
eacli two being separated by a 5-ft. section of the old timbering. 

The mortar car delivered Portland cement mortar (1 to 3) 
through a chute, making an 8-in. layer of mortar into which broken 
stone was shoveled imtil all the mortar was taken up by the stone 
voids. In 10 to 14 days the walls were hard enough to support the 
arches which were then allowed to rest on the walls, and the posts 
of the remaining 5-ft. sections were removed, and concrete placed 
as before. About 4 parts of mortar were used to 5 parts of 
broken stone, which is a very rich concrete. The average prog- 
ress per working day was 30 ft. of side wall, or 45 cu. yds. 
From 3 to 9 ft. of brick arch were put in at a time, depending 
I'pon the nature of the ground. To remove the old timber arch, 
one of the segments was partly sawed through, and a small charge 
of dynamite exploded in it ; the debris being caught on a platform 
car, from which it was removed to another car and conveyed 
away. The center was then placed, and the cement car used to 
mix mortar on. Brick were 2% x 2% x 9 ins., four ringings, 
making a 20-ft. arch and giving 1.62 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. 
The bricks were laid in rov/lock bond. Two gangs of 3 brick- 
layers and 6 helpers each, laid 12 lin. ft, or 19.4 cu. yds., of 
brick arch per day. 

The foregoing description of the work is given by Mr. H. C. Relf. 
The following data were published in Engineering-Contracting, July 
17, 1907. 

For most of the distance it was lined with concrete side walls 
and concrete arch, but for part of the distance a brick arch was 
used instead of concrete. The brick was used only where it was 
necessary to support the roof by timbering, for wherever the roof 
would stand without props the concrete was used on account of its 
much greater cheapness. 

The concrete side walls were 14 ft. high and had an average 
thickness of 2% ft. Therefore each side wall averaged nearly 
1.3 cu. yds. per lin. ft., and the two walls averaged 2.59 cu. 
yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. The concrete was mixed 1 :3 :5, 
being, we believe, unnecessarily rich in cement. The average 
amount of concrete placed in the walls per day was 50 cu. yds. 

Cost of Side Walls. 
Materials: ' Per cu. yd. 

1.33 bbl. cement, at $2.00 $2.66 

0.5 cu. yd. sand, at $0.18 0.09 

0.75 cu. yd. stone, at $0.55 0.41 

Total $3.16 

Labor on Concrete: 

0.01 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.05 

0.03 day foreman, at $3.00 0.09 

0.03 day engineman, at $3.00 0.09 

0.35 day laborer, at $1.75 0.61 

0.42 Total $0.84 



1234 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor, Removing Timber, Building Forms, 
Excavating Etc.: 

0.02 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.10 

0.05 day foreman, at $3.00 0.15 

0.40 day laborer, at $1.75 0.70 



0.47 Total $0.95 

Miscellaneous: 

0.02 day engineer and superintendent, at $5 $0.10 

Falsework and forms, timber and iron 0.07 

Tools, light, etc 0.10 

Interest and depreciation of $1,800 plant at 20% 

per annum 0.09 

Train service, 0.03 day work train, at $25 0.75 

Summary Concrete Side Walls: 

Materials $3.16 

Labor on concrete 0.84 

Labor removing timber, etc 0.95 

Train service 0.75 

Miscellaneous 0.34 



Total $6.04 

In the two side walls there were 2.59 cu. yds. of concrete per 
lin. ft. of tunnel, hence the cost of the side walls was $6.04 X 2.59 = 
$15.64 per lin. ft. of tunnel. 

The concrete arch varied in thickness, averaging from 14 to 
20 ins. at the springing line to 8 to 14 ins. at the crown. The 
arch averaged 1.2 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. About 20 cu. yds. 
of arch were placed per day. The arch concrete was mixed 1 :3 :5 
and the cost was as follows : 

Cost of Concrete Arch. 
Materials: Per cu. yd. 

1.36 bbls. cement, $2.00 $2.72 

0.05 cu. yd. sand, $0.18 0.09 

0.75 cu. yd. stone, $0.55 0.41 



Total $3.22 

1.8 cu. yds. dry rock backing, at $0.55 0.99 

Labor on Concrete: 

0.02 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.10 

0.12 day foreman, at 3.00 0.36 

0.88 day laborer, at 1.75 1.54 



1.02 Total $1.96 $2.00 

Labor Placing 1.08 Cu. Yds. Rock 
Backing: 

0.01 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.05 

0.51 day foreman, at $3.00 0.15 

0.55 day laborer, at 1.75 - 0.96 



0.61 Total $1.90 $1.16 

Labor Removing Timbers, Removing 
Forms, Excavation, Etc.: 

0.02 days foreman, at $5.00 $0.10 

0.04 days foreman, at 3.00 0.12 

O.OG day carpenter, at 2.50 0.15 

0.40 day laborer, at 1.75 0.70 



0.52 Total $2.06 $1.07 



RAILWAYS. 1235 

Train Service: 

0.06 day, at $25 $1.50 

Miscella7ieoHs: 

Engineering and superintendence $0.07 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.13 

Tools, light, etc 0.12 

Interest and depi'eciation, $1,800 plant, 20% per 

annum 0.09 

Summary Concrete Arch: 

Concrete materials $3.22 

Dry rock backing (1.8 c. y. ) 0.99 

Labor and concrete 2.00 

' Labor placing 1.8 cu. yds. rock backing 1.16 

Labor removing timber, etc 1.07 

Train service hauling materials 1.50 

Engineering and superintendence 0.07 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.13 

Tools, light, etc 0.12 

Interest and depreciation plant 0.09 

Grand total $10.35 

It will be noted that the "train service" is an item that really 
should be considered as a part of the cost of the materials, for 
the cost of the sand and stone is the cost f. o. b. cars at the sand 
pit and at the quarry, to which should be added the cost of hauling 
them to the tunnel — to-wit, the "train service." 

Summing up. we have the following as the cost per lineal foot for 
lining this single-track tunnel with concrete : 

Per lin. ft. 

2.59 cu. yds. side walls, at $6.04 $15.64 

1.20 cu. yds. arch, at 10.33 12.40 



3.79 cu. yds. Total $9.38 $28.04 

It should be remembered that the higher cost of the arch concrete 
is due in large measure to the fact that 1.8 cu. yds. of dry rock 
packing above the arch is included in the cost of the concrete. 
Strictly speaking, this dry rock packing should not be charged 
against the arch concrete, and, segregating it, we have the fol- 
lowing : 

Per lin. ft. 

2.59 cu. yds. concrete side walls, at.. $6. 04 $15.64 

1.20 cu. yds. concrete arch, at 8.18 9.82 

2.16 cu. yds. dry rock, at 0.55 1.19 

Labor placing 2.16 cu. yds., at- 0.64 1.39 

Total $28.04 

This is a much more rational analysis of the cost and a still 
further reduction in the cost of the arch concrete might be made by 
prorating the train service item ($1.50 per cu. yd. concrete). 
At least half of this train service should be charged to the dry 
rock backing, for there are 1.25 cu. yds. of sand and broken stone 
to 1.80 cu. yds. of dry rock backing. 

The amount of this dry rock backing, or packing, varies greatly in 
different parts of a tunnel. In the first half of this tunnel it 
averaged 1.8 cu. yds. per lin. ft., while in the second half it averaged 



1236 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

nearly 2.4 cu. yds. per lin. ft. In a subsequent issue we shall give 
the cost of lining a tunnel that averaged 1.4 cu. yds. of dry rock 
packing per lin. ft. 

As previously stated, part of this tunnel was arched with brick 
instead of concrete. About one-third of the tunnel was thus 
arched with brick, laid 2 to 5 rings thick, and averaging 1.28 
cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. 

The average progress was 13 lin. ft. per day. The brick were 
2%x4x8 ins. in size. The cost of the brick arch was as follows: 

Materials: Per cu. yd. 

500 brick, at $7.00 $3.50 

1.02 bbl. cement, at 2.00 2.04 

0.4 cu. yd. sand, at 0.25 0.10 

Total $5.65 

1.5 cu. yds. dry rock backing at $0.55 $0.83 

Labor and Masonry: 

0.03 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.15 

0.03 day foreman, at 3.00 0.09 

0.32 day masons, at 3.00 0.96 

0.65 day laborers, at 1.75 1.14 

0.06 day sta. engr., at 3.50 0.21 

1.09 days. Total $2.34 $2.55 

Labor Removing Timbers, Moving 
Centers, Excavating, Etc.: 

0.02 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.10 

0.07 day foreman^ at 3.00 0.21 

0.07 day carpenter, at 2.50 0.18 

0.46 day laborer, at 1.75 0.81 

0.62 day. Total $2.10 $1.30 

Labor Placing Rock Backing: 

0.01 day foreman, at $5.00 $0.05 

0.06 day foreman, at 3.00 0.18 

0.52 day laborer, at 1.75 0.91 

0.59 day. Total $1.93 $1.14 

Train Service: 
0.06 day, at $25.00 $1.50 

Miscellaneous: 

Engineering and superintendence $0.04 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.12 

Tools, light, etc 0.12 

Interest and depreciation, $1,800 plant, 20% per 

annum ' 0.09 

Total $0.37 

Summary of Brick ArcJi: 

Materials for masonry $ 5.64 

Labor on masonry 2.55 

Labor removing timber, etc 1.30 

Train service 1.50 

Miscellaneous 0.35 

Total $1124 

Dry rock backing 0.83 

Labor placing rock backing 1.14 

Grand total $13.21 



I 



RAILWAYS. 1237 

The cost per lin. ft. of tunnel for lining with a brick arch 
resting on concrete side walls was as follows: 

Per lin. ft. 

2.50 cu. yds. concrete side walls at $6.04 $15.64 

1.28 cu. yds. brick arch at $11.24 14.3!) 

1.92 cu. yds. rock backing at $0.55 1.06 

Labor placing 1.92 cu. yd. rock backing at $0.76 1.46 

Total , $32.55 

The previous remarks about ti-ain service apply in this case also. 
Not much has ever been published on the cost of tunnel lining. 
Several examples of such cost are given in Gillette's "Rock Ex- 
cavation," but the costs there given are considerably higher than 
those above recorded. In making comparisons, however, the reader 
is cautioned to compare the cost per cubic yard of lining as well 
as the cost per lineal foot of tunnel. The character of the ground 
and the opinion of the engineer influence the thickness of the lining 
used, so that one tunnel may contain twice as many cubic yards 
per lineal foot as another tunnel of equal size. 

Masonry lining put in at the time of construction is obviously 
cheaper than lining put in to replace an old timber lining. Not 
only does the passage of trains delay work, but the cost of removing 
the old timber lining is no small item itself. The work above 
described involved the removal of an old timber lining, yet it was 
done at a very low cost, particularly when one considers that it 
was done by company forces and not by contract. 

Cost of Lining a 1,000 Ft. Railway Tunnel.* — This tunnel was 
lined with concrete side walls and a brick arch, the length of the 
lining being about 1,000 lin. ft. The two concrete side walls 
averaged 3.2 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel, and the cost was as 
follows, per cu. yd. 

Per cu yd. 

1.1 bbl. cement at $2.00 $2.20 

0.9 cu. yd. stone at $0.60 0.54 

0.5 cu. yd. sand at $0.12 0.06 

Tools 0.04 

Light 0.01 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.07 

Labor excavating for and building side walls 1.75 

Engineer and superintendence 0.15 

Work train service 0.90 

Total $5.75 

Laborers received $2.00 a day on the concrete work. We are 
unable to give the cost of the labor in as much detail as was given 
in our issue of July 17, but the total cost per cubic yard is nearly 
the same in both cases. The cost of the sand was merely the 
cost of loading. Work train service (90 cts. per cu. yd. of concrete) 
covers the cost of hauling sand and broken stone. 

There were four rings of brick in the arch which averaged 1.8 
cu. yds. per lin. ft. of tunnel. The brick measures 2%x3%x8 ins. 
The cost of the brick arch was as follows per cu. yd. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 14, 1907. 



1238 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Materials. " Per cu.yd. 

1.1 bbls. cement at $2.00 $2.20 

480 brick at $7.00 3.36 

0.4 cu. yds. sand at $0.50 0.20 

Total $5.76 

Labor : Excavating and Preparing for Arching 
Moving Centers. 

0.03 day foreman at $4.00 $0.12 

0.06 day foreman at $3.50 0.21 

0.01 day timekeeper at $2.50 0.03 

0.02 day blacksmith at $2.50 0.05 

0.27 day laborer at $2.00 0.54 

0.39 day at $2.44 $0.95 

Mixing Mortar and Building Brick Arch. 

0.03 day foreman at $4.00 $0.12 

0.06 day foreman at $3.50 0.21 

0.01 day timekeeper at $2.50 0.03 

0.05 day brick mason at $3.50 0.18 

0.23 day brick mason at $3.00 0.69 

0.35 day laborer at $2.00 0.70 

0.73 day at $2.65 $1.93 

Quarrying Rock for and Filling Over Arch. 

0.07 day at $2.15 $0.28 

Engineering and superintendence 0.16 

Work train service 0.56 

Falsework, timber and iron 0.07 

Tools, light, etc 0.05 

Summary of Brick Arch. 

Materials $5.76 

Labor, excavating, etc 0.95 

Labor, mix mortar, etc. . . . ; 1.93 

Quarrying rock and filling over arch 0.15 

Engineering and superintendence 0.16 

Work train service 0.56 

False work 0.07 

Tools, light, etc 0.05 

Total $9.63 

Summary of Tunnel Lining. Per Tin. ft. 

3.2 cu. yd. concrete sidewalls at $5.72 $18.30 

1.8 cu. yd. brick arch at $9.63 17.33 

Total $35.63 

The two portals were of concrete and each contained 250 cu. yds. 
The average cost of each portal was as follows : 

Per portal. 

275 bbls. cement at $2.00 $ 550 

225 cu. yds. rock at $0.60 135 

110 cu. yds. sand at $0.12 13 

Work train service 150 

Lumber for forms 70 

Labor, erecting and removing forms 140 

Labor excavating for and building portals 500 

Engineering and superintendence 50 

Total $1,608 

This is equivalent to $6.45 per cu. yd. of concrete in the portals. 
The cost of two portals, $3,216, distributed over a tunnel 1,000 ft. 
long, adds $3.22 per lin. ft. to the cost of the masonry lining. 



RAILWAYS. 1239 

Cost of a Brick and Stone Lining. — (Tlie data on tunnels above 
described should be consulted for data on concrete lining.) Drinker 
gives the following data on the lining or Carr's Tunnel (825 ft.) 
on the Pennsylvania R. R. in 1868-1869. Brickwork: 609.000 brick 
in the arch (5 per cent broken and lost) ; 10.44 bushels of neat 
cement (no sand used in the mortar) laid 1,000 bricks, the mortar 
forming 30 per cent of the brick masonry; the arch was 25 ins. 
thick, 24%-ft. span and 9-ft. rise: 

• Cost per M. 

Bricks f. o. b $ 8.80 

Loss in handling 51 

Unloading and delivering 1.92 

Laying 5.84 

Cement 5.10 

Total $22.17 

Bricklayers received 40 cts. per hr. ; helpers, 17^4 cts. per hr. ; 
carpenters, 27% cts. per hr. ; laborers, 17 cts. per hr. 

Stonework: 1,730 perches (25 cu. ft.) of rough masonry for side 
walls, presumably sandstone; 187 perches of ring stone; 25 perches 
wasted in dressing. The bench walls were 4 ft. wide at the bottom,. 
3 ft. at the top and 13 ft. high: 

Cost per perch. 

Quarrying (1,730 perches) $ 4.80 

Cutting (1,730 perches) 4.36 

Hauling (1,942 perches) 1.06 

Handling and laying (1,917 perches) 2.80 

Cement, 1.65 bu. per perch (8 1/6 per cent of the 

Masonry) 81 

Total $13.83 

Stone cutters and masons received 35 cts. per hr. ; quarrymen, 
17^^ cts. ; laborers, 17 cts. The stone side walls were laid in 8 
courses averaging 2 ft. thick each; hence there were 52,800 sq. ft. 
of beds cut ; and estimating each stone 3 ft. long and dressed for 
1% ft. back of the face on joints, there were 14,300 sq. ft. of joints; 
making a total of 67,100 sq. ft. of cutting which cost 11.2 cts. 
per sq. ft. This is said to have been too high a cost, if the measure- 
ments were correct. 

Arch centering cost $1,400, to which was added $600 for moving 
the centering forward from time to time ; making $2.40 per lin. ft. 
of tunnel, to which must be added $0.70 per ft. for scaffolding. 

Weights and Price of Rails. — Steel rails are sold by the ton of 
2.240 lbs. The standard price for many years past has been $2 8 
per ton at the mills, Pittsburg, Chicago, etc. Railways have 
charged one another % ct. per ton-mile freight on rails. 

The number of tons of rails per mile of single track is exactly 
11 

— of the weight of the rail in pounds per yard of length. Thus a 
7 11 

track laid with 80-Ib. rails will require — X 80 = 125.5 -{- tons per 

7 
mile of single track. 



1240 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Prices of Rails Since 1876.* — We publish below the price of steel 
rails at Pittsburg for the years 1876 to 1907 inclusive. We also 
include the price of iron rails from 1876 to 1882. After the last 
named date iron rails were seldom laid. 

It will be noted that since 1888 the price of rails has never varied 
much from the present price, except in the years 1897 and 1898. 

Price of Rails at Pittsburgh, Pa. 
(Statistical abstracts of U. S. Dept. Commerce and Labor, 1905, 

page 539.) 
(Ton equals 2,240 lbs.) 

Price per ton, Price ijer ton 
Tear. steel rails. iron rails. 



1876 $59.25 

1877 45.58 

1878 42.21 

1879 48.21 

1880 67.52 

1881 61.08 

1882 48.50 

1883 37.50 

1884 30.75 

1885 28.52 

1886 34.52 

1887 37.08 

1888 29.83 

1889 29.25 

1890 31.78 

1891 29.92 

1892 30.00 

1893 28.12 

1894 24.00 

1895 24.33 

1896 28.00 

1897 18.75 

1898 17.62 

1899 28.12 

1900 32.29 

1901 27.33 

1902 to 1907 28.00 



$41 
35 
33 
41 
49 
47 
45 



25 
25 
75 
25 
25 
13 
50 



The Cost of Tracl< Laying. t — Contracts for track laying on new 
railway construction are not at all uniform as to specified methods 
of payment, largely because of varying practice as to the time and 
method of ballasting. If the ballast is not placed at the time of 
track laying, it is customary to divide the payment for track work 
in two parts — (1) track laying and (2) surfacing track. 

Track laying involves the unloading of the ties and rails from 
the cars, trimming the earth to true grade to receive the ties, deliv- 
ering and placing the ties and rails thereon, curving the rails and 
joining them. 

The railway company usually stands the cost of loading the 
ties, rails, etc., at the material yard and the transportation to the 
•site of track laying work. This expense is charged upon the 
railway company's books as "train service." 



*Engineermg Contracting, July 8, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



RAILWAYS. 1241 

Surfacing track consists in shoveling eartli in between tlie ties, 
aligning the track and tamping. Where suitable material for filling 
between the ties is not at hand, it is hauled in on cars at the 
expense of the railway company, and the contractor loads and 
unloads these cars at a separate unit price agreed upon. Such 
material if hauled in is usually gravel, and is called ballast. 

On the Northern Pacific Railway the contract prices for track 
laying and surfacing have been quite constant for tlie last 30 years, 
being about $250 per mile for track laying and $200 per mile for 
surfacing. The engineer's preliminary estimates of the cost of 
"train service" have usually been about $100 a mile, but the actual 
cost has ranged from $75 to $150 a mile. Summarizing we ha\e: 

Per mile. 

Tracking laying (contract price) $250 

Surfacing (contract price) 20O 

Train service (including loading) 125 

Total $575 

Of course the length of all permanent siding is included in arriv- 
ing at the mileage. 

In addition to this item of "train service" there is the cost of 
transporting workmen to the site of the work, for, under most 
contracts, the railway company agrees to carry the contractor's 
workmen free over its own lines. The railway also frequently 
agrees to carry the contractor's plant, including animals, free for 
some prescribed distance. This cost of transporting men and plant 
has seldom exceeded $25 per mile of track. This brings the total 
cost up to about $600 a mile. An allowance greater than this is 
usually an error on the side of liberality. 

The item that we have called "train service" is commonly under- 
estimated by engineers who have not had access to the books of 
railway companies, so that an analysis of items that go to make up 
this cost of train service will prove of decided value to the majority 
of railway engineers. Such an analysis follows : 

Per day. 

1 engineman $ 3.60 

1 fireman 2.00 

1 conductor 3.00 

2 brakemen at $2 4.00 

1 engine 7.50 

14 flat cars at 35 cts 4.90 

4 tons coal at $3 12.00 

Oil and waste 0.75 

Total $37.75 

In round numbers we may call it $40 a day for a train and 
train crew. 

It must be remembered that the train crew is paid by the month 
and not by the day. Hence the average number of miles Of track 
laid per month should be divided by the total number of \7orking 



12i2 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

days in the month and not by the number of days actually worked 
In arriving at an average daily mileage for track laying to be 
divided into the cost of train service. 

It must also be remembered that the number of trains required 
can not be determined by the average haul of materials, but by the 
longest haul from the material yards to the front. 

Usually three trains are needed in building a long line, where 
the track laying gang is large enough to lay 2 miles of track a day 
when working. Due to spells of bad weather, delays occasioned by 
non-completion of bridges, etc., the monthly average will not be 
more than 40 miles, or 1.5 miles per working day. Hence 3 trains 
at $40 equals $120, which divided by 1.5 miles gives $80 per mile 
for train service. 

To this must be added the cost of unloading rails and ties in 
the material yard. The rails and fastenings weigh about 120 
tons per mile, and the ties weigh about 200 tons per mile of track. 
Practically all the steel has to be unloaded and loaded again, 
but usually the ties are delivered with such regularity that only 
a small portion of them needs to be stored. Contract prices for 
loading rails at 10 cts. a ton are not uncommon, although the 
price frequently runs as high as 25 cts. By common forces, ma- 
terials should be unloaded and reloaded for 25 cts. a ton. Hence, 
if all the track materials were thus handled, the yard expense would 
not exceed $80 per mile of track. Under ordinary conditions not 
more than half the materials are thus handled in the yard, so that 
the yard cost averages about $45 per mile of track. Adding this to 
the item of train service we have the total of $125 per mile of track, 
as above stated. 

Where all the track is to be ballasted at once, the present 
practice is to include the cost of "surfacing track" as a part of the 
cost of ballasting. 

To indicate how the contract prices run under such conditions, 
we may cite the bids on the Portland & Seattle Ry., in 1906, which 
were as follows : 

Track laying, including loading of track materials but not 
including unloading in the yard, $300 per mile. 

Tie plating (fully tie plated), $75 per mile. 

Labor on single tie plates, 1% cts. each. 

Labor on switches, $25 each. 

Ballast, 27 cts. per cu. yd. 

This price is for gravel ballast and includes all' the cost of 
loading and unloading the same and tamping it under the ties, 
and lining up the track, but does not include the train service nor 
the wear and tear on the steam shovel which is furnished bv the 
railway company. The train service rarely exceeds 8 cts. per cu. yd. 
and another 1 ct. will usually cover steam shovel repairs and 
depreciation. This 9 cts. added to the contract price of 27 cts. gives 
a total of 36 cts. per cu. yd. of gravel ballast in place. This is 
a liberal estimate under ordinary conditions. 



RAILWAYS. 1243 

We give the following as confirming the above given cslimate 
of $150 per mile for "train service," yard work and transportation 
of men in traclt laying: 

On the Seattle and Montana Ry., built in 1891, the train service, 
etc., cost $67 per mile of track for 79 miles. 

On the Idaho division of the Great Northern Ry. (110 miles 
long), built in 1892, the train service, etc., cost $125 per mile of 
track. 

On the Cascade division of the Northern Pacific Ry., built in 1884, 
the cost of train service, etc., was $170 per mile of track. This was 
a difficult section over the Cascade Mountains. On an easier section 
tlie corresponding cost was $150 per mile. 

On the Snake River branch of the O. R. & N., built in 1899, the 
cost of train service, etc., was $154 per mile, to which must be 
added $18 per mile for the cost of transporting men, etc. 

It will be seen from these figures that engineers quite commonly 
underestimate the total cost of track laying and surfacing. Fre- 
quently estimates may be seen that contain no allowance whatever 
for train service and work at the material yards. 

Cost of Tracklaying, M., St. Paul & S. S .M. Ry. — About 263 miles 
of track were laid In 1892-3 from Valley City across North Dakota. 
The tracklaying and surfacing were done by the railway company, 
not by contract. The track was 72-lb. rails laid on 16 ties to the 
30-ft. rail. The construction train was made up of 32 cars, the loco- 
motive being in the middle of the train. The next car behind the 
locomotive was an ordinary flat car loaded with telegraph material ; 
then followed 15 box cars loaded with ties. In front of the locomo- 
tive were the following cars. No. 1 being the one farthest front. 

No. 1, Pioneer car. This was double deck, containing blacksmith 
shop, store room, general foreman's office, telegraph office, two sleep- 
ing rooms, and three extra berths. In front of the car was a plat- 
form carrying extra splice bars, bolts and spikes. 

No. 2, store car. This was double deck, and had a store room for 
provisions and one for clothes, sleeping berths for cooks and a 
sleeping apartment above. 

Nos. 3 and 4, dining and sleeping cars, double deck. 

No. 5, kitchen car, single deck. 

No. 6, dining and sleeping car, double deck. 

No. 7, feed and fuel car, ordinary box car. 

No. 8, water car, flat car with a 2,000-gal. tank at each end. 

Nos. 9 to 16, flat cars with rails and spikes. 

Work commenced at 7 a. m., the teams hauling ties from the 
f.ve rear cars. The ties were shoved from the car down a tie chute, 
provided with three rollers, and were loaded into a V-shaped rack 
on a wagon holding 25 ties. The rails were unloaded onto the 
ground from both sides of the cars, and the train pulled back out 
of the way. The rails were loaded onto two "iron cars" and hauled 
to the end of the track by horses. The iron car gang would "drop" 
100 rails (1,500 ft. of track) in half an hour. As soon as a pair was 
dropped upon the ties, a hook gage was thrown over them, at the for- 
ward end, and the horse pulled the cur fsirward 30 ft. Two more 



1244 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

rails were then run out, and so on. The tracklaying force was as 
follows : 

Per day. 

Iron car gang, who dropped rails, 22 men at $2.25 $ 49.50 

Strappers, who adjusted and bolted splices, 6 men at $2.00. . . 12.00 

Spike peddlers, 2 men at $1.50 3.00 

Tie-spacing gang, 12 men at $1.50 18.00 

Men lining ties, with rope and stakes, 2 men at $1.75 3.50 

Men spacing joint ties, 2 men at $1.75 3.50 

Men leveling grade cut by tie wagons, 4 men at $1.50 6.00 

Spikers, 16 men at $2.00 32.00 

Nippers, holding up end ties for spikers, 8 men at $1.50 12.00 

Tracklining gang, 6 men at $1.75 10.50 

Teamsters for tie wagons ($35 per mo. and board), 40 men 

at $2.00 80.00 

Men unloading ties from cars, 15 men at $1.75 26.25 

Men unloading rails and fastenings from cars, 4 men at $1.75 7.00 

Telegraph gang, 8 men at $1.75 14.00 

Telegraph operator ($50 per mo.), 1 man at $2.00 2.00 

Drivers of iron car horses, 2 men at $1.75 3.50 

Blacksmith, 1 man at $2.25 2.25 

Night watchman, 1 man at $1.50 1.50 

Cooks ($50 per mo.), 2 men at $2.00 4.00 

Baker, working nights, 1 man at $2.50 2.50 

Waiters, 5 men at $2.00 10.00 

Storekeeper, 1 man at $2.50 2.50 

Foremen ($65 per mo. each), 5 men at $2.80 14.00 

General foreman ($150 per mo.), 1 man at $6.00 6.00 

Total $325.50 

Note that the teams of horses are not included, but the drivers of 
the teams are included in the above. The men were boarded for 
$3.50 a week, and this was deducted from the wages of all except 
teamsters. 

The average daily wage of these 167 men was $1.95. 

The telegraph gang, consisted of 8 men and 1 foreman. The cedar 
poles were 25 ft. long, spaced 30 to the mile, set 5 ft. in the ground. 
The wire was stretched from a reel on a small hand wagon pushed 
by the men. 

This force of 167 men and about 90 horses averaged 3 miles of 
track per day. If we consider horses (not including driver) as 
costing $1 per day, we have a total daily cost of $415.50, not includ- 
ing the cost of operating two locomotives and trains, which may be 
rated at $40 each (including wages, fuel, interest and depreciation). 
This brings the total cost to $495.50 per day, or $165 per mile, 
including the erecting of the telegraph line, but not including the 
cost of surfacing the track. On one occasion the above force laid 
4 miles in 10 hrs. In dry open country, like North Dakota, this 
method was faster than working with track machines and no more 
expensive. In swamp, very hilly or timbered country, the track- 
laying machines are especially serviceable. 

The track surfacing gangs followed the tracklayers and surfaced 
the track so as to make a safe roadway and prevent bending of the 
rails and splices before the ballasting was done. These gangs 
numbered 40 to 45 men under a foreman and sub-foreman. About 
250 men were required for surfacing, and they went to and from 
work on hand cars, their boarding cars being located on the sidings 



\ RAILWAYS. 124 -) 

which were put in about every 10 miles. If these men received 
$1.50 per day, the surfacing cost $375 per day, or $125 per mile. 
Hence the total cost of laying and surfacing would be $290 per mile. 

Cost of Tracklaying, 50-lb. Rails. — In 1881 the following gang 

averaged one mile of track laid per day by contract. The track 
was not surfaced by this force. 

This does not include the cost of "surfacing," nor does it include 
"train service." 

Tie gang. Per day. 

1 panel spacer, at $1.50 $ 1.50 

1 lie surfacer, at $1.50 1.50 

2 tie liners, at $1.50 3.00 

3 tie unloaders, at $1.50 4.50 

6 tie spreaders, at $1.50 9.00 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Iron gang. 

1 gager, at $2.00 2.00 

2 heelers, at $2.00 4.00 

2 unloaders, at $2.00 4.00 

6 iron men, at $2.00 12.00 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Front gang. 

1 tie spacer, at $1.50 1.50 

1 spike peddler, at $1.50 1.50 

2 nippers, at $1.50 3.00 

4 spikers, at $2.00 8.00 

5 strappers, at $1.50 7.50 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Tie loading gang. 

16 men (4 gangs of 4 each), at $1.50 24.00 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Backspiking gang. 

1 tie spacer, at $1.50 1.50 

2 spike peddlers, at $1.50 3.00 

4 nippers, at $1.50 6.00 

8 spikers, at $2.00 16.00 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Lining gang. 

5 men, at $1.50 7.50 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

Backfilling gang. 

15 men, at $1.50 22.50 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

1 foreman, at $3.00 3.00 

Hauling gang. 

18 teamsters, at $1.80 ' 32.40 

1 waterboy, at $1.25 1.25 

40 mules' feed, at $0.40 16.00 

1 wagon master, at $3.00 3.00 

General force. 

1 camp boss, teamsters' camp, at $2.25 2.25 

1 blacksmith, at $2.25 2.25 

2 night watchmen, at $2.25 4.50 

1 tool man, at $2.00 2.00 

1 bookkeeper, at $4.00 4.00 

1 superintendent, at $5.00 5.00 

Material train, fuel and wages 24.00 

Total per day and per mile $266.90 



1246 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The force, as above given, can lay 1 % miles of steel track per day, 
but cannot keep up the back work and average much more than one 
mile. All ties are full spiked; 15 ties to a 30-ft. rail; 50-lb. steel 
rails. The ties and steel are delivered to the contractor on cars at 
the last side track ; and side tracks are about 8 miles apart. 

A material train is made up of 10 tie cars, each holding 135 ties, 
and 3 steel cars, each holding 60 rails. This train is at the boarding 
train at 6 a. m., in time to take the force to the front after break- 
fast. The backfillers, liners and backspikers are dropped where 
work had stopped the day before, and the 10 cars of ties (which, 
are in the rear of the locomotive) are uncoupled far enough back to 
give the train room to move ahead with the 3 cars of steel (which 
are in front of the locomotive) as far as the "iron car" upon whicli 
30 rails at a time are loaded and pushed up front. The two un- 
loaders in the iron gang assist in loading the iron car ; and, while 
the rails on the iron car are being laid, they throw off another 
30 rails from the flat cars ready to be loaded on the iron car. The 
10 cars of ties are brought up as fast as the track will allow, and 
only enough are unloaded by the tie loaders at one time to keep the 
wagons busy. At noon the tra.in carries the force back to dinner, the 
empty flat cars are sidetracked, and another train of 10 tie cars and 
3 steel cars brought up in time to take the men back after dinner. 

In laying the track, the panel spacer with a 30-ft. pole and pick 
keeps far enough ahead to do duty as the roadmaster. The front 
gangs of spikers (2 on each rail) spike 3 ties in each panel, always 
the joint and the 6th and 11th ties, skipping 4 ties each time. Of 
the 5 strappers, one untrims the plates, leaving plates, nuts and bolts 
on the joint tie, and the other 4, working 2 on a side, strap up and 
bolt the joints. Should the backspikers get behind, they are assisted 
by the frontspikers. Should the backfillers get behind, they are 
reinforced by the tie gangs, and the iron gang and strappers can be 
putting in the sidings. 

Of the teams, 16 are used to haul ties, 1 to pull the iron car, and 1 
to haul water to the boarding train. The 16 teams haul 14 loads of 
12 ties each per day, making 2,688 ties. 

Cost of Tracklaying on the A., T. & S. Fe R. R.— With a well- 
organized force the cost of laying and surfacing the Arkansas City 
extension of the A., T. & S. Fe, in 1888, was $292 per mile for a 
month's work. On the same road the following force laid 2 miles 
per day: 



RAILWAYS. 1247 

Laying. Per day. 

15 men running Iron cars, at $1.75 $ 26.25 

2 men unloading iron, at $1.75 ' 3.50 

24 men spiking, at $1.75 42.00 

8 men strapping, at $1.75 14.00 

5 men spacing ties and "squaring" joints, at 

$1.75 8.75 

4 men lining track, at $1.75 7.00 

7 men setting "joint and center" ties, at $1.75 12.25 

2 men carrying gages, at $1.75 3.50 

2 men distributing spikes, at $1.75 3.50 

1 man caring for tools, at $1.75 1.75 

42 men bedding ties, at $1.40 58.80 

12 men ("nippers"), at $1.40 16.80 

18 men handling ties, at $1.40 25.20 

2 men stretching tie line, at $1.40 2.80 

4 men carrying water, at $1.40 5.60 

1 general foreman 3.33 

1 foreman iron car 2.50 

1 foreman tie bedding 2.50 

1 foreman handling ties 2.50 

1 foreman tracklining 2.50 

1 foreman spiking gang 2.00 

10 extra men, at $1.40 14.00 

22 teams hauling ties, at $3.50 77.00 

1 team hauling iron car, at $3.50 3.50 

Total laying 2 miles at $170.76 $341.53 

In addition to this the surfacing of 2 miles of track per day cost 
as follows : 

Surfacing. 
80 shovelers, at $1.40 $112.20 

2 "back-bolters," at $1.75 3.50 

1 foreman raising track 2.00 

1 foreman 2.50 

Total surfacing 2 miles at $60.10 $120.20 

Train Service and General. 

Superintendent of tracklaying $ 5.00 

Timekeeper 3.00 

Train and engine crews 15.04 

Engineering 10.97 

Total, train crews, etc., 2 miles at $17.00 $34.01 

Summary. Per mile. 

Tracklaying $170.76 

Tracksurfacing 60.10 

Train service, etc 17.00 

Total $247.86 

This does not include the cost of supplying and distributing of 
ballast by train. On the Larned branch 15 miles were laid in 7 days, 
but under the favorable circumstance of light grades, light work, 
light earth for ballast, and roadbed in first-class condition. 

It will be noted that the cost of "train service" appears not to in- 
clude the delivery of materials from material shards, nor does it in- 
clude fuel, and interest and depreciation on plant. 

Cost of Tracklaying, A., T. & S. Fe R. R. — Some rapid work 
was done (1899) in the extension of the A., T. & S. F. Ry. from 
Stockton, Cal., to Port Richmond. The rails were laid with broken 



1248 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

joints, 17 ties per rail. One stretch of 11 miles (62 1/2 -lb. rails) was 
laid at the rate of 2,846 ft. per day, with a force of 45 men, on level 
grade. Another stretch of 17 miles (75-lb. rails) was laid at the 
rate of 3,500 ft. per day, with 48 men, on a descending grade of 1%, 
with curves at intervals of % mile. The best day's work, on the 
level grade, was 5,400 ft., with 52 men. The force was as follows: 

Foreman 1 

Sub-foreman 3 

Strappers ■ 4 

Iron car men 10 

Spikers 8 

Nippers 4 

Tie line man 1 

Lining ties 2 

Tie plater 1 

Spike peddler 1 

Spacing ties 2 

Spacing rails 2 

Back bolting 2 

Tie carriers 10 

Picking up materials 1 

Total 52 

Cost of Tracklaying, P., S. & N. R. R.— Mr. G. C. Woollard 
gives the following on tracklaying on the Pittsburg, Shawmut & 
Northern R. R. The length of track laid was 8 miles. With a gang 
of 46 men and 3 foremen the average day's work was 2,870 ft. of 
track laid; the best day's work was 3,290 ft. There were 18 men 
and a foreman in the tracklaying gang; 17 men and a foreman in 
the supply gang; 11 men and a foreman in the backtieing gang. 
Beside these men there were a locomotive engineer, fireman, con- 
ductor and a brakeman. No teams were used. Trucks passed one 
another by raising one truck to a vertical position on the cross-ties 
and then allowing it to drop back to an oblique position, keeping it 
from turning over by means of a prop while the loading truck 
passed. There were 18 oak ties to a rail, and rails were 85-lb. All 
the work was on a 2% down grade, which facilitated delivery of 
materials by gravity. 

Cost of Tracklaying with Machines. — Tracklaying machines 
do not lay the track, but merely facilitate the delivery of ties and 
rails on a series of rollers from the cars to the tracklaying gang 
of men. In rugged or swampy country a tracklaying machine is 
especially economic, because the ties cannot be easily delivered by 
teams. 

With a Holman tracklaying machine, 120 miles of the Washing- 
ton County Ry. (Maine) were laid in 1899. The best day's work 
was 2 miles laid in 9 hrs. with 110 men. 

On the Burlington & Missouri River Ry., with a gang of 85 men 
and a Holman machine, 1% miles per day were laid at a cost of $100 
per mile. The rails were 65-lb. rails, with 18 ties to a rail. Curves 
.,^ JO tr. leo -arajra Jaid. Equally good work was done with the Harris 
tracklaying macTune. 



RAILWAYS. 1249 

On the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., 1,300 miles of track 
were laid with a Harris machine in 1886 and 1887. The average cost 
of laying 2 miles per day was as follows : 

Per day. 

1 general foreman $ 5.00 

3 assistant foremen, at $3 6.00 

109 laborers, at $2 218.00 

1 engine and train ci-ew 20.00 

Total, 2 miles, |124.50 $249.00 

To this must be added $10 per mile for preparatory work in trans- 
ferring material to cars in the yard, and $5 per mile royalty for use 
of the Harris machine, bringing the total to $140 per mile. It will 
be noted that this does not include the cost of surfacing. 

The Harris machine is said to be quicker than the Holman, 
where long stretches are to be laid ; but the Holman is more eco- 
nomical for short stretches or where delays are frequent, as the 
gang is smaller. 

Another machine that has been extensively used is the Roberts. 

The Hurley Tracklaying Machine Co., of Chicago, make an ex- 
cellent machine with which 2 to 4 miles per day can be laid and 
quarterspiked with a gang of 40 men. 

Cost of Laying a Narrow Gage Track. — Where ties and rails are 
dumped along in small piles, and where no grading has to be done, 
a gang of 3 men will average 210 ft. of track laid in 10 hrs. This 
applies to a light 3-ft. gage track made of 30-lb. rails on 6 x 6-in. 
ties, 5 ft. long, spaced 3-ft. centers. With wages at 15 cts. per hr., 
the labor cost is practically 2 cts. per ft. of track, or $100 per mile, 
after the materials are delivered. 

A Method of Unloading Rails. — An effective method of unloading 
rails, along a track where new rails are to be put in, is as follows : 
The car is provided with a tail board that hangs down and drags 
along on the track, forming an inclined plane. A hook on a rope is 
hooked into a rail, and another hook, on the other end of the rope, is 
hooked over a tie. As the car moves slowly forward the rail is 
dragged out. By having two of these ropes and hooks, pulling out 
two rails at a time, 71 rails were unloaded in 25 mins. from a 
drop end gondola, and 86 rails in 42 mins. from a solid end gondola. 

Cost of Renewing Ralls on the C, C, C. & St. L. Ry.* — The fol- 
lowing is given by Mr. John Barth, and relates to the cost of taking 
up 80-lb. rail and laying 90-lb. rail. 

To unload the new rail I used a rail unloader, which was oper- 
ated by air, furnished by the work engine, which took a foreman 
and five men besides the train crew to operate. Any good handy 
man could run the loader. I made comparison with loading and 
unloading rail, and found that we could handle the rail considerably 

*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 6, 1909. 



1250 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cheaper with the machine. It cost to unload the new rail and 
fastenings, per mile : 

Labor $ 9.75 

Work train service 9.58 

Fuel, oil and waste 7.58 

Making, per mile for unloading, a total of $26.91 

This was on single track where we had an average of 17 trains 
during tlie 10 working hours. To get tlie above estimate of cost of 
unloading I took total cost of unloading 65 miles of rail, and divided 
by 65 which gives the average cost per mile. Some days we were 
hung up on account of trains and did very little work, and other 
days we could do more. 

"We loaded the old rail with the rail loader, and it cost practically 
the same to load it as it did to unload the new rail. 

In laying this rail I used gangs of one foreman, assistant fore- 
man, timekeeper, and two flagmen, and 44 men. Had my gangs 
organized as follows : 

Six men with claw-bars pulling spikes. 

Three men with spike mauls to loosen up spikes that were stuck 
and to knock down stubs. 

Four men throwing out the old rail. 

One man with nipping bar to cant the old rails up out of the old 
bed, and 3 men to shove it out. 

Three men driving plugs in the old holes, which should be dis- 
tributed ahead of the work. 

In taking up light rail and laying heavier rail, pull the outside 
spikes. In doing this, I had 1 man with an adze to adze off the very 
highest ties only and to cut off the plugs that stick up. 

Twelve men with tongs to set in the new rail, which should be 
set in one rail at a time. 

One good hustling fellow to put in the expansion shims and keep 
the rail gang moving, using steel cut nails for shims, making the 
expansion according to the thermometer by using different sizes of 
nails, putting the nail in crosswise against the ball, so that it will be 
out of the way in putting on the angle bars. The first few trains 
over, this nail will slip out. 

Two men with bars with claws on one end and pointed on the 
other to shove the rail into the spikes at center and quarters. 

Four men with spike mauls. These men start off leaving eight ties 
unspiked between each man, and go ahead, each man spiking every 
eighth tie from the last one that he spiked. This spikes every other 
tie, and prevents the men running around each other. 

One man with a claw bar and adze to pull out the spikes that come 
in the way of the angle bars at the new joint, and to adze down the 
high ties at the new joint. 

Five men putting on angle bars, and bolting up, putting two bolts 
at each joint, all bolts and angle bars to be distributed ahead of 
the rail laying for each day's work only. Have plenty of wrenches 
and spike mauls, and when connection is being made, or waiting for 



RAILWAYS. 1251 

trains, turn the men that are working in the tong gang and those 
throwing out rail, back to do full bolting and full spiking. 

Two men with a push car, to keep the connection rails, off-set 
splices, and everything needed in making a connection, and extra 
tools, right up with the rail-laying, so that when connection is to 
be made they will be on the ground. Have the spikers and bolters 
in starting out assist these two men in loading the connection rails. 
Always move the last new rail ahead and use it as a connection rail 
all the way through. This will always give you a good joint. 

The foreman should watch the time of the regular trains, and go 
ahead of the spike pullers, and pick out his place for making a con- 
nection, and have four picked men out of the gang that set in the 
rail to make the connection, using short pieces of rail. I used pieces 
from 4 ft. to 4 ins. long and used off-set bars from 90 lbs. to 80 lbs. 
I always found that my new rail fell short. I was putting down 
33-ft. rail and taking up 30-ft. rail, and every ten rail lengths we 
could make a good connection by pulling the 80-lb. rail against the 
90-lb. and using short pieces of 80-lb. rail to fill in the gap. In clos- 
ing up at night, if I thought it necessary, I would cut in a long 
piece of rail. 

The two men handling the push car and keeping the tools and con- 
nections up with the rail laying, should also keep the tools in good 
repair, such as keeping handles in the mauls, and have a general 
supervision of the tools. 

The assistant foreman should be back among the workmen and 
see that the track is kept safe spiked and bolted, and ready for trains 
by the time a connection is made. 

Section men should follow up and tamp any ties that may be 
hanging or shim them up as the season of the year may require. 

Gage the track when you space the ties, as you will have to do 
it at that time any way, and it avoids cutting up the ties with spikes. 

In taking up 80-Jb. rail and putting down 90-lb. rail, pull the out- 
side spikes of both rails. In doing this you avoid adzing, as the 
new rail will set up on the shoulder of tlie tie on the outside and 
give the wlieels a full bearing on the ball of the rail. In taking up 
and laying rail of the same size, pull the inside spikes on both rails, 
and adze the ties down so as to give the wheel a perfect bearing on 
the ball of the rail. To do this it would take five extra men to do 
the adzing above the 44. 

Full bolt and spike the new rail and uncouple the old rail as far 
as you go each day. This usually can be done while waiting on 
trains. If not, take the time to do it. This is the reason I did not 
work larger gangs of men, as 44 or 46 men just about cleaned up 
each day's work even. 

This rail laying was done on single track where we had an 
average of 17 trains in our 10 working hours, and was laid at a cost 
of $134.24 per mile. We laid an average of 3,500 ft. of rail per day. 

Since there are 141 tons of 90-lb. rails per mile, this cost is equiva- 
lent to $0.95 per ton. 



1252 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Rail Relaying Gang.* — At the last annual convention of the 
Roadmasters' and Maintenance of Way Association a committee re- 
port was read on relaying rail and the organization for the work. 
According to the report 51 men will make a good rail gang for 85 
to 100-lb. rails, this gang being made up as follows: 1 foreman, 
1 assistant foreman, 12 men on the tongs, 7 men pulling spikes, 
6 men adzing, 1 man plugging spike holes, 4 men throwing out old 
line of rails, 10 men spiking, 5 men bolting, 2 flagmen, 1 tool man, 
and 1 water man. All rails should be laid one at a time, except in 
a yard where business is too heavy to permit of the use of the 
tracks. Heavy adzing should, if possible, be done in advance of rail 
laying. 

A gang of this size can lay one mile of track per day on the 
average railroad. At this rate, and assuming wages to average $2 
per man, it would cost $100 per mile for relaying rails. 

Labor Cost of Renewing Rails. — During a traffic of one train per 
hour, in winter, the cost of taking up old rails, unloading and placing 
new 72-lb. rails on a single track, was $140 per mile. The wages 
of common laborers were $1.25 per 10 hrs. 

Labor Cost of Renewing Rails.— In 1904 and 1905, old 72-lb rails 
were taken up and new 85-lb. rails laid on certain sections of track 
in the state of Washington at the following costs per mile. The first 
work involved 27 miles of single track. 

Per mile. 

Unloading and distributing $ 34.60 

Laying and surfacing 294.15 

Picking up and piling old steel 38.15 

Total ''. $366.90 

Since 85-lb. rails weigh 134 tons per mile, the labor cost of re- 
newing these rails was $2.75 per ton. 

On another 18-mile stretch, the cost was as follows: 

Per mile. 

Unloading and distributing .* $ 35.05 

Laying and surfacing , 393.70 

Picking up and piling old steel 38.60 

Total $467.35 

This is equivalent to nearly $3.50 per ton, which is an unneces- 
sarily high cost. The wages of laborers were $1.75, and of spikers 
$2.25 per day. 

Cost of Laying Side Tracks and Switches.f — Practically nothing 
has ever been printed as to the cost of laying sidetracks and spurs. 
We purpose giving in this article eight examples of the actual cost 
of this sort of work on a western railway. 

The grading was done, in most cases, by contract and its cost Is 
not included in the following costs, unless specifically mentioned. 
The tracklaying and surfacing were done by company forces. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 15, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 4, 1908. 



RAILWAYS. 1253 

Example 1. — This is a spur track 400 ft. long. 
Labor. 

8 days, foreman at ?1.50 $12.00. 

16 days, laborers, at $1.25 20.00 

Total labor, 400 ft. at $0.08 $32.00 

Materials. 

158 cedar ties at $0.35 $ 55.30 

1 set stub switcli ties. 3,200 ft. B. M. at $15 48.00 

800 ft. S. H. (second hand), 56 lb. rail, 6 and 

1886/2240 tons at $16 109.31 

52 S. H. angle bars, 728 lbs., at $1.37 9.97 

100 S. H. track bolts, 85 lbs., at $1.95 1.66 

400 lbs. new spikes at $1.85 7.40 

1 frog (56 lb.) 8.00 

1 S. H. switch lock 0.25 

2 S. H. 2 way switch chairs, 190 lbs., at $1.65.. 3.14 

6 connecting rods, 5' 2", at $1.35 8.10 

1 S; H. long connecting rod 2.50 

1 high switch stand, 2 way 8.00 

Total materials $261.63 

Grand total, 400 ft, at $0.73 $293.63 

Example 2. — This work involved putting in a switch to connect two 
tracks, the length of track laid being 118 ft. 
Labor. 

4V2 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 8.10 

141/2 days, laborer at $1.25 18.13 

4 days, laborer helping engineer stake out spur, 

$1.25 5.00 

Total labor, 118 ft. at $0.265 $31.23 

Materials. 

19 S. H. switch ties at $0.10 $ 1.90 

1 set switch ties, 2,677 ft. B. M. at $14 37.48 

108 ft. new 75 lb. rail, 1 460/2240 tons, $27 32.54 

127 ft. S. H. 75 lb. rail, 1 935/2240 tons, $16 22.68 

22 new 25 lb. angle bars, 528 lbs., $1.45 7.66 

62 track bolts, 52.7 lbs., $2.00 1.05 

256 track spikes, 143.4 lbs., $1.68 2.41 

1 new 75 lb. 1-7 frog 16.65 

1 new sw. lock 0.46 

1 S. H. sw. stand, 2 way, low 4.40 

2 new switch points (75 lb.) at $7.40 14.80 

12 new tie plates at $0.25 3.00 

8 new rail braces at $0.155 1.24 

1 main rod 0.90 

3 connecting rods at $0.50 1.50 

8 clips at $0.27 2.16 

24 clip bolts, 12 lbs., at $3.10 0.37 

1 S. H. short connecting rod 1.10 

Total materials $152.32 

Grand total, 118 ft., at $1.55 $183.55 

Example S. — This work consisted in putting in a passing track 
2,500 ft. long. 

Labor tracklaying. 

20 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 36.00 

78 days, laborer at $1.35 105.30 

Total labor, 2,500 ft. -at $0.056 $141.30 



1254 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Materials. 

2 S. H. head blocks, 224 ft. B. M., at $6 $ 1.34 

1,245 S. H. ties at $0.145 180.53 

2 sets sw. ties, 34,045 ft. B. M., at $20.00 68.09 

42 planks (3 x 12-16), 2,016 ft. B. M., at $11... 22.17 

4,969 ft. S. H. 56 lb. rail, 41 911/2240 tons, at $16 662.51 

340 S. H. A bars, 4,590 lbs., at $0.88 40.39 

182 new trk. bolts, 155 lbs., at $1.85 2.86 

592 S. H. trk. bolts, 503 lbs., at $1.40 7.04 

5,100 spikes, 2,856 lbs., at $1.65 47.12 

2 frgs (1-9), 60 lbs., at $13.25 26.50 

2 H. T. 2 way sw. stands at $7.25 14.50 

2 long conn, rods at $2.10 4.20 

2 S. H. conn, rods at $1.05 2.10 

14 S. H. conn, rods at $0.53 7.42 

8 sw. stand bolts, 12 lbs., at $2.25 0.27 

8 sw. nuts 0.33 

40 sw. chairs (60 lb.), 357 lbs., at $1.45 5.18 

2 sw. locks at $0.29 ■. 0.58 

2 S. H. guard rails (60 lbs.) at $1.27 2.54 

Total materials $1,095.67 

4,720 cu. yds. grading at 13 cts 613.60 

Labor ballasting. 

51/2 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 9.90 

11 days, laborer at $1.35 14.85 

Total labor ballasting $ 24.75 

Grand total,, 2,500 ft, at $0.75 1,875.32 

Example i. — The work consisted in laying a passing track 2,500 ft. 
long, including grading, ballasting and surfacing. 
Labor grading: 

15 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 27.00 

10 days, laborer at $1.25 22.48 

195 days, team at $3.50 682.50 

Total grading $ 731.98 

Labor laying track. 

4 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 7.20 

80 days, laborer at $1.25 100.00 

Total, 2,500 ft. at $0.043 $ 107.20 

Labor moving a switch. 

1 day. foreman $ 1.80 

81/2 days, laborer at $1.25 10.63 

Total $ 12.43 

Labor surfacing track. 

4 days, foreman at $1.80 $ 7.20 

20 days, laborer at $1.25 25.00 

Total $ 32.20 

Work train service ballasting. 

1.4 days, engine service (140 mi.) at $27.50..$ 38.50 

1.5 days, conductor at $80 mo 4.44 

3 days, brakeman at $60 mo 6.67 

Total .• $ 49.61 



RAILIVAYS. 1255 

Materials. 
4,760 lin. ft. S. H. 56 lb. rail, 39 1493/2240 

tons, at $16 $ 634.66 

128 lin. ft. S. H. 50 lb. rail, 2133/2240 tons, 

at $16 15.24 

1 new No. 9 frog 13.25 

1 new No. 1 frog (56 lb.) 12.25 

4 guard rails at $1.27 5.08 

1,088 ties at $0.23 250.24 

2 sets sw. ties, 5,354 ft. B. M., $12.00 64.25 

4 H. B. bolts. 12 lbs., $2.25 0.27 

318 S. H. 56 lb. A bars, 4,452 lbs., $0.88 39.18 

2 sw. stands, $7.25 14.50 

12 S. H. 50 lb. splice bars, 108 lbs., $0.88 0.95 

8 sq. nuts, 2 lbs., $2.90 0.06 

648 new track bolts, 551 lbs., $1.85 10.19 

2 sw. locks, $0.45 0.90 

4,990 new track spikes, 2,974 lbs., $1.65 46.11 

2 long conn, rods, $2.10 4.20 

4 new 2 way sw. chairs; cast 382 lb., at $1.45 5.54 

2 new tie rods, $1.10 2.20 

10 new conn. sw. rods, $1.10 11.00 

■ 8 rail braces, $0.91 0.73 

12 crossing plank (3 x 12 — IG), 576 ft. B. M. 

at $10.00 5.76 

12 lbs. spikes, $1.85 0.22 

2 sets frog blocking, $1.20 2.40 

Total materials •. , $1,139.18 

Grand total, 2,500 ft. at $0.829 $2,072.60 

Example S. — This is an Industry spur 550 ft. long, and the cost 
of labor only is given. The rail was 56-lb., and the cost of materials 
can be easily estimated from the examples previously given. 

10 days, foreman, $1.80 $ 18.00 

30 days, laborer, $1.50 45.00 

24 days, team and driver, $4.00 96.00 

Total, 550 ft., at $0.28 $159.00 

Note the high cost due to team work. 

Example 6. — This consisted in making an extension 180 ft. long to 
an existing spur, so that no switch was put in. 

Labor : 

3.6 days, foreman, at $55 mo $ 6.75 

11.6 days, labor, at $1.50 14.16 

4.8 days, labor, at $1.20 5.04 

Total labor, 180 ft., at $0.144 $25.85 

Material : 

360 ft. S. H. 60-lb. rail, 3 480/2240 tons, $24.20..$ 77.79 

24 S. H. A. bars, 342 lbs., $1.53......'-.. 5.23 

190 track spikes, 106 lbs., $1.59 1.69 

48 S. H. tr. bolts, 41 lbs., $2.04 0.84 

90 treated ties, $0.36 32.40 

Total $117.95 

Grand total, 180 ft, at $0.80 $143.90 



1256 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Example 7. — This consisted in building an industrial spur 550 ft. 
long. The low cost of the labor should be noted, as compared with 
that in Example 5, where an inordinately high team cost appears. 

Engineering : 

8 hrs. asst. engr., at $100 mo $ 2.58 

8 hrs., roadman, at $50 mo 1.29 

8 hrs., chainman, at $40 mo 1.03 

Total engineering $ 4.90 

Labor : 

55 hrs. foreman, at $55 mo $ 9.75 

475 hrs. laborer, at $1.25 day 59.20 

Total labor, 550 ft, at $0.126 $ 68.95 

Material : 
1,052 ft. S. H. 56-lb. rail, 19,637 lbs., at $24.20.. $212.10 

30 ft. scrap rail (56-lb.), 560 lbs., at $7.37.. 1.84 

76 A bars (56-lb.), 1,083 lbs., at $2.25 27.62 

129 lbs. tr. bolts, at $3.19 4.12 

700 lbs. tr. spikes, at $2.98 18.06 

1 rigid frog ( 1-9 ) , 60-lb 21.05 

1 sw. stand 6.68 

4 sw. bolts 0.20 

1 long conn, rod 2.33 

1 split sw. compl. (60-lb.) 23.52 

2 guard rails, 10 ft, 50-lb 6.56 

12 S. H. rail braces, 8 1/2 cts 1.02 

1 sw. lock 0.38 

1 set sw. ties, 3,283 ft B. M., at $8.50 27.91 

1 sand bumper 9.20 

Total materials $362.59 

Grand total $436.44 

It will be noted that no charge for cross ties (other than the set 
of sawed switch ties) is made. Hence the cost of materials is in- 
complete. 

Example 8. — This is a crossover track, 496 ft. long. 
Engineering : 

1 day, asst engr $ 2.75 

1 day, rodman 1.60 

1 day, chainman 1.30 

Engr. expense 4.35 

Total $ 10.00 

Labor : 

Putting in sw. ties and grading new crossover 
track : 

1.5 day, foreman, at $75 mo $ 3.75 

1.5 day, timekeeper, at $60 3.00 

1.5 day, asst foreman, at $60 -. . 3.00 

38 day, laborers, at $1.75 67.35 

Total ^ $ 77.10 

Putting in crossover track : 

1 day, foreman, at $75 $ 2.42 

1 day, timekeeper, at $60 1.93 • 

1 day, asst. foreman, at $60 1.94 

39.8 day, laborers, at $1.75 69.65 

Total $ 75.94 



RAILWAYS. 1257 

Surfacing crossover track : 

0.4 day, foreman, at $75 $ 0.97 

0.4 day, asst. foreman, at $60 0.97 

0.5 day, timekeeper, at ?60 0.96 

11.5 day, laborers, at fl.75 20.10 

Total $ 22.80 

Materials : 

50 ft. 80-lb. 1st qual. rail, 1,333 lbs., at $29.30.$ 17.43 
87 ft. SO-lb. 2d qual. rail, 1 80/2240 tons, at 

$29 30 . 28 89 

679 ft. S.' H. ' 6 S-'lb! "rail," 6 '195 1/2*240" tons', "at 

24.20 166.27 

41 S. H. ties, at $0.10 4.10 

130 treated ties, at $0.37 48.10 

1 set sw. ties 27.81 

1 set sw. ties 22.51 

14 new 24-in. 80-lb. A bars, 290 lbs., $1.30... 3.77 

2 new W. joints, $0.96 1.92 

50 S. H. 36-in. 68-lb. A bars, 1,200 lbs., $0.98.. 11.76 

4 new 24-in. offsets, 68 lbs., $1.37 0.93 

185 new tr. bolts, 157 lbs., $2.48 3.89 

1,331 new spikes, 745 lbs., $1.88 13.97 

1 new No. 9 sprg. rail frog (77y2-lb.) 35.50 

1 new No. 7 frog (68-lb.) 13.70 

IS. H. sw. stand 2.98 

1 new sw. stand 5.55 

8 sw. stand bolts, 14 lbs., $3.66 0.51 

1 sprg. switch comp., 15 pts. (68-lb.) 18.11 

1 sprg. switch comp., 15 pts. (68-lb.) 9.41 

1 S. H. long conn, rod 0.70 

1 short conn, rod 0.34 

2 guard rails comp. (80-lb.) 13.65 

2 S. H. 68-lb. guard rails, 680 lbs., $13.80.. 4.19 

2 sw. locks repd., $0.18 0.36 

2 sets frog blocking, $0.15 0.30 

1 sw. lamp 1.85 

68 new tie plates, 273 lbs., $2.15 5.87 

415 S. H. tie plates, 1,177 lbs., $1,875 22.07 

9 S. H. wall rail braces, 22 lbs., 11.05 cts. . . 0.12 

Total material $486.56 

Grand total, 496 ft., at $1.366 $672.40 

The high cost of the labor is attributed to "extra labor expended 
in clearing and to considerable interference by switch engine, this 
work being done in the yards." 

Summary. — On short sidetracks or cross-overs the cost of putting 
in a switch constitutes a much larger percentage of the total cost 
than on long sidetracks. Hence the cost of labor, as well as of 
materials, is greater per lineal foot of short sidetrack than of long 
sidetrack. 

Estimated Cost of Growing Tie Timber.* — In a paper read before 
the Engineers* Club of Philadelphia, Mr. E. A. Sterling, Forester of 
the Pennsylvania Lines, stated that in their work on the Penn- 
sylvania Lines east of Pittsburg and Erie, over 2,000,000 trees had 
been planted on lands acquired in connection with widen- 
ing and straightening the main line, and in the construction of low 



*Engineering-Contracting, April 22, 1908. 



1258 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

grade lines. The actual cost of plant material and planting last 
spring was $11.29 per thousand trees. 

Mr. Sterling gave the following as an estimate of the returns per 
acre, which may be expected from such work, if red oak is planted 
on land valued at $10 per acre, with interest at 4l^%, compounded 
annually, and the crop maturing in 40 yrs. : 

Land at $10, at 41/2%, for 40 yrs $ 58.16 

Plant material and planting |10, at 4%% for 

40 yrs 58.16 

Taxes, 3 cts. per annum, at 4%% for 40 yrs... 3.21 
Management and protection, 15 cts., at 4%% 

for 40 yrs 16.05 

Sawing or hewing 400 ties, at 10 cts., 40.00 

Hauling 400 ties, at 5 cts 20.00 

Total, 400 ties, at 48 cts $195.58 

By the above estimate 400 ties would be produced per acre every 
40 yrs. at a cost of 48 cts. each, including compound interest 
charges at 4%%. Mr. Sterling states that the estimate of 40 yrs. 
will hold for red oak and Scotch and red pines ; while chestnut 
should make ties in 30 to 35 yrs. and locust in 25 to 30 yrs., 
if not eaten up by the borers. The trees at the end of this period 
should average 15 ins. on the stump. The tax rate of 3 cts. per 
acre, used above, is far below the present rate, but is what would 
be considered a fair charge in a European forest. 

Cost of Making Hewed Ties. — From a pine tree that is 14 ins. 
diameter at the height of a man's shoulder, from 3 to 5 pole ties 
may be made. The ties are hewed 8 to 8% ft. long, 6 ins. thick, 
with two hewed faces 8 ins. wide, and the bark on the sides is 
peeled with a tie peeler. It is said that a skillful man can cut and 
make 40 to 50 of these ties per day, but it would not be safe to 
figure on such, an output. In the state of Washington, 25 to 35 fir 
ties per man per day are a fair output. This includes cutting 
down the small fir trees from which the ties are made. The men 
who do this work are called "tie hackers." 

In Missouri 25 white oak ties per man per day are regarded as a 
good output, the men receiving 10 cts. per tie. 

A Cheap Way of Loading Ties. — The following described device 
is simple and well adapted to handling other materials than ties. 
It consists of an overhead trolley, traveling on a 4-in. I-beam that 
serves as a rail. In loading box cars with ties, one end of this 
I-beam is supported on a light wooden A-frame, 7 ft. high and 
standing about 15 ft. from the car door; the other end of the 
I-beam enters the car door, and inside the door it is fastened to two 
bars ( ^ X 3 ins. ) that branch, forming a Y with curved branches, 
so that one trolley can run toward one end of the car, another trol- 
ley toward the other end. The trackway in the car is hung from the 
roof rafters by clamps. From each of the trolleys is suspended, by 
a chain, an L-shaped tie stirrup for carrying a tie. Two men un- 
load a tie from a truck and place it on the tie-stirrup, one man 
(one on each trolley) runs the tie into the car, the track having 
a slight down grade, and one man (one at each end of the car) 



RAILWAYS. 1259 

assists in unloading and piling. The man then takes the trolley off 
the track and carries it back to the loader^ Thus with a gang 
of 6 men as much work is done as with 10 men unaided by this 
device. A gang of G men loaded 3,325 large creosoted hewn ties in 
9 hrs., no effort being made to make a record. When timed they 
unloaded a truck of 30 ties into the car in 2 mins. Creosoted ties 
weigh 200 to 250 lbs. each, and as one man by using a trolley can 
easily transport them it is evident that much labor is saved. I 
would suggest the use of a similar device for handling sacks of 
cement (2 sacks on a double stirrup), for handling brick, two-man 
stone, etc. 

Cost of Burnettizing Timber and Ties.* — The following data re- 
late to the cost of treating timber by the zinc chloride process, 
known as burnettizing. The extremely low cost of preserving tim- 
ber in this manner will doubtless astonish many of our readers who 
are more familiar with the relatively high cost of creosoting. In 
this article we shall show that burnettizing costs about $2.50 per 
1,000 ft. B. M., or 3 cts. per cu. ft. ; and in a subsequent article we 
shall give similarly detailed figures showing a cost of $16 per M, 
or 19 cts. per cu. ft. for creosoting. 

The plant has a capacity of 2,500 ties per day, and the following 
is the average cost of a year's work: 

Cts. 
per cu. ft. 

0.3 lb. zinc chloride, at 3.8 cts 1.14 

Fuel, at $3.50 per ton 0.25 

Oil, etc 0.06 

Current repairs 0.10 

Switching engines, etc 0.10 

Depreciation, 10% of $75,000 plant divided by 

2,500,000 cu. ft 0.30 

Labor 1.05 

Total per cu. ft 3.00 

The ties were 7x9 ins. by 8 ft., containing 3.5 cu. ft. each, hence 
the cost per tie and per 1,000 ft. B. M. was as follows: 

Cts. Per 

per tie. M ft. B. M. 

Zinc chloride, at 3.8 cts. lb 4.00 $0.95 

Fuel 0.87 0.21 

Oil, etc 0.21 0.05 

Current repairs 0.35 0.08 

Switching engines, etc 0.35 0.08 

Depreciation 1.05 0.25 

Labor 3.67 0.88 

Total 10.50 $2.50 

The amount of zinc chloride per cubic foot is somewhat less than 
is commonly used, being 0.3 lb. as compared with 0.4 to 0.5 lb. 
per cu. ft. 

Cost of Burnettizing Ties on the S. P. Ry. — On the Southern 
Pacific Ry., in 1893, the cost of burnettizing ties was 9 1^ to 12 cts. 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 3, 1907. 



1260 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

per tie 6x8 ins. x 8 ft. About 221,000 "sap" ties were treated 
during the year, these ties being purchased at the mills iK Texas 
for 23 cts. each. 

Cost of Creosoting Piles and Ties.* — In our issue of July 3 we 
gave the itemized cost of burnettizing ties, the total cost being 
$2.50 per 1,000 ft. B. M., or 10 Va cts. per tie of 7 x 9 ins. x 8 ft. The 
following data relate to the cost of creosoting ties and piles. 
Creosoting is a much more expensive process, but the burnettizing 
treatment is of no use where timber is constantly exposed to the 
action of water, as is the case wherever piles are 'used. Water 
leaches out the zinc chloride in a comparatively small time when- 
ever the timber is constantly submerged, and, even where it is ex- 
posed to frequent rains the zinc chloride is dissolved little by little 
until there is no longer enough left in the timber to protect it from 
the fungus of decay. Could someone devise a method of filling the 
outer pores of burnettized wood with some waterproof compound 
it would be possible to use the zinc chloride for preserving the 
body of timber that is exposed to water. For example, it might 
be practicable to treat the surface of burnettized timber with the 
Sylvester process which has been so successfully used in water- 
proofing masonry, namely, by coating with soft soap and alum in 
such a manner as to fill the pores with a curd like precipitate. 
Indeed, it might be practicable to treat timber, first with zinc 
chloride and subsequently with creosote, so that the creosote would 
form the outer protective shell. 

The following costs represent the average of a year's work in a 
plant having a capacity of 500,000 cu. ft., or 6,000,000 ft. B. M. 
per annum. 

The cost of treating the timber was as follows, per cu. ft. : 

Cts. 
per cu. ft. 

1.05 gals, creosote, at 11.5 cts 12.08 

Fuel (13.50 per ton) and other supplies 1.82 

Labor 3.75 

Depreciation, maintenance and repairs 1.50 

Total 19-15 

This is equivalent to $16 per 1,000 ft. B. M., which is more than 
six times as expensive as burnettizing. 

A 7 X 9-in. x 8-ft. tie contains 3.5 cu. ft., hence the cost of creo- 
soting each tie was 67 cts., as compared with 10^^ cts. by the zinc 
chloride process (burnettizing). 

About 300,000 lin. ft. of piles were creosoted, and It was found 
that the piles average 1.11 cu. ft. of timber per lin. ft. of pile. 
Hence the cost of creosoting was 21% cts. per lin. ft. of pile. 

In analyzing the above costs per cu. ft. it will be noted that the 
item of depreciation and maintenance is 1.5 cts. per cu. ft., which is 
equivalent to $1.80 per M. This item is based on an allowance of 
10% per annum for depreciation of a $75,000 plant, plus current 
repairs and insurance. 

* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 7, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. 1261 

See the section on Timber in tliis book for further data on 
creosoting. 

Cost of Treating Ties With Zinc Chloride and Creosote, Gales- 
burg, III.* — The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Ry. lias built a plant 
for treating ties at Galesburg, 111. The plant is situated on a tract 
of 80 acres with a space for tracks having a capacity of 2,000,000 
ties, although at present there are tracks for a storage of only 
1,000,000. For fire protection in the yard, hydrants are spaced 
300 ft. apart, being supplied with water from a 100,000-gal. storage 
tank, fed by a well 1,300 ft. deep. The tracks in the yard are laid 
with three rails, as narrow gage cars are used to deliver the ties 
to the retorts. 

The plant was located at Galesburg as it is the connecting point 
of tlie Burlington lines with the south, the principal source of the 
supply, and on this part of the system there are always available 
stock cars for the shipment of tlie treated ties. Box cars cannot be 
used for this purpose on account of tliG odor which is retained in 
the cars when loaded with creosoted timber. 

Tlie main building is 152 x 115 ft., divided into three rooms, one 
containing three retorts, another the engines and tanks, the third 
being the boiler room. There is also a test room, fitted up for 
treating four ties. The building is of reinforced concrete through- 
out. The window sashes are of metal, glazed with wire glass, while 
the doors are all covered with sheet metal. 

The retort room is the full length of the building and 38 ft. wide, 
the retorts being 132. ft. long and 6 ft. in diameter, made of %-in. 
steel, furnished by tlie Allis-Chalmers Co. Each has a capacity of 
650 ties, while the plant treats 6,000 ties in 24 hrs. 

There are three 150-lip. boilers, one being for emergencies. There 
is no chimney, induced draft system being used. The engine room, 
30 X 115 ft., contains an Ingersoll-Rand compressor, with a capacity 
of 525 cu. ft. of free air per min., a Knowles fire pump, three 
Knowles pressure pumps, one Knowles oil pump and one Battle 
Creek vacuum pump. Tliere is also a small electric light plant in 
this room. 

The tank room, 39 x 50 ft, contains a 25,000-gal. steel working 
tank and a 100,000-gal. steel mixing tank for creosote. On the 
outside, close to tlie main building, are the storage and measuring 
tanks, one 500,000-gal. steel tank for creosote storage and two 
5,000-gal. steel tanks for measuring creosote, two 50,000-gal. wooden 
tanks for zinc chloride and one 25,000-gal. iron storage tank for zinc 
chloride. The two steel outside tanks are arranged for heating 
with steam coils. 

The plant is arranged with its pipe connections between pumps, 
tanks and retorts, so that the straight zinc chloride process, of the 
two, known as the Card process, may be used on one retort or on all 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 2, 1908, an abstract of an article 
in The Railway Age. 



1262 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

three. In the Card process, which is a modification of the Rutger, 
the zinc chloride and creosote are continuously agitated under pres- 
sure by centrifugal pumps, and ordinary coal tar creosote can be 
used. Each retort is connected with an electrically driven 
centrifugal pump, which forces the liquid in at the bottom and ex- 
hausts it from the top of the retort. The vacuum in retorts is 
obtained by a Baragwauth barometric condenser, with an auxiliary 
air pump 6%xl2xl2 ins. having a connection with the air 
chamber of the condenser. The condensing pipes are placed on the 
roof of the engine rooin. 

The Rutger process has been used in Germany, but it requires a 
creosote having special qualities and is expensive. In the Allar- 
dyce process the zinc chloride is put in first and then the creosote, 
while the Ruping process aims to reduce the expense for creosote 
by first filling the wood cells with compressed air and then coating 
them with creosote. 

Seasoned ties are treated directly, but if green they are first 
steamed under pressure of 5 to 20 lbs. from 1 to 2 hrs. The sap 
is blown off every 15 to 30 mins. With the Card process a vacuum 
of 27 to 28 ins. is held on the retort for an hour, and, with the 
vacuum still on, the mixture of zinc chloride and creosote is run 
in by gravity, entirely filling the retort, and requires about 18,000 
sals. The liquid is heated to 180° F., and at this temperature the 
two ingredients do not separate as rapidly as in a cold solution. 
T'he centrifugal pumps are then started and the liquid is circulated 
at the rate of 2,500 gals, per min. and the whole charge is changed 
every 7 or 8 mins. At the same time the pressure pumps are 
started and pressure gradually increased to 150 lbs. and held at 
that for 2 to 4 hrs., or until a sufficient amount of the liquid is ab- 
sorbed by the timber. 

The pressure pumps are connected to the 5,000-gal. measuring 
tanks which have gauges operated by floats, and in this way the 
volume of liquid forced into the timber is known. "When the 
gauges show a sufficient amount the pressure is released and the 
remaining liquid is forced back into the mixing tank. Then a 
vacuum of 24 to 28 ins. is created and held for an hour, taking out 
all surplus liquid into the underground tanks, where it is allowed 
to settle and then returned to the mixing tank. This last treatment 
is for the purpose of removing the surplus creosote remaining on the 
surface of the ties, so they can be handled comfortably, and 500 
gals, saved from each retort. 

The retort door is then opened and the cars withdrawn by wire 
cable operated by electric motor and switched to the platform, 
where they are loaded directly for shipment. Bach tie is marked 
with a short thick nail having the year of treatment on its head. 
The ties are loaded by the Anzier loader at a cost of 25 cts. per 
tram. 



RAILWAYS. 12G3 

An approximate cost of the new plant is as follows : 

Land $ 28,000 

Tracks 50.000 

Sewers 5,000 

Well 6,000 

Platform 3,000 

Building 30,000 

Three retorts 30,000 

Tanks of all kinds 10,000 

Pipes and valves and labor 20,000 

Pumps 6,000 

Boiler and settings 5,000 

Electric light plant 3,000 

Mundy hoists 2,500 

$198,500 

Thirty men are employed in the offices and plant, there being a 
chief engineer and chemist, 2 engineers and 2 assistant engineers 
for day and night, 3 sub-foremen and 2 motormen, besides the 
laborers. 

The liquid used is a mixture of 17% creosote and 83% zinc chloride 
solution, the latter containing 3% chloride and the rest water. The 
creosote has a specific gravity of 1.045 and contains about 35% 
naphthaline and 5% tar acid. The cost of creosote is 6% to 7 cts. 
per gal. 

The cost of treating a pine tie is estimated as follows : 

Per Per tie 

cu. ft. (3cu. ft.) 

0.5 lb. dry zinc chloride, at 4cts $0,020 $0,060 

0.8 lb. creosote, at 3 cts 0.024 0.072 

Labor, fuel, supplies and supt 0.013 0.040 

Interest and depreciation 0.005 0.15 

Total $0,062 $0,187 

This figure is the cost during the winter months. The cost is: 
less in warm weather — probably as low as 16 cts. About 46% of 
the ties treated at this plant are red oaks, and 35% yellow pine, the 
rest being gum, elm, beech, birch, etc. 

The plant was designed under the supervision of T. E. Calvert,, 
chief engineer, and F. J. Creiger, who now has charge of the plant- 
It will be noted that at 6.2 cts. per cu. ft., the cost of treatment 
is equivalent to $5.17 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 

Cost of Treating Ties and Their Life. — In 1885 the A., T. & S. F. 
Ry. began treating ties by the zinc-tannin, or Wellhouse, process. 
Up to 1901, its cost of treating some 4,000,000 ties is said to have 
been 15 to 18 cts. per tie. 

New Mexico mountain pine ties having a life of 4 yrs. when un- 
treated have a life of of 10% to 11 yrs. when treated. 

In 1886 the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. contracted to- 
have ties treated for 16 cts. per tie. 

Some 4,750,000 hemlock and tamarack ties had been treated up' 
to 1901, and the average life of these ties has been 10% to 11%. 
yrs., depending on location. 



1264 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In 1887 the Southern Pacific Ry. began burnettizing ties (zinc 
chloride process) without subsequent treatment. Up to 1901 it had 
treated 2,500,000 pine ties, which last 4 yrs. when untreated. The 
life of the treated ties was 7 yrs. where the rainfall was heavy 
(Glidden Division) to more than 9 yrs. where the rainfall was light 
(Del Rio Division). The average of all was 8% yrs. life. 

Not including interest or depreciation of plant, the cost of treat- 
ment was only 6.44 cts. per tie, in 1898. 

About 0.24 lb. dry zinc chloride was used per cu. ft. of timber, 
or half the standard used in Et^rope. 

Life of Treated Ties. — The records of treated pine ties taken out 
of the A., T. & St. P., showed the following averages : 

Life, yrs. 

1897 10.18 

1898 10.56 

1899 10.61 

1900 10.78 

1901 10.58 

1902 10.70 

These ties were treated with the two-injection Wellhouse process. 
These figures relate only to the ties removed on account of rot. 

Life of Ties. — For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1901, seven 
railways reported that untreated oak ties (white, post, burr, etc.) 
were in use on the following mileage: 

Miles of Miles of 

main line. all track. 

Chicago and Northwestern (Madison Div.).. 614 764 

Illinois Central (Eighth Div.) 286 332 

Illinois Central (Springfield Div.) 454 552 

Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis 1,195 1,414 

Penn. Lines (Pittsburg Div.) 442 594 

Southern Ry. (Eastern Dist.) 3,200 3,749 

Southern Pacific (Atlantic System) 2,107 2,607 

Total 8,298 10,012 

There were 17,471,116 oak ties in these tracks, and 2,147,684, or 
12.3% more renewed during the year, which is equivalent to a life 
of about 8 yrs. 

The average life of ties, as estimated by different railways, was 
as follows: 

Kind of 
Railway. tie 

Chicago and Great Western .... Oak 

Chicago and Northwestern " 

Illinois Central " 

Nash., Chatta. & St. L 

Norfolk & Western White Oak 

Pitts. & Lake Erie 

Boston & Maine Chestnut 

Illinois Central (Louisiana) . . . Cypress 



Life in 


Years. 


Main track. 


Side track. 


8 


10 


7 


10 


■ 7 


9 


7 


9 


8.5 


9.5 


8 


10 


8 


12 


9 


13 



RAILWAYS. 1265 

The French State Railway gave the following as the life of creo- 
soted ties : 

Life Years on 

Main line. Siding. Total. 

Creosoted pine 15 5 20 

Creosoted oak 18 7 25 

Creosoted beech 20 10 30 

Estimated Life of Ties in 1894.— Bulletin No. 9 (1894) of the For- 
estry Division, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, states that when there 
were 235,000 miles of track (all main, branch and side tracks) in 
the U. S., 76,000,000 ties were annually required for renewals. This 
is equivalent to 324 ties renewed per mile of all tracks. If there 
were 2,800 ties per mile, the life was 8.7 yrs. The estimate of 76,- 
000,000 ties for renewals may be accurate, since the reports of 
the railways to the Interstate Commerce Commission give the 
number of ties used each year for renewals. 

Due to the use of heavier rails than were common in 1894 (15 yrs. 
ago), the life of ties is greater now than then. 

Life of Ties as Affected by Weight of Rail.— Mr. P. H. Dudley 
states that on the New York Central Ry., when 65-lb. rails were 
used, the life of a yellow pine tie was 8 or 9 yrs. Since the intro- 
duction of 100-lb. rails, the life has increased to 11% yrs. The ties 
are no longer cut bj'' the rails nor injured by the frequent tamping 
required with lighter rails. He states (in 1901) that not 5% of 
the ties are now removed for other causes than decay, whereas 40% 
of the ties under 65-lb. rails were taken out because of cutting 
under the rail and other injury. Eighteen ties used per 30-ft. rail 
length, or 3,168 per mile. The average tie renewals from 1890 to 
1900, was 293 ties per mile, or 9%%, for untreated ties of all kinds. 

Spacing of Ties on Different Railways. — In 1901 the following was 
the spacing of ties on different railways : 

Ties per mile. 

Main track. Side track. 

Baltimore & Ohio 2,850 2,650 

Chicago & Great Western 3,000 2,800 

Chicago & Northwestern 2,990 2,500 

C, M. & St. P 3,000 '2,640 

C, C. & St. L 3,000 2,800 

Illinois Central 3,168 2,640 

Louisville & Nashville 2,816 2,112 

Michigan Central 3,168 2,375 

Nashville, Chatta. & St. L 2,900 2,640 

New York Central 3,000 2,500 

Norfolk & "Western 2,816 2,600 

Penn. Lines (Pittsburg Div.) 2,816 2,288 

Pittsburg & Lake Erie 2,640 2,640 

Southern Pacific (Atlantic Syst.)... 2,816 2,664 

Southern Ry. (Eastern Dist.) 2,816 2,640 

Wabash (Detroit Div.) 2,990 2,800 

Union Pacific (2,816 on branches) . , 2,992 2,640 

It is probably very close to an average to say that there are 
2,900 ties per mile of main line and branches, and 2,640 per mile 
of sidetrack and yards, in the railways of the United States. Since 
ihere are 0.4 mile of sidetracks and yards per mile 'f main track 



1266 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and branches the average of all tracks would then be 2,820 ties per 
mile of track. 

Labor Cost of Renewing Ties. — The cost of distributing new ties, 
taking out old ties and laying new ones, and disposing of the old 
ties by burning, averaged as follows for the years 1904 and 1905 
on one of the divisions of the Northern Pacific Ry. in Washington : 

Per new tie. 

Distributing $0,028 

Laying 0.110 

Disposing of old tie ; 0.009 

Total $0,147 

Wages averaged $1.45 per day for section men and $2.00 per day 
lor section foremen. The ties were laid on a gravel ballast. 

Prices of Ties and Labor Cost of Renewals. — In 1901 the follow- 
ing was the cost of ties and of placing them in track on several 
typical railways : 

. . tuD ; o . ' • bo • ^ 

.2 • a . o--; .2 • c • ! 

^ : S '-' 2 -3 M 5 J < 

''30 Ctfh 'rJ.C ,„•-! %U 

Road. • 2 °g ftM o^ at 

•d ^*^ ^" ^2. -mS ^-^ "3 . 

M UOU" U U Eh" 

So. Pacific Redwood 38 1 1 V2 lOVa 52y2 

Mich. Cent Oak 45 IVa 4% 1 10 60 

Wabash Oak 40 11/25 1 10 55 

N. Y. Cent Y. Pine 59 II/2 4 1 10 77% 

Louisville & N Y. Pine 45 11/2 15 81% 

Denver & R. I Red Spruce 33 1 % 1 1% . 37 

Mo. Pacific Oak 32 1% 5 % 6% 40% 

Lake Shore & M. S Oak 58 1% 15 74% 

Union Pacific Oak 56 ... 1% 1% 10 71% 

Union Pacific Wyo. Pine 40 ... 2%, 2 11 57% 

Average Price of Ties in America. — The annual reports made by 
the different railways of America to the Interstate Commerce Com- 
mission contain statements of the number of ties used in renewals 
and of the, average price paid for ties at the point of distribution. 
Unfortunately the reports made by the Interstate Commerce Com- 
mission contain none of these data. However, the reports give the 
total cost of tie renewals each year, which is approximately $130 
per mile of all track. If there are 2,800 ties per mile, and if 10% 
are renewed annually, then the average cost of ties is 46.4 cts. This 
does not include the cost of distributing and laying the ties. If 11% 
of the ties are renewed annually, the average cost of ties is 42.2 cts. 
per tie. It is reasonably certain that, including side tracks and 
yard tracks, tie renewals (untreated ties) average 10 to 11% per 
year for American railways, variations from this average depend- 
ing on kind of wood, climate, weight of rail, etc. 

Cost of Gravel Ballast. — A common amount of gravel ballast is 
1,600 cu. yds. per mile of track, and rarely need the cost exceed 40 
cts. per cu. yd., including the labor of putting the ballast under the 
ties and surfacing the track. A not unusual contract price is 27 cts. 



RAILWAYS. 1267 

per CM. yd. for loading ballast on flat cars with steam shovels, 
unloading with ballast plows, and putting under the ties, and sur- 
facing of track. In addition to this the railway company must 
pay the cost of hauling the ballast — work train service — which 
should not exceed 17 cts. per cu. yd. even for a haul of 100 miles. 

The following is a typical gang for loading, hauling and unloading 
ballast : 

Steam Shovel. Per day. 

1 foreman, $150 per mo $ 6.00 

1 engineman, $125 per mo 4^80 

1 cranesman, $90 per mo 3^50 

1 fireman, $60 per mo 2!30 

1 watchman, $60 per mo 2!30 

1 timekeeper, $60 per mo 2!30 

6 pit laborers, at $2.00 12.00 

6 laborers "throwing" pit tracks and repairing 12.00 

Total $ 45.20 

Repairs to steam shovel 8.00 

Total steam shovel loading $ 53.20 

Hauling Ballast. 

1 conductor $ 3.50 

2 brakemen, at $2.50 5.00 

Engine service on work train. 

1 engineman $ 4.50 

1 fireman 2.50 

Coal and oil 8.50 

Engine rental and repairs 12.00 

27.50 

Engine service "spotting" cars 27.50 

Rental and repairs, 40 flat cars, at $0.50 20.00 

Total hauling ballast $ 83.50 

Unloading and Distributing Ballast. 

1 operator of unloading plow $ 3.00 

10 laborers, at $2.00 : 20.00 

Coal and oil for unloader 4.00 

Rental and repairs of unloader 4.00 

Total unloading ballast $ 31.00 

Grand total $167.70 

When this crew is handling 800 cu. yds. of gravel per day the 
cost is : 

Per cu. yd. 
Cts. 

Loading 6.7 

Hauling 10.4 

Unloading 3.9 

21.0 
In addition to this, the labor cost of tamping ballast under ties 
and track surfacing is about 12 cts. per cu. yd. 

It often happens that gravel pits must be stripped of overlying 
earth, that considerable grading is necessary lor tracks into the 
pit, that the gravel is cemented and requires some blasting, and 
that "pit rent" must be paid for the gravel. All these items, how- 
ever, will rarely amount to 7 cts. per cu. yd., so that the total 



1268 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cost of the gravel in the track should rarely exceed 40 cts. per 
cu. yd. 

Where traffic on a road is so congested that a ballast train cannot 
average more than 100 miles traveled per Qay, and where the load 
hauled is only 160 cu. yds. per train, it is evident that 5 trips of 
10 miles and return will be required to haul 800 cu. yds., and to the 
figures above given must be added another train for each additional 
10 miles of distance from the gravel pit to the dump. However, 
on long hauls it is obvious that much heavier train loads will ordi- 
narily be used, thus keeping the cost down. 

Cost of Gravel and Rock Ballasting Old Track.* — The following 
matter has been taken from the report of a committee read before 
the 1907 convention of the Roadmasters and Maintenance of Way 
Association : On a northern division of the Chicago & Northwestern 
By. the cost of ballasting one mile of track with gravel was ?1,020, 
figured on the basis that 3,400 cu. yds. of material would be used 
per mile. The gravel was unscreened and unwashed and was used 
just as it came from the pit. The gravel was placed for a 12-in. 
raise with standard gravel roadbed on the top of 11%-ft., slope 
1% to 1, and 16 ft. wide from bottom ballast line to ballast line. 
The itemized cost per cubic yard was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Cost of gravel loaded on cars at pit $0,070 

Hauling and unloading, 50-mile haul 0.107 

Ballasting 0.123 

Total $G.300 

On a division of the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. for the 
year 1906 the cost of ballasting with gravel was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Gravel, washing and loading $0.18 

Hauling 0.07 

Digging out old ballast 0.15 

Unloading and placing in track 0.15 

Total $0.55 

For crushing limestone % to 1% ins. in size the cost was as 
follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Cost of stone $0,535 

Digging out old ballast 0.150 

Hauling, unloading and placing in track 0.400 

Total $1,085 

yor ballasting with crushed stone on a division 6t the Atchison, 
Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. the cost was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Crushed stone at crusher, loaded on cars $0,615 

Haul, 50 miles 0.055 

Labor (Mexican) inserting 0.330 

Total $1.00 

*Engtneering-Contracting, Dec. 25, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. 1269 

For a 12-in. raise 3,400 cu. yds. of ballast are used per mile, 
making the cost ?3,400. The present standard on this road requires 
the ballast to be dressed level with the top of the ties for the full 
length of the tie and 6 ins. beyond the ends of ties, making the top 
widths of the ballast 9 ft. and giving a slope of 1 % to 1 ; this gives 
a roadbed 16 ft. wide from ballast line on one side to ballast line on 
the other side, with a 12-in. raise. 

Cost of Gravel Ballasting. — About 30 miles of single track rail- 
road were ballasted with gravel sufficient to raise the ties 8 ins. 
Ties had 10-in. face, were 8 14 ft. long, and there were 16 ties to a 
30-ft. rail. A 2%-yd. steam shovel was used to load flat cars. 
About 4 ft. of earth had to be stripped off the gravel pit. The 
• gravel was hauled by two trains of 35 apron flat cars each, each 
car holding 6 to 7 cu. yds. Two locomotives were used to haul tliese 
trains and one locomotive in the pit to spot cars. The cars were 
unloaded with a plow, and it will be noticed tliat tlie damage to 
the cars caused by the plow was very high. The cost to tlie rail- 
way company per cubic yard of ballast in place was as follows : 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

Pit rent 1 Va 

Loading, hauling and dumping 15 ^ 

Repairs to cars 5 

Shoveling and tamping ballast in track 8 

Total per cu. yd 30 

Common laborers were paid $1.25 per 10 hrs. 

Cost of Cemented Gravel Ballast.* — There are two principal points 
!n the territory east of Memphis wliere cementing gravel is worked 
for the purpose of supplying ballast to railroads ; one at luka. Miss., 
on the Southern Ry., known as the Tisliomingo Gravel Pit, owned 
and operated by the Tishomingo Gravel Co., of Memphis, Tenn., 
and one at Perryville, Tenn., on the Memphis & Paducah Division 
of the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry., owned and operated 
by the Perryville Gravel & Ballast Co., of Memphis, Tenn. 

As the character of the gravel and the manner of working the 
two pits are somewhat different, they will be handled separately. 

Tishomingo Gravel. — This is a water-worn gravel lying in a 
compact mass requiring blasting before it can be handled with a 
steam shovel. It is composed of 20% clay, 5% sand, and 
75% gravel. This gravel as a rule is small and none of 
it large enough to require crushing to make it suitable 
for ballasting purposes. In order to get it in shape to 
load with steam shovel, it is loosened up by blasting. This is ac- 
complished by digging a tunnel about 20 x 26 ins. in cross-section 
into the material a distance of about 26 ft., then turning at right 
angles for a distance of 10 ft. (see Fig. S). This digging is done 
by a man lying down using a pick with a very short handle. The 
cost of digging these tunnels is 50 cts. per ft. 



* Engineering-Contracting, April 14, 1909. 



1270 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The charge is placed in the extreme end of the tunnel and a 
portion of it refilled as shown on sketch. From 75 to 100 carloads 
of material is loosened up at each blast. This material is then 
loaded by steam shovel onto cars. The cost of this material is as 
follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Loading ?0.09 

Hauling 0.20 

Unloading and distributing 0.07 

Putting under ties and surfacing 0.11 

Total ?0.47 

The advantages of its use are : Small cost, quick cementing quali- 
ties, holds track in line and surface well under fairly heavy trafflc, 
does not churn, very little dust and has great resistance to erosion 






soyea" 







Fig. S. — Chamber Blast. 



by water. Considered an excellent ballasting material. Has the 
disadvantage of growing prolific crops of weeds and grass, making 
it costly to keep clean. 

Perryville Gravel. — This is an angular gravel lying in compact 
mass requiring blasting before it can be handled. 

Large pockets of clay are encountered, making it preferable to 
load by hand in order to get the best material. It is composed of 
10% clay and 90% gravel, with chemical analysis of 97% silica, 
2.5% alumina and 0.5% iron. There is found in this pit considerable 
large stone, which has to be crushed before it is suitable for use. 
The cost of this gravel per yard is as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

F. o. b. cars at pit $0.27 % 

Hauling, 100-mile train service 0.20 

Unloading and distributing 0.04 

Stripping, putting under and surfacing 0.20 

Total . $0.71% 



RAILWAYS. 1271 

Cost of Washing Gravel.— A large gravel washing plant was built 
in 1906 by the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry., at Pleasant 
Lake on the Ft. Wayne branch of the Lake Shore. The plant 
handles 3,000 cu. yds. of raw gravel daily. A 75-ton steam shovel 
with a 3% -yd. bucket loads dump cars, which are dumped into 
two hoppers that discharge upon two inclined conveyors (made by 
the Link-Belt Go.), having a capacity of 4,000 cu. yds. per 10-hr. 
day. The conveyors discharge upon a short flume (8 ft. long) where 
the gravel encounters the water. Thence the material passes over 
several fixed screens, all material larger than 2-in. being shunted 
to a gyratory rock crusher. 

The washed gravel for ballast collects in hoppers whence it is 
drawn oft into cars, and the sand (all material larger than ij^-in.) 
collects in other hoppers, whence it is drawn off into cars. 

The output for a typical day is as follows : 

Cu. yds. 

Raw gravel 3,270 

Washed gravel 1,335 

Washed sand 1,850 

The following is the crew required to operate the plant: 
1 foreman. 
1 clerk. 

1 engineman at plant. 
1 fireman at plant. 
1 shopman. 

1 carpenter. 

2 men on two sand settlers. 
4 men dumping gravel cars. 

4 men keeping track clean at washer. 

10 men repairing cars and calking ballast cars with hay. 

2 locomotive crews delivering gravel. 

2 locomotive crews removing washed gravel. 

1 steam shovel crew. 

30 men in section gang. 

The washing plant is driven by a 200-hp. Erie steam engine, but 
the driving load on the engine is only 132 hp., of which 105 hp. is 
required to operate the pump supplying the wash water. A 10-in. 
single-stage centrifugal turbine pump (Worthington), having a 
2,400-gal. rating under a 90-ft. head, is used ; but the pump is not 
called upon to deliver more than 1,650 gals. 

The cost of the plant and land was as follows: 

Plant for washing $25,000 

Land 15,000 

Grading 10,000 

Bridge work 2,500 

Miscellaneous 5,000 

Track 36,000 

Total $93,500 



1272 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Assuming that the gravel pit will be exhausted In 5 years, we 

have the following annual and daily cost (200 days per year) : 

Per year. Per day. 

Plant, 15% of ?25,000 ? 3,750 $18.75 

Track, 10% of $36,000 3,600 18.00 

Grading, 20% of $10,000 2,000 10.00 

Bridging, 20% of $2,500 500 2.50 

Miscellaneous, 20% of $5,000 1,000 5.00 

Land, 20% of $15,000 3,000 15.00 

Total $13,850 $69.25 

Assuming that 3,000 cu. yds. of sand and gravel are produced 
daily, half of which is sand, for which there is no market, we have 
the following cost : 

Per cu. yd. 
Per day. of gravel. 

Operating expense $250.00 $0,167 

Plant and land depreciation 69.25 0.046 

Plant interest (at 5% of $93,500).. 23.35 0.015 

Total $362.60 $0,228 

This does not include the cost of stripping the gravel which was 

about 6% cts. per cu. yd., making the total cost of this washed 

gravel nearly 30 cts. f. o. b. cars. 

For description and drawings of this Pleasant Lake washing 

plant, and for hints on ballasting, see Engineering-ContracUng , 

April 14, 1909. 

Cost of Ballasting, Using Dump Cars. — The Goodwin steel car is 
largely used by contractors, and railway companies, for ballasting 
and for dumping earth and rock on standard gage tracks. Its 
dimensions are 36 ft. long, 9 ft. % in. height above rails, and it 
weighs 47,500 lbs. Its capacity is 40 cu. yds., or 80,000 lbs. A 
train of cars can be dumped at one time all together, or one at a 
time, by one man operating a compressed air valve, or they can be 
dumped by hand. The car is so designed that its load may be 
placed between the rails ; on either side of the track, or on both 
sides, or in any combination of ways desired. In grading and bal- 
lasting 22 miles of track with 30,000 cu. yds. of gravel, during the 
winter of 1904-5, an average train of 8 40-cu. yd. Goodwin cars was 
used, the average haul being 141/2 miles. The gravel came from 
the pit quite wet, but required little or no spreading as plows and 
scrapers are not needed when these cars are used. 

Mr. W. B. Stimson, Superintendent Grand Rapids & Indiana Ry., 
gives the following data on the loading and hauling of gravel for 
ballast : 



RAILWAYS. 1273 

Rodger ballast cars were used, working two trains of 25 cars per 
train. Sixteen miles of track were ballasted with 1,039 carloads, or 
20,800 cu. yds. of gravel, or 1,300 cu. yds. per mile, the average 
haul being 7 miles. The cost was as follows for the 16 miles: 

Total. Per day. 

Two train crews, 12 days each ? 175.00 $14.58 

Locomotives, enginemen and watchmen. 199.25 16.60 

Fuel for locomotives 254.10 21.17 

Telegraph operator 15.50 1.28 

Pit foreman 28.84 2.40 

Pitmen 100.35 8.36 

Steam shovel, including rent of shovel, 

fuel and wages 323.52 26.96 

Total, at 5.3 cts. per cu. yd $1,096.56 $91.35 

In addition to this it cost 6.7 cts. per cu. yd. to spread and tamp 
the gravel in the track, each laborer averaging 75 ft. of track per 
day. Including in the expense of 5.3 cts. per cu. yd., is the cost 
of moving the two trains and the steam shovel 166 miles to the 
pit, and half a day's time setting up the shovel and getting ready 
to work ; so that the actual working time of the shovel was only 
10% days, making an average of 2,000 cu. yds. loaded per day of 12 
hrs. The depth of the face at which the shovel worked was only 
8 ft. The above is an exceedingly low cost. 

The Rodger ballast car is 8 ft. 9 ins. x 34 ft. over sills, weighs 
28,000 lbs. and its capacity is 60,000 lbs., or 20 cu. yds. of gravel 
heaped measure. The car is hopper bottomed, with plows and 
scrapers for spreading the ballast. One car is dumped at a time and 
fills about 80 ft. of track. 

Cost of Rock Ballast. — The Railroad Gazette, Nov. 16, 1906, p. 
438, gives the following cost of re-ballasting an Eastern railway: 

Per cu. yd. 

Rock on cars at Rockland Lake $0,575 

Floatage from Rockland Lake 0.086 

Distribution by train (Rodger cars and ballast 

plow) 0.035 

Labor putting in track 0.058 

Total $0,754 

This does not Include cost of preparing the old track, forking up 
old ballast, lifting track, etc. 

It is estimated that $0.15 per cu. yd. would cover the added cost 
of putting rock ballast in a new track, including cost of lifting 
track, tamping, surfacing, etc. 



1274 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Prices of Frogs and Crossings, Etc. — The prices used in esti- 
mating the cost of frogs, etc., on the New York Central, in 1902, 

were : 

Wt. of Rail, 

No. Lbs. Description. Price. 

6 80 Rigid, Bolted $27.00 
10 80 Rigid, Bolted 32.00 
10 65 Spring R. 48.50 

8 60 Rigid, Bolted 23.00 

8 65 Rigid, Bolted 24.00 

8 75 Rigid, Bolted 28.50 

Type A 80 Crossing Bolted 335.00 to 365.00 

10 75 Spring R. Bolted 51.00 

7 80 Rigid, Bolted 27.50 
10 80 (51/8") Spring R. 49.25 
10 67 (4y2") Spring R. 44.50 
18 80 (SYs") Rigid, Bolted 45.00 to 70.00 

Rail braces, 3.32 lbs. each, each % .10% 

Rail joints (80-lb. rail), Weber, insulated 5.25 

Rail joints. Atlas, com 3.75 

Rail joints, 22-in. for 60-lb. rail 2.50 

Replacers, Little Giant 15.00 

Rail bender, roller 143.00 

Rail chairs, cast, per 100 lbs 2.48 

Rail chairs, weights: 

4 ins. high, 19.5 lbs. 

3 ins. high, 18.6 lbs. 

Switch stand, Ramapo, low 10.00 

Smoke jack in place 40.00 

Track drill 18.00 

Track jack 3.00 

Cost of Track Scales. — On the N. T. Central a 100-ton track 
scales, 42 ft. long, cost as follows, in 1902 : 

Scales and materials $1,760 

Labor 640 

Total $2,400 

8.7 tons rails (relayers), at $20 174 

15 ties, at $0.60 9 

Miscellaneous material 150 

Labor laying track, etc 70 

Grand total $2,803 

No piles were used in foundation. 

The cost of 50-ton track scales, 42 ft. long, on the Northern Pa- 
cific, in 1899, averaged as follows: 

Scales, delivered i $ 580 

Other materials 170 

Labor ($175 to $300) 250 

Total $1,000 

The cost of 80-ton track scales, 50 ft. long, in 1905, was as 
follows : 

Scales and materials $1,250 

Labor ($500 to $700) 650 

Total $1,900 



RAIUVAYS. 1275 

Cost of Water Tanks. — On the Chicago & Northwestern, In 1896, 
the following was the cost of four different 50,000-ga'. tanks, 
16 X 24 ft, on 24-ft. posts : 

Tank No. 1. 
Material: 

Water tanlc, inclurling hoops, etc $ 275 

Two 8-in. standpipe 380 

540 ft. 8-in. pipe, valves, etc 315 

1 bbl. pitch and 1 bbl. oakum 7 

Posts, caps and braces 209 

Stone, cement, etc., for foundation 309 

108 ft. 4-in. gas pipe 22 

Total material $1,517 

Labor: 

Building tank $ 263 

Building masonry foundation 209 

Painting tank, 2 coats 26 

Laying pipe and setting standpipes 178 

Total labor $ 676 

Grand total ?2,193 

Tank No. 2. 
Material: 

Tank, and posts, braces and caps $ 304 

One 8-in. standpipe 190 

Two 8-in. gate valves 45 

608 lbs. lead 21 

660 ft. 8-in. cast-iron pipe 255 

Lumber for well, pump house and standpipe 

foundation 23 

80 ft. 4-in. gas pipe 16 

Paint 20 

Stone, cement, etc 289 

Total material $1,163 

Labor: 

Building tank $ 201 

Building foundation 120 

Laying pipe 199 

Painting tank, 3 coats 35 

Digging well (16 x 18) and walling it up 290 

Total labor $ 845 

Grand total $2,008 

Tank No. "3. 

Material: 

Tank $ 275 

One 10-in. standpipe 225 

90 ft. 10-in. cast-iron pipe 72 

Fittings for pipe and standpipe. . 65 

Foundation for tank and standpipe 150 

Paint ^ 

Total material ? 780 

(Posts, etc., seem to have been omitted.). 



1276 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor: 

Building tank $ 238 

Building foundation 133 

Laying pipe 93 

Painting, 2 coats 31 

Total labor $ 595 

Grand total $1,375 

Tank No. 4. 

Material: 

Tank $ 304 

10-in. standpipe 225 

60 ft. 12-ln. cast-iron pipe 72 

Valves, elbows, etc 65 

2,586 lbs. lead, at 3% cts 87 

250 pieces 6-in. cast-iron pipe 1,230 

Paint 20 

Material for standpipe 21 

Material for tank 129 

Total material $2,153 

Labor: 

Building tank $ 228 

Laying 3,000 ft. pipe, at 30 cts 600 

Building foundation of tank 112 

Building foundation of standpipe 18 

Painting, 2 coats 29 

Total labor $ 987 

Grand total , ?3,140 

The cost of a 16x24-ft. tank, on the C, R. I. & P., in 1896, 
V?as: 

Tank with 12 hoops $275 

Indicator 5 

Set 7-in. fixtures 68 

12 iron post caps 24 

Rail joists, at $5 per ton 19 

Substructures (incl. frost proof g.) 198 

Paint 15 

Foundation stone 69 

Labor erecting tank 165 

Labor painting tank 24 

Labor on foundation 116 

Total $978 

On the Lehigh Valley Ry., in 1896, a 20-ft. tank cost as 
follows : 

2,720 lbs. wrought-iron hoops, at 3 cts ,....$ 82 

4,560 ft. B. M. of 3-in. cypress for staves and 

bottom, at $28 128 

700 ft. B. M. yel. pine (1x3) for false bottom, 

^^ $20 28 

6,000 ft. B." M.* white pine,' at $30 !!!."!!!!!!! .' .* ." .' .' 180 

Nails, door, ladder, etc 30 

56 cu. yds. masonry foundation, at $5.00 280 

Lead, etc 35 

Labor erecting tank 175 

Total $938 



RAILWAYS. 1277 

On the Northern Pacific, from 1890 to 1900, the average cost ot 
25 tanks, 16x24 ft., was as follows: 

Materials | 900 

Labor 800 

Total $1,700 

In no case does this include pump, pump house, well, etc., but it 
does include pipe, foundation, etc. 

The cost of a typical water tank on the Erie Ry., in 1901, was as 
follows for a 50,000-gal., 16 x 24-ft. tank: 
Tank and Substructure: 

16 X 24-ft. pine tub $ 275 

30,270 lbs. steel trestle, at $2.25 832 

49 ft. iron ladder 13 

9 squares slate for roof 27 

9 squares tar paper 3 

40 lbs. yellow metal slate nails 7 

128 ft. galv. ridge roll 4 

Pine 80 

Nails, etc 10 

14 gals, paint 16 

63 bbls. cement 86 

30 cu. yds. crushed stone 12 

31 cu. yds. sand 15 

9,000 brick ^ 63 

Mason labor 239 

Carpenter labor 187 

Total 11,869 

Plumbing: 

Standpipe, 10-in., complete $ 225 

10.75 tons 10-in. cast-iron pipe 237 

1 length (12 ft.) 10-in. flanged pipe 17 

3 elbows (10-in.) and 1 sleeve (10-in.) 35 

552 lbs. lead 24 

130 ft. galv. pipe (3-in.) 47 

1 Worthington meter (3-in.) 78 

1 gate valve ( 3-in. ) 4 

1 angle valve ( 2-in. ) 3 

70 ft. sewer pipe ( 4-ln. ) 2 

1 iron grating for drain pit 4 

1 galv. iron float, beam and chain 4 

4 pr. pipe flanges ( 3-in. ) , etc 5 

6 nipples (3-in.), 4 elbows and 1 tee 2 

Labor of plumbers 153 

Total plumbing $ 840 

Grand total ?2,709 

Cost of Track Tank. — The form of track tank shown in Fig. 9, 
1,200 ft. long, on the B. & O. R. R., cost as follows, in 1890: 

Repairing roadbed $ 1,094 

Labor placing trough and pipe 2,135 

Trough, including shop work 4,159 

Cross-ties, pipe and other material 2,936 

Hauling 61 

Total $10,385 

The trough was of steel 3/16 in. thick, made in 30-ft. sections. 
The above cost includes 75 ft. of 8-in. cast-iron pipe and tWO 
standpipes for use of freight engines. 



1278 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The cost of operating such a track tank was as follows per 
month : 

Two pumpmen, at $45.00 $ 90.00 

15 tons coal, at $1.50 22.50 

Ordinary repairs 20.00 

Total $132.50 

Examples of Practice In Turntable Construction, With Some Data 
on Costs.* — The following text consists of a series of letters dis- 
cussing seven subjects suggested by a committee as follows : 

(1) Proper length, allowing for probable future increase in 
length of locomotives. (2) Plate girder tables, and cost. (3) Cast- 
iron tables, and cost. (4) Gallows frame tables, and' cost. (5) 
Other designs, and cost. (6) Foundation, circle wall, paving if any 
and pit drainage. ( 7 ) Power for operation ; electricity, air and 
other power. 




Fig. 9. — Track Tank. 



J. P. Canty, Boston d Maine R. R. — Anticipating the probable 
length of a turntable required for future locomotive service, ■ is 
rather an uncertain problem just at this period. However, it is the 
opinion of many that, on the division where I am located, the lately 
purchased steam locomotives have apparently reached their eco- 
nomical limits in both length and weight, provided the class of 
traffic remains similar to that which is now being handled. 

The largest engines on our division are turned easily on turn- 
tables 70 ft. long. This is now our standard length, and as far as 
we are able to predict, will answer for future requirements. 

The steel work in these tables cost approximately $2,500 on 
board cars delivered to our road by the contracting bridge com- 
pany. There is nothing unusual about the design. However, I will 
mention that we specify that four cast steel end wheels shall be 
furnished on each end of table and the center pivot bearing shall be 
of the disc pattern ; meaning that the table turns on a composi- 
tion disc on top of the center cast steel pivot casting, instead of on 
the familiar roller bearing. 



*Engineering-ContracUng, Oct. 27, 1909. 



RAILWAYS. 1279 

Our turntable center foundations have, of late, been made of 
concrete, being 10x10 ft. on bottom and bearing on piles when 
there is doubt about the earth being sufficiently solid to carry the 
maximum load on this area without settling. The bottom course of 
concrete is generally 2 ft. in depth. The foundation is then stepped 
7% ft. square by 2 ft. thick, and a granite cap 5 ft. square by 2 ft. 
in depth is placed on top to receive the cast steel center pedestal. 

There are 330 cu. yds. of masonry in our 70-ft. turntable pits. 
The whole outfit, including turning motor, costs us between $6,000 
and $7,000. Figures vary for different locations, depending upon 
Whether or not we are obliged to drive piles, provide expensive 
drainage, etc. 

Practically all of these new outfits have been put in where older 
and smaller tables were installed and as the older tables were 
kept in service just as long as possible so as to avoid delays to 
engines, our work has always been made more expensive than it 
new tables were constructed where we would not be handicapped 
by keeping the old table in use. 

We use gasoline power turning device. 

The floors of the turntable pits are covered with a coal-tar con- 
crete paving, about two and one-half inches thick, somewhat sim- 
ilar to that which is used extensively in small cities and towns in 
New England for sidewalk surfaces. This gives a fairly hard and 
elastic surface, and does not crack when soil underneath heaves 
with frost, and is comparatively smooth, so that it is easily kept 
clean and snow may be removed from pit without much trouble. 
The cost is about 50 cts. per sq. yd. 

A. H. Beard, Philadelphia & Reading Ry. — The cost of our plate 
girder standard 75-ft. table in place ready for the track rails is 
$7,785.00, as follows: 

Masonry $2,500.00 

Miscellaneous 500.00 

Table 4,785.00 

$7,785.00 

A 65-ft. plate girder table has been in service at the roundhouse 
at Reading since 1897. This was manufactured by the Pottstown 
Bridge Co. Engines of all classes are turned on this table, the 
number turned every 24 hrs. (although the table is short for some 
engines) is 75 to 80. The cost of this table in place was $5,825. 
This table at present is operated by an 8-hp. gasoline engine, manu- 
factured by the Williamsport Gasoline Engine Co., the cost of same 
in place was a fraction over $1,000, and costs for operating about 
$165 per month, this includes labor, oil, gasoline and repairs; we 
are now arranging to install an electric motor on the same table 
to replace the gasoline engine. 

E. E. Schall, Lehigh Valley R. R. — Our 80-ft. turntable is con- 
structed as follows : Deck plate girders 5 ft. 6 % ins. deep at cen- 
ter and 2 ft. 8% ins. at ends, spaced 6 ft. c. to c, conical wheel 
center bearings with live ring, built for a moving load of Cooper's 



1280 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

E. 50 engines or 4,500 lbs. per Iln. ft. of table. Cost about $3,200 
delivered f. o. b. cars within 200 miles of bridge shop. 

The center foundations and circular rim walls are generally of 
concrete, the circular rail resting on short sawed ties. The top 
of rim is covered by a white oak timber coping to act as a cushion 
with rail tie-plated. The pit is paved with concrete about 6 ins. 
thick, and provided with drainage. For outlying districts, and 
tables not used extensively, the rim wall is at times omitted, using 
only a segmental wall at entrance and run-off of table, using bal- 
last under the ties of circular rail. 

For operation we have in use electric motors, gasoline engine 
motors and air motors ; all are giving satisfaction. When electric 
power is at hand, it is the most suitable power to use ; when 
electric current must be purchased from other parties or when none- 
is available, gasoline engine ipotors of from 8 to 10 hp. will prove 
very satisfactory. The air motor will also prove efficient if properly 
installed and arranged to take proper adhesion on circular rail, ob- 
taining a sufficient supply of air from locomotives to be turned, 
unless the air can be taken from a compressor near by. The air 
motor will not turn as many engines in a given time as either of the 
other two kinds, on account of the time required in making 
couplings, but for outlying districts it is the best motor attach- 
ment available at this time. The cost of installing one of the motors 
ranges from $900 to $1,200. 

A. A. Wolf, Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. — We use 85-ft. 
turntables on mountain division where the heaviest power is used, 
and 75-ft. tables on other main line divisions. We have three types 
of the plate girder tables, which we distinguish as through, semi- 
through and deck. The reason for these various designs is occa- 
sioned by the difficulty in many places of getting drainage from the 
pit to a sufficient depth to accommodate a deck table. These plate 
girder tables cost from $6,000 to $8,500, varying somewhat with 
local conditions, pertaining to the nature of foundations, etc. The 
labor amounts to from 35 to 40% of the total cost. 

For plate girder tables, we use a concrete center pier, circle wall 
and circle rail foundation ; the circle wall and foundation for circle 
rail being of monolithic construction. Piles are always used under 
center foundation, except at places where solid ledge rock is found. 
Piling is used under circle wall except where rock or other firm soil 
is found. We do not make it a practice to pave the pits. Drain- 
age is provided by means of connection to roundhouse sewer or to 
low adjacent ground, according to local conditions. 

We use gasoline and electric motors only for power ; the electric 
motor, in our estimation, furnishes the ideal power for turntable 
operation where it can be procured without excessive cost. At 
several of our division points we have our own generators and con- 
sequently the current required for operating turntable costs but very 
little. 

/. O. Walker, Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. — Our stand- 
ard length is 70 ft. Plate girder tables cost with ties, latches, etc.. 



RAILWAYS. 1281 

in place, f3,200. Masonry and foundations $2,000. The cost of the 
masonry is extremely variable, however. 

W. T. Main, Chicago d North Western Ry. — Turntables newly in- 
stalled in the future should be 80 ft. in length. A 70-ft. King 
Bridge Co., deck plate girder turntable installed at Chicago Ave., in 
1907, cost as follows: 

Material $2,570.46 

Labor 2,262.00 

Total $4,832.46 

This table replaced an old 60-ft. deck plate girder and was in- 
stalled under continuous traffic except for two days while new 
concrete center pier was allowed to set. Over 400 engines were 
turned every 24 hrs. on old table during construction of new circle 
wall which will give some idea of conditions under which work was 
done and reason for high cost. Table is operated by 10-hp. electric 
motor which was used on an old table but furnislied with new frame. 
A 70-ft. King Bridge Co., deck plate girder turntable installed in 
1907 cost as follows: 

Material $2,890.00 

Labor 2,262.00 

Total $5,380.00 

This table replaced an old 60-ft. Lassig plate girder and was 
installed under traffic in same manner as the one before mentioned. 
About $500 of the cost was due to renewal of radial tracks. The 
circle wall was built of concrete and the center pier of concrete, re- 
inforced with scrap rails in order to spread the load over old 
masonry foundation. The table is operated by 10-hp. Pilling air 
motor and has six reservoirs under runways, the air being furnished 
by air compressor. 

A 60-ft. Stroebel deck plate girder table installed at Chicago 
Ave., in 1899, on old masonry wall and new center pier, cost $2,500. 
A 60-ft. Greenleaf cast-iron table installed at Milwaukee, 1899, in- 
cluding new center pier, cost $3,100 ; the table alone cost $1,160. 
A 50-ft. gallows frame turntable installed at Evanston in 1896 with 
timber circle wall and center pier cost $983. 

Circle walls should preferably be built of concrete except when 
table is renewed under traffic, where rubble masonry can be used 
to better advantage while working in cramped space. Center pier 
may require pile foundation unless subsoil is good, where a spread 
foundation of concrete or masonry 12 ft. square will serve. The 
advantage of paving in pit will hardly justify the additional expense 
though it is easier to keep pit clean when paved and helps the drain- 
age. The best drainage possible should always be secured. Circle 
walls should have an offset at one point to allow of examination 
and repairs to end rollers and boxes, particularly where table has 
rollers between girders. Masonry circle rail seat should be extended 
at two points, diametrically opposite, to afford support for jacks 
for raising table and examining center. This saves placing cribbing 



1282 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

on soft ground when using jacks and renders the operation much 
safer. 

Would recommend the use of electric motor for operating table 
wherever possible and where service demands the quick handling of 
engines ; second choice, gasoline engine ; third choice, air motor. 
The latter gives excellent service, where there is plenty of time for 
handling engines and where there is sufficient supply of compressed 
air which can be piped to reservoirs, but it is slow in operation 
where engine to be turned must supply the air. 

A. O. Cunningham, Wabash R. R. — No table less than 75 ft. should 
be used. Deck tables of this length cost $2,600. The foundation 
of circular wall and paving should always be of concrete ; pit should 
be well drained ; the cost of this for 75-ft. deck table would be 
13,700. 

Electricity is the ideal power for operating a table. If this can- 
not be obtained a gasoline engine may be employed of about 6 hp. 
Tlie cost of the electrical equipment would be $1,150, and for the 
gasoline engine equipment $1,000. 

W. H. Moore, New York Haven & Hartford R. R. — The standard 
length for turntables on our road is 75 ft., but we build some tables 
80 ft. long. The approximate average cost for a 75-ft. deck plate 
girder turntable is about $3,500, and for a half through plate girder 
turntable about $5,750. The cost of foundation of the circular wall, 
etc., varies so much, depending on the nature of the ground, that it 
would be hardly proper to name any average. I may say, however, 
that for a concrete pit with granolithic floor and granite center 
stone, in a location where there was good Arm sand requiring no 
piles and where drainage could be cheaply taken care of, the total 
cost is about $3,800. For power operation we tise mostly gasoline 
motors ; some air motors, and electric motors where current can 
be conveniently obtained. The cost of power installation averages 
about $1,000. 

G. Aldrich, New York, New Haven & Hartford R. R. — For the re- 
quirements of modern engines, 75-ft. minimum ; 80-ft. recommend ; 
75-ft. deck plate girder, erected complete $3,600, base of rail on 
table to top of center pier, 6 ft. 4 ins. ; base of rail on table to top 
of circular rail, 4 ft. 8 ins. ; 75-ft. through plate girder, cost with 
floor erected complete, $5,750. Base of rail on table to top of center 
pier, 3 ft. 11 ins. ; base of rail to top of circular rail, 2 ft. 9 ins. 
The foundation, circular wall and center pier are constructed of con- 
crete ; the pit is usually paved with granolithic pavement. The 
cost varies in accordance with local conditions, ranging from $2,500 
to $4,000. 

For power we use: (a) air supplied by the engine being turned; 
(b) air supplied from compressors in adjacent shops; (c) gasoline 
engines; (d) electric motors. Electric motors preferred where 
current is available ; air motors, supplied by compressors, second, 
and gasoline motors third choice. The cost of power installation 
varies from $900 to $1,200. 

N. F. Helmers, Northern Pacific Ry. — The Northern Pacific Ry. 
are installing 80 and 85-ft. tables. I do not anticipate any power 



RAILWAYS. 1283 

in the future which will call for the use of a larger table. An 80-ft. 
through table, without the circle rail, and weighing 114,855 lbs., cost 
in place $4,600. Such a table was installed at Staples, Minn., with 
concrete circle wall and center foundation. The masonry was done 
by contract, and the installation of the table by the company at an 
expense of $3.92 per ton. The framing of ties and other timber 
cost $4.03 per thousand feet. The cost was as follows: 

Labor. Material. 

Turntable $211.44 $4,198.52 

False work 12.93 

Timber, ties, planking, etc 35.23 77.49 

Painting 27.49 44.78 



$274.16 $4,333.72 

Total cost (not Including masonry) ... . $4,607.88 

In 1908 an 80-ft. table of the same type was installed at Minne- 
apolis replacing one 64 ft. in length. The foundation work was 
done under traffic, and the change of tables was done with a total 
interruption of 15 hrs. ; itemized statement follows: 



Excavation 

Gravel 

Concrete work 

Forms 

Circle rail 

Table proper , 

False work for curbing 

Removal of old brick curbing. . 104.42 

Cleaning girders 37.98 

Painting 23.76 

Ties and coping 79.71 

Engineering 



Labor. 


Material. 


; 463.94 




92.14 




408.28 


$ 651.52 


21.76 


134.19 


38.74 




361.36 


4,040.95 




66.36 



21.04 

188.89 

14.66 



The total cost was $6,749.70. 



$1,632.09 $5,117.61 



I consider that ordinary conditions do not require the neces- 
sity of paving for the pit, but good drainage is essential in most 
cases. 

For power we are using electricity and compressed air, while some 
of the 80 and 85-ft. tables are being turned by hand. Air motor in 
use at Jamestown, N. D., cost at St. Paul, $450 ; installation, $19.81 ; 
total, $469.81. Electric tractor furnished by Nichols & Bro., cost 
$1,104.37; installation, $115.86; total, $1,220.23. 

W. T. Powell, Colorado & Southern Ry. — The up-to-date table 
should be 80 ft. long, with a capacity for turning 200-ton engines. 
We installed recently an 80-ft., 200-ton, through-plate girder table 
which cost as follows: 

Table f. o. b. Denver, including circle rails $3,700.00 

Material for concrete foundations and walls 1,090.00 

Labor 1,600.00 



Total cost $6,390.00 

This table replaced a 6 6 -ft. table and we were compelled to ex- 
cavate and put in the curbing under 42 tracks and keep them safe 



1284 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. '^^ 

while in use. We drove 24 piles for center foundation and capped 
it with a block of concrete 12 ft. square and 4 ft. thick; a deck 
table of this length and capacity would cost about $600 less. We 
use concrete entirely for masonry ; rails are fastened with bolts and 
cast clips, the bolts being set in the concrete ; no paving ; drained 
when necessary. We use air power with a two-cylinder motor. 

J. S. Browne, New York, New Haven & Hartford B. R. — We have 
recently installed an 80-ft. table at Providence. The center pier is 
of concrete, reinforced with steel rails, on account of the irregularity 
of the supporting material, as it was feared that the concrete might 
be fractured by the load if laid without reinforcement. The outer 
wall of the pit and the paving are also of concrete. 

While an accurate record was not kept of the cost it was approxi- 
mately as follows : 

80-ft. steel table delivered at Providence $3,400.00 

Placing coping and circular rail and moving table 

into pit 800.00 

Concrete in outer wall and center, including forms. 2,800.00 

Excavation, including disposal of material 1,500.00 

Paving 300.00 

Brain pipe to connect with sewer 200.00 

Total $9,000.00 

The work was done by the company's force, and the high cost of 
excavation was due to the fact that a portion of the work was done 
in freezing weather, and it was necessary to handle the material 
more than once before its final disposal by work trains. 

The company's standard main line turntable is 75 ft. long, but 
80 ft. is considered better at points where the largest type engines 
are turned, to permit of properly balancing them. Deck plate 
girder tables are used where sufficient depth is available without 
excessive cost, but where this is not feasible, half through plate 
girder tables are used. The superstructure of deck tables is about 
30% cheaper than that of half through tables, but this saving is 
balanced by the greater cost of the pit, so that under ordinary condi- 
tions the total cost of these two types Is about equal. Gasoline 
motors are generally used for power, although electric motors may 
be used to considerable extent in the future. 

J. N, Penwell, Lake Erie d Western R. R. — On our main line, we 
are taking out 62-ft. tables and replacing with 80-ft. tables, using 
the old ones on the branch lines. We have two of the old cast-iron 
tables, 50 ft. in length, which have been in use 20 yrs., one of 
which is in perfect condition and the other about worn out. We 
have only one of the old style gallows frame tables, but it is out of 
date and will be replaced with a more modern structure within two 
years. For the foundation and circle walls we are using concrete. 
If foundation is not absolutely reliable, we drive piles. Drainage 
is important and the very best should be provided. Our tables are 
all operated by hand, except one which we are now operating with 
air. Would recommend electricity wherever it can be had. In 
erecting new tables we make provision for air pipes in the founda- 
tion, so that we can use air in the future if we desire. 



RAILWAYS. 1285 

Cost of Turntables. — The following was the estimated cost of 
turntables for the N. Y. Central Ry., in 1902 : 

Size of Turntable. 70 ft. 75 ft. 80 ft. 85 ft. 

Turntable delivered, f. o. b $1,965 f2,400 $2,600 $2,800 

Labor erecting 395 430 460 500 

Pit 3,600 3,800 4,000 4,200 

Mortar for turning 900 900 900 900 

Total $6,860 $7,530 $7,960 $8,400 

Cost of Ash Pit. — On the Northern Pacific a standard ash pit 
with brick side walls and concrete bottom was built at a cost of 
about $9 per lin. ft. in 1890. The width between the side walls is 
4 ft., and the clear depth of the walls is 3% ft. below top of rail. 
The brick side walls are 17 Ins. thick. The sides of the pit are 
protected by cast-iron plates, % in. thick, 18 ins. wide, and 3 ft. 4 
Ins. long. The bottom of the pit is paved with hard brick set on 
edge and bedded on 8 ins. of concrete. This concrete foundation ex- 
tends under the side walls where it is thickened to 12 ins. for a 
width of 2 ft. 

On the N. T. Central in 1902, the following was the cost of differ- 
ent types of ash pits : 

Elevated ash pit, $13 per lin. ft., plus $39 for the two ends. 

Semi-depressed pits on the main line, $20 per lin. ft. 

Ditto, for minor pits, $15 per lin. ft. 

Cost of Snow Sheds.— On the Northern Pacific R. R. (in 1890) the 
Standard snow shed on level ground consisted of timber bents 
(8xl0-in. ), 6 to 10 ft. apart, to which were fastened horizontal 
studding (4xl0-in. ), and to the studding was spiked 2-in. upright 
siding. The roof was double-pitched, with rafters 4 x 10-in., and 
sheeted with 2-in. plank. For wet snow, the bents were spaced 
6 ft. apart, requiring 304 ft. B. M. and 13.3 lbs. of iron per lin. ft. 
of snow shed. At $30 per M, and 5 cts. per lb., the cost was not 
quite $10 per lin. ft. of shed. 

The standard snow shed in through cuts (single track) has bents 
6 ft. apart, and it requires 4 84 ft. B. M. and 14 lbs. of iron per lin. 
ft., the cost being $15 per lin. ft. 

A standard side-hill snow shed, with a flat roof, with bents 6 ft. 
apart, contains 634 ft. B. M. and 10 lbs. of iron per lin. ft., costing 
$20 per lin. ft. 

None of the foregoing have any cribwork, being entirely sawed 
timber. Nor is any extra excavation involved in their construction. 
These sheds are not designed to resist snow slides or avalanches. 

In Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. 29, 1888, Mr. Thomas C. Keefer 
has described and illustrated the types of snow sheds built (1887) 
in the Selkirk Mts., on the Canadian Pacific Ry. Fifty-three sheds, 
total 7 miles long, were built. 

The typical "avalanche shed" has a log, rock-filled crib, forming a 
retaining wall back of which is an earth fill. This forms the uphill 
side of the shed. The roof and downhill side are of sawed timber. 
The cost ranged from $40 to $70 per lin. ft. of "avalanche shed." 



1286 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Where cribwork was not needed, "gallery sheds" were built at a 
cost of $15 to $40 per lin. ft. 

Cost of Snow Fences. — The standard portable snow fence of Chi- 
cago, Milwaukee & St. Paul has the following bill of material for a 
panel 16 ft. long: 

Legs, 3 pieces 2 x 6-in. x 14-ft., No. 1 Common. 

Boards, 11 pieces 1 x 6-in. x 16-ft., No. 2 Fencing. 
3 carriage bolts, % x 5 ins. 
3 No. 10 = 0.1 lb. 

66 wire nails, 8d. = 0.5 lb. 

60 wire nails, lOd. = 0.7 lb. 

When stakes are used to hold the legs down, use 6 stakes cut 
from 2 X 4-in. x 2-ft. No. 1 common ripped diagonally, and fastened 
to the legs with a total of 12 wire nails (20d.). 

When ground is frozen, use drift bolts instead of stakes, using 
6 drift bolts (% x 15-in.) and 12 wire staples (3-in.). 

This fence contains 130 ft. B. M. per panel 16 ft. long, and weighs 
327 lbs. when made of green lumber. In 1899, the cost was $1.60 
per panel, f. o. b. cars, complete with stakes and spikes. 

On' another Northwestern railway, the cost per 16-ft. panel was: 

126 ft. B. M., at $15, incl. nails $1.89 

Labor 0.11 

Total $2.00 

On another road the cost per 16-ft. panel was : 

152 ft. B. M., at $17 $2.58 

Nails 0.10 

Bolts 0.05 

Labor 0.35 

Total $3.08 

On the C. & N. W. Ry. a stationary snow fence is largely used. 
Cedar posts, 12 ft. long, are set 4 ft. in the ground and 8 ft. apart. 
The boards are 1 x 10-in., spaced 2 ins. apart, leaving an open space 
of 12 ins. next to the ground. The cost of this fence per 16-ft. panel 
was as follows, in 1900: 

96 ft. B. M. boards, at $14.50 $1.39 

2 cedar posts, at 30 cts 0.60 

11/2 lbs. lOd. nails, at $2.40 0.04 

Labor •• • • 0.60 

Total $2.63 

For costs of right of way fences see the index under Fences. 
Cost of Mail Cranes.— On the St. Louis & Southwestern Ry., In 
1902, the standard mail crane cost: 

Crane and materials $13.00 

Labor 6.35 

Total $19.35 



RAILWAYS. 1287 

This was a wooden mall crane. A common cost of wooden mail 
cranes is $12 to |15, erected In place. Iron mail cranes cost about 
$35 in place. 

Cost of Interlocking Signal Plant and of Operation. — Mr. J. A. 

Peabody estimates that the average interlocking plant will have a 
life of 20 yrs., but, to be on the conservative side, assumes 15 yrs. 
He estimates such a plant will cost $8,000, including cross-over, 
4 derails, 4 higli signals and 6 dwarfs. 

To operate and maintain this plant would cost: 

Per year. 

Interest, 4 % of $8,000 $ 320 

Depreciation, 7 % 560 

Maintenance, 10.5% 840 

Operation 1,440 

Total $2,800 

He estimates that where there are 17 trains stopped daily, at a 
cost of 45 cts. per stoppage, the yearly cost is $2,800 for stopping 
trains. Any greater number of trains would justify an interlock- 
ing plant merely to save the expense of stopping trains. 

See Engineering-Contracting, February, 1906, p. 49, for Mr. Pea- 
body's complete discussion. 

Definition of "Mile of Railway." — In discussing railway costs per 
"mile," there is great danger of confusion, for there are three 
kinds of "miles of railway": (1) The mile of roadbed, equivalent 
to the mile of riglit of way ; ( 2 ) the mile tracltway, including all 
1st, 2d, 3d and 4th tracks upon which trains travel regularly be- 
tween stations; and (3) the mile of track, including all tracks of 
every nature, main, branch, side tracks, yard tracks, etc. Due to 
the different meanings assigned to the "mile of railway," I have 
abandoned the use of that term, and for this book I have adopted 
the three terms above used: (1) Roadbed, (2) trackway, and (3) 
track. 

The Interstate Commerce Commission uses the word "line" when 
referring to "roadbed." 

Many engineers use the word "line" when referring to "roadbed." 

The term "main line" is also ambiguous, as many people use it 
to include "branch" lines. 

The word "branch" has no definite meaning, as a rule, and re- 
fers merely to lines having a light traffic, and generally to lines that 
branch from the main line and do not carry "through traffic." 

"Spurs" is another ambiguous term. A short branch line, espe- 
cially one that serves only one class of traffic, is commonly called a 
spur. 

Logging "spurs" are often merely temporary lines, too long to be 
called "sidings," and yet not of a character worthy of being desig- 
nated as branch lines. 

"Sidings" are short lengths of track at stations, where trains 
pass, and where cars await loading and unloading ; also short tracks 



1288 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

serving factories, mills, etc. Sidings merge into "yard tracks" at 
large stations. 

Average Cost of Railways in America. — Many generalizations 
founded on meager data have been made as to the probable average 
cost of American railways. The Interstate Commerce Commission 
receives annual reports from all railways, and those reports give the 
"cost of road." The last report of the Commission, for the year 
1906, gives the following as the total of all roads, taken from the 
general balance sheets of American railways : 

Cost of road .$11,588,922,421 

Cost of equipment 831,365,517 

Neither of these figures means what it seems to mean. 
The following was the total mileage : 

Single track (= roadbed) 222,340 

1st, 2d, 3d and 4th track (= trackway) 243,322 

All tracks, including sidings, etc 317,083 

According to this, the "cost of road" would be $50,200 per mile 
of roadbed, and cost of equipment would be $3,740 per mile of 
roadbed. The first is too high and the second is too low. The "cost 
of road" is, in large part, the price paid for it by its present 
owners ; and, as nearly all American roads have changed hands 
at least once, it is evident that this price is more nearly a function 
of value based on net earnings than it is a function of actual cost 
of construction. 

The "cost of equipment" is far below the actual cost of new 
equipment, since most roads report the depreciated or second-hand 
cost of equipment. Indeed, it seems that some roads report merely 
a nominal cost of equipment to escape taxation. 

The capital stock and funded debt (= bonds) reported for 1906 
was as follows : 

Funded debt $ 8,068,004,746 

Capital stock 6,929,670,224 

Total $14,997,674,970 

From this it follows that the following stock and bonds were out- 
standing per mile of roadbed : 

Funded debt $36,300 

Capital stock 31,200 

Total '. $67,500 

Since nearly all American railways have been built with money 
secured by the sale of bonds, it is evident that the average Ameri- 
can railway (including equipment) has cost at least $36,300 per 
mile of roadbed. The capital stock largely represents the capital- 
ized value of the net earnings, although in some instances it repre- 
sents money actually expended in construction and equipment. 

Of the $75,458,000 spent in building and equipping the 1,645 miles 
of the Northern Pacific Railway in Washington, $8,848,000 was ex- 



RAILWAYS. 1289 

pended for improvements (exclusive of equipment) since the 
original construction. If this is typical of average expenditures 
for railway improvements throughout America, it would be neces- 
sary to add about 10% to the $36,300 above given, which would 
make the average cost of construction and equipment about $40,000 
per mile. It has been the common practice to make most improve- 
ments out of earnings, without issuing bonds ; hence it is reason- 
ably certain that American railways have actually cost at least 
$40,000 per mile of roadbed for construction, land and equipment. 
Nor do I believe that this cost has been much exceeded. On the 
other hand, the cost of reproducing the same roads to-day would 
probably exceed this sum, and might exceed it very much, the 
reason being that land values have appreciated so greatly since the 
roads were built. This is well brought out elsewhere in this boolt 
where the original costs and costs of reproduction of "Washington 
railways are given. 

Cost of Railway Lines. — In Engineering Magazine, December, 
1S95, Mr. J. F. Wallace gives the following estimates of the average 
cost per mile of single track roadbed in the United States: 

Class of Railway. A. B. C. 

Right of way ? 1,000 ? 1,500 ? 2,000 

Proportionate expense of terminals... 500 1,500 5,000 

Bridges and culverts 1,500 2,500 4,000 

Grading 3,000 6,000 12,000 

Track laid 6,000 6,500 7,000 

Ballast (rock) 2,500 3,000 

Fencing 300 400 400 

Telegraph 200 250 250 

Stations and water supply 500 800 1,200 

Engineering 400 500 700 

General and legal expenses 200 400 600 

Equipment, cars and locomotives 1,500 2,500 4,000 

Total $15,100 $25,350 $40,150 

Class "A" is a branch line, 2 passenger and 4 daily freight trains. 

Class "B" is a secondary line, connecting small cities. 

Class "C" is a trunk line, 90-lb. rails. 

It will be noted that the - item of "Engineering" is considerably 
below what it actually cost the various railways in the state of 
Washington. See pages 1303, 1306 and following. 

In fact, Mr. Wallace is low, in my judgment, on nearly every 
item enumerated, excepting, perhaps, general and legal expense. 

Cost of a Mining Railway. — Mr. John H. Pearson gives the fol- 
lowing cost of The Winchester & Beattyville R. R., built in 1893. 
The road is 8 miles long, and has 9 miles of track including sidings. 
It was built to open up a mining district, and it runs through rugged 
country. No grades exceed 1%, and the maximum curve was 6", 
except two 12° curves. The cost per mile of roadway (8 miles) 
was as follows : 



1290 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

'% 

Per milfe 
of roadbed. 
' 1. Preliminary surveys $ 19 

2. Locating surveys Ill 

3. Engineering during construction 375 

4. Stationery 28 

5. Office furniture , 6 

6. Tools 83 

7. Grading roadbed 2,233 

8. Trestles (at $23 per M in place and iron at 

5 cts. per lb.) 1,393 

9. Culverts 159 

10. Legal expenses 10 

11. Right of way 428 ' 

12. Cross ties (31 cts. each) and handling 696 

13. Rails (56-lb. relayers, at $25 per ton) 2,370 

14. Track fastenings 506 

15. Svsritches 140 

16. Ballast (1,000 cu. yds.) 330 

17. Fences and cattle guards 41 

18. General expenses 220 

19. Tracklaying and surfacing and repairs 988 

20. Water station ($1,380).. ; 172 

21. Depot and other buildings ($1,320) 165 

22. Engines, cars and repairs ($6,013) 752 

23. Fuel, oil and waste 83 

24. Conducting transportation 321 

25. Telegraph line 

26. Three coal and lumber switches 2,021 

Total $13,650 

Net revenue from operation ($6,000) 750 

Balance $12,900 

Deduct equipment 714 

Total cost of construction $12,186 

Since there was 1 mile of side track to 8 miles of roadway, the 
above costs should be divided by 1.125 to arrive at the cost per mile 
of track. Multiplying by 0.9 will give almost the same result. 

Wages were low at that time, common laborers receiving $1.25 
a day ; teams, $3.50; single mule and driver, $1.75; foremen, $2.00. 

Cost of a Logging Railway, Pennsylvania. — Mr. William Barclay 
Parsons, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 25, p. 119, briefly describes 
the location and construction of 7 miles of standard gage logging 
railroad built in Northwestern Pennsylvania in 1890. The maxi- 
mum curve was 18°, and the ruling grade, 3.3%. The country 
was heavily wooded with hemlock and very rough ; clearing and 
grubbing costing $50 to $60 an acre for a right of way 50 ft. wide. 
Cuts were 16 ft. wide and fills 12 ft. Log culverts were used under 
banks 10 ft. or less in height. The excavation averaged nearly 
11,000 cu. yds. per mile, of which 7.6% was rock, 11% loose rock, 
35.2% tough clay (1 pick to 1 shovel), and 46.2% earth, most of 
which was heavy soil. The clearing and grubbing, log culverts and 
excavation when charged up to the excavation cost 46^^ cts. per cu. 
yd., or about $5,000 per mile. (The excavation alone probably cost 
about 40 cts. per cu. yd. The toughness of the earth and the pres- 
ence of roots made the excavation expensive. Wages were prob- 



RAILWAYS. 1291 

ably $1.25 per 10-hr. day.) The cost of one mile of finished road 
on the heaviest part of the line was as follows : 

62.86 tons of 40-lb. rails, at $33.00 $2,074.38 

352 joints complete, at $0.55 193.60 

6,200 lbs. spikes, at $0.0225 139.50 

3,000 cross ties, at $0.15 450.00 

Freight on materials 159.00 

Tracklaying 400.00 

Grading 5,026.89 

Trestles (at $17 per M in place) 250.45 

Surveys, inspection, etc 400.00 

Total per mile $9,093.82 

Cost of a Short Branch Line, Texas.— In 1903 a flrst-class branch 
line was built in Texas to give the St. Louis Southwestern an 
entrance into Dallas. The line is 12.13 miles single track and has 
1.52 miles of sidings, total 13.65 miles of track. The line is almost 
entirely tangent, and follows a ridge. 

Total. 

Engineering $ 6,323 

Grading 48,924 

Bridges, trestles and culverts 41,001 

Ties 26.838 

Rails (75-lb.) 37,607 

Track fastenings 5,596 

Frogs and switches 1,177 

Ballast 30,526 

Tracklaying and surfacing 9,511 

Crossings, cattle guards and signs 1,929 

Total $210,092 

It will be noted that land and equipment are not included, nor 
interest during construction. 

Engineering cost about 3%, and tracklaying and surfacing cost 
about $700 per mile of track. 

Cost of a Cheap Railway, Georgia. — Mr. A. Pew, in Trans. Am. 
Soc. C. E., Vol. 23, in a paper entitled "The Cheapest Railway In 
the "World," gives the following as the cost of a 19-mile railway in 
Georgia : 

Cost per mile of road and track $3,440 

Cost per mile for equipment 1,000 

The roadbed was only 10 ft. wide in fills and 14 ft. in cuts, and 
the excavation averaged 4,000 cu. yds. per mile. The excavation 
cost only 9 cts. per cu. yd., wages of laborers being $1 per 10-hr. 
day. The ties cost only 10 cts. each, and 45-lb. rails were used. 

Report of H. P. Gillette to the Washington Railroad Commission 
on the Valuation of the Railways.* — Before explaining the methods 
pursued in making the appraisal, it is as well to record the fact 
that the state of Washington is the first state in the Union to com- 
plete the valuation of its railways for the express purpose of using 
these values as a basis for rate making. Only one other State 



*Engineering-Contracting, April 7, 1909. 



1292 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Railway Commission takes priority over the Washington Railroad 
Commission in point of time of completing a valuation of the rail- 
ways within the state, namely, the Texas Railway Commission ; but 
it should be remembered that the object of the valuation of the rail- 
ways of Texas was not for the purpose of rate making, but for the 
purpose of limiting the issues of stocks and bonds — that is, to pre- 
vent "stock watering" — which presents quite a different problem 
from that presented to the Washington Railroad Commission. 
Vastly greater interests are at stake than when railway values are 
to be used merely to limit the issue of stocks and bonds of railways 
chartered within the state. Hence, both the scope of my investiga- 
tion of railway values, and the methods used were radically differ- 
ent and necessarily much more complex than prevailed in the Texas 
appraisal. For example, in the following out of the requirements 
of the Washington statute, you felt impelled to secure all the data 
enumerated by the Supreme Court of the United States in the cele- 
brated Nebraska rate case known as the Smythe v. Ames case. 
The Supreme Court held in its decision of that case that a rate- 
making body must consider, among other things: 

First. The original cost of the railway, plus improvements and 
betterments. 

Second. Its cost of reproduction new. 

Third. Its present value, ascertained by deducting its depreci- 
ation from its value new. 

Prior to this Washington railway appraisal, no railway com- 
mission in America had ever attempted to comply with the de- 
cision of the Supreme Court in the Nebraska case, and I believe 
that all the failures on the part of other railway commissions in 
their rate-making efforts may be traced directly to their funda- 
mental failure to follow the Nebraska rate case decision. Flat rate 
making has proven abortive, because of attempts to make rates 
"Without full knowledge of all the factors which the Supreme Court 
lias held to be necessary in forming an intelligent judgment ; and 
prominent among these factors are the original cost, the cost of 
reproduction, and the present value. 

Two other states besides Texas have made railway appraisals, 
namely Michigan and Wisconsin ; but in neither of these instances 
was the appraisal made by a railroad commission. Both the 
Michigan and Wisconsin appraisals were made for the purposes of 
taxation, and were not governed by the Nebraska rate case decision. 

The state of Washington is the first state to secure the original 
cost of the railways within its boundaries and is, therefore, the 
first state to investigate the accounting records of the railways with 
the object of ascertaining the actual original cost and the cost of 
improvements and betterments. 

I mention this fact not merely for the purpose of putting on 
record the priority which the Washington Railroad Commission can 
justly claim in following the law as laid down by the Supreme 
Court, but for the purpose of making clear the magnitude of the 
task confronting the commission and its engineers and experts. 



RAILWAYS. 1293 

Speaking for myself, I found the precedents established by 
Texas, Michigan and Wisconsin of little value, either in deciding 
the methods to be pursued in making the appraisals or in esti- 
mating the probable cost of the appraisal. I ascertained that the 
state of Wisconsin had spent about $11 per mile of railway for 
making the appraisal and the railways themselves had spent an 
equal sum, making a total of about $22 per mile for the joint work 
done by the state and by the railways, for they both worked to- 
gether in making the appraisals. When I started the appraisal of 
the railways of Washington I believed that the appraisal would cost 
far less than $11 per mile, and I am glad to say that the cost has 
actually been not more than $13 a mile, altliough I regret that 
it was even as much as that. I had no precedent to guide me In 
estimating the cost of going through the accounting records of the 
railways, and I underestimated the time and labor involved in that 
undertaking. Railway accounting records nearly 40 years old had 
to be discovered and analyzed. I say "discovered," for the rail- 
ways themselves did not know the nature of these early records, 
even if they knew of their very existence, which in many cases 
they did not. 

At this point it may be well to explain that these early records 
are far from being worthless, as many persons have assumed, for 
the subsequent improvements and betterments can be added to these 
original costs, and thus bring the total cash expenditures down to 
date. This total cash expenditure is a wonderful aid to the engi- 
neer in estimating the cost of reproduction. To illustrate by an 
example, take the actual cost of the item of "Engineering" on the 
Northern Pacific Railway. Up to June 30, 1906, it has amounted 
to $2,900,000 for the state of Washington, or about 5% of the total 
actual cost of construction and betterments. An investigation of 
this seemingly high percentage disclosed two big items, one being 
about $300,000 for the exploration surveys in the Cascade 
Mountains. At the time these surveys were made, no maps were 
in existence, and the railway engineers were compelled to explore 
the entire Cascade Range from the Canadian boundary south to 
the Columbia River. To-day, in reproducing the Northern Pacific 
Railway, no such elaborate exploration is necessary, and, if it were 
eliminated, the cost of engineering would be reduced to $2,600,000. 
In like manner certain other items of engrineering would be reduced, 
so that the total cost of engineering should not exceed $2,500,000, 
which is the sum that I used in estimating the item of engineering 
when making my estimate of the cost of reproduction. It would 
take several hundred pages to explain my analysis of the original 
costs, and my use of the data thus obtained in guiding my judg- 
ment as to a proper allowance for the cost of reproduction of ea/ih 
item. I wish, however, to say had I not secured the original costs 
I am positive that my costs of reproduction would be nothing better 
than engineering guesses in so far as certain items are concerned. 
For example, the cost of grading, especially through rough and 
mountainous country cannot be accurately ascertained to-day by 



1294 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

any engineer not possessed of the original records showing the 
quantities, and classification of excavation, or of the actual costs of 
doing the grading work. It is true that in the entire absence of 
original records of any sort, an engineer can go into the field, and 
cross-section the existing "cuts" and "fills," and make an estimate 
of yardage of the different classes of excavation, but I should never, 
do this except as the very last resort, and then with the determina- 
tion of adding a very large percentage for contingencies. 

I may state at this point that one of the most potent reasons for. 
securing the original quantities and original costs is to eliminate 
the item of "contingencies" entirely. It sounds little enough to 
speak of 10% added for "contingencies," but it would have meant 
adding just $5,000,000 to my estimate of the Northern Pacific Rail- 
way alone. 

Reverting briefly to the cost of appraising the railways of Wash- 
ington, attention should be called to the lack of logic in estimating 
the cost of such appraisals in terms of the mile as the unit. The 
"Wisconsin appraisals cost $22 a mile, but the Wisconsin railways 
have an appraised value of only $30,000 a mile; hence the Wis- 
consin appraisal cost 70 cts. per $1,000 appraised. The Wash- 
ington appraisal cost $13 a mile, but the Washington railways have 
an appraised value of $60,000 per mile; hence the Washington ap- 
praisal cost 20 cts. per $1,000 appraised, as against 70 cts. in Wis- 
consin. There is not the slightest doubt that it costs more per mile 
to appraise a line worth $60,000 a mile than to appraise one costing 
$30,000 a mile, if the same methods of appraisal are used; for the 
$60,000 line contains many more structures and details per mile, 
and higher land values, involving more labor on the part of both 
accountants, engineers and right-of-way appraisers. If this is so, 
it will be asked why the Washington appraisal cost less per mile 
than the Wisconsin appraisal. An answer leads me into the .subject 
of the methods used in making the Washington appraisal, for upon 
those methods depends the relative economy. 

Methods of Appraisal. — Before entering upon the task of apprais- 
ing the Washington railways I had secured all desired information 
as to the appraisals of the railways in Texas, Michigan and Wis- 
consin. I also saw the engineer of the Minnesota Railway and 
Warehouse Commission, who had been engaged for six months on 
the appraisal of the Minnesota railways. I found that the Wis- 
consin and Minnesota methods of appraisal were practically 
identical. Both states furnished printed blanks to the railways, and 
required the railways to make a detailed estimate of the cost ot 
their own property. Upon securing such estimates, the states' engi- 
neers checked up the appraisal. This method is advocated largely 
on the ground that it avoids duplicating the expense of an appraisal, 
the assumption being that each railway itself will make its own 
appraisal in any event, whether asked to or not. Therefore, if the 
railway is required to make its own appraisal first, the state's engi- 
neer need not go through all the details, but can accept most of 
the matter after a more or less cursory inspection. 



RAILWAYS. 1295 

I was wholly dissatisfied with this method, for I felt that it would 
make it almost imperative for me to accept the appraisals made by 
the railways, practically at their own figures, or to undertake In 
the end what I could just as well undertake in the beginning, 
namely an independent investigation of my own. I need scarcely 
say that the results of the investigation have served to confirm my 
position on this point. 

Neither the slate of Minnesota nor Wisconsin had gone into the 
matter of the actual cost of the original railway property. This 
seemed to me a serious omission, not merely because of the Ne- 
braska rate case decision, but because of the invaluable data that 
an investigation into actual costs would disclose. 

In estimating the present or depreciated value of structures, 
rolling stock, etc., both Michigan and Wisconsin had sent experts 
into the field to estimate the percentage of present value of each 
unit. In this manner 40,000 freight cars were inspected in Michi- 
gan, and their "present value" estimated. To me this seemed to be 
not only a useless procedure, but very erroneous. Aside from the 
g:reat e.xpense of thus inspecting each car and structure, I was in- 
fluenced by a belief in the far greater accuracy of applying what 
might be termed "mortality tables of structures." If the age of a 
man is known, his expectation of life can be estimated from mor- 
tality tables. Insurance companies do not have their doctors guess 
at the man's probable life. The doctor merely reports the man as 
not suffering from disease, and the insurance company having the 
man's age, applies its mortality tables. In like manner, it seemed 
to me, the "present value" of a ear or locomotive could be accu- 
rately estimated if its present age were known. It is a Well- 
established fact that a freight car has a useful life exceeding 20 
or 25 yrs. If the average car has a life of 25 yrs., it loses 4% of its 
life every year. Hence, by multiplying its age in years by 4%, its 
lost life or depreciation is accurately ascertained ; and by sub- 
tracting this depreciation from 100 the remainder will give its 
"present value," expressed as a percentage of its value new. 

I believed that it would be far less expensive to ascertain the age 
of each car and each structure from the records of the companies, 
and to estimate the present value by the method just explained, 
than to inspect each structure in the field. This proved to be th-s 
case, and it effected a very substantial saving in the cost of ap- 
praisal, while, at the same time, it yielded more reliable results. 

In some cases the records in the engineering offices of the rail- 
ways did not show the ages of existing structures, but in such cases 
their accounting records showed the dates when structures were 
built, or when cars were purchased. 

If practically all the structures shown in the accounting records 
are still in existence, and the money expended each year for each 
class of structure is known, it is a very simple matter to figure the 
average age of the money invested in such structures, which, after 
all, is what is needed in estimating present value. To illustrate. 



1296 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

suppose there are a number of station buildings in existence, whose 
age is not known. Suppose, liowever, that $10,500 was spent for 
such buildings in 1896, $20,000 in 1900, and $5,000 in 1902. Then, 
in 1906, the average age of the money invested in these buildings is 
ascertained thus: 

$10,500 X 10 yrs. equals $105,000 one year 

$20,000 X 6 yrs. equals $120,000 one year 

$5,000 X 4 yrs. equals $20,000 one year 

$35,500 X 7 yrs. equals $248,500 one year 

This gives a total of $35,500 invested 7 yrs. ; for $35,500 X 7 yrs. 
equals $248,500 one year. 

The rule to be followed in all such cases is to multiply the money 
expended each year for structures of a given class by the age In 
years, add all these products together, and divide by the total 
cost of all the structures under consideration. The quotient is the 
average age of all the structures, or, more strictly speaking, the 
average age of the money invested in the structures. If some of 
the structures are no longer in existence, this method can still be 
applied. Take railway cross-ties, for example. Ascertain the total 
value of cross-ties in the track, then go back through the records 
of cost and tie renewals, by years, until the total cost of the 
renewals adds up to the total value of ties now in the track. 
Then compute the average age as above shown. If the price of ties 
has fluctuated, ascertain the actual price paid, and reduce all yearly 
expenditures of renewals to the present price. 

It will be impossible, as well as undesirable, in a report of 
this character, for me to indicate all the methods pursued in the 
appraisal of railways, but some of the radical departures from 
precedent should be outlined, particularly where a result is secured 
in more thorough or in a more economic manner. Moreover, any 
<;hief engineer who may be in your employ in the future will be 
greatly handicapped without an outline of the methods pursued in 
this original appraisal. 

In searching the records of the railways, I did not confine myself 
merely to their engineering and their accounting books, but often 
found missing links of information in the most incongruous places. 
The Oregon Railroad & Navigation Company, for example, had 
"practically none of its "construction ledgers," and at -first we de- 
spaired of being able to piece together a complete itemized summary 
■of original cost. Finally we found an old tissue copy book, Book 
No. 51, at the Ash St. Dock in Portland, containing copies of the 
auditor's distribution sheets, showing costs of engineering, grad- 
ing, etc., etc. 

For several months our work was considerably retarded, not only 
by the reluctance of several of the railway companies to assist us 
in finding their records, but by the incompleteness of the records 
when found. Little by little, however, we were able to fill in the 
gaps, until there remained not 10% of the original unascertained. 



RAILWAYS. 1297 

For the guidance of any engineers whom you may employ in the 
future, I give a list of the most important records to be looked 
for in making an appraisal of this character. 

1. Annual reports to stockholders. 

2. Annual reports to Interstate Commerce Commission. 

3. Annual report of chief engineers and superintendents to the 
president of the road. 

4. Reports of minor officials. 

5. Progress profiles. 

6. Cross-section and quantity books. 

7. Final estimates on contract work. 

8. Tissue copy books of final estimates. 

9. Rail and ballast charts. 

10. Bridge books (engineering department). 

11. Building books. 

12. Work orders. 

13. A. F. E.'s (authorization for expenditure). 

14. Accounting records (a) Construction Ledgers, (b) General 
Ledgers and their accompanying journals, (c) Vouchers, Regis- 
ters, (d) Vouchers, (e) Auditor's Distribution Sheets, and the like. 

15. Equipment Registers. 

16. Distribution Book, or Disbursement Accounts Books, contain- 
ing directions for accountants to follow. 

17. Confidential Reports. 

In my judgment the first step to be taken in appraising a rail- 
way is to ascertain its physical and financial history. For this pur- 
pose the annual reports to stockholders are an invaluable source of 
information. By a perusal of these reports an historical map or 
chart can be prepared showing the limits of each "construction 
division" or branch of the railway, and the dates of beginning and 
completing the construction work on it. The present "operating 
divisions" often have the same names as certain "construction 
divisions" of the road, but wholly different limits. Hence the ne- 
cessity of an historical map in order to avoid confusion in interpret- 
ing the accounting records of the road. 

Having prepared a map, and a brief history of the road, the next 
step should be an investigation of the accounting department rec- 
ords. The tendency of a civil engineer is to go to the engineering 
records first, but this is a mistake, for the accounting records are 
usually kept in a much better shape, and contain fewer gaps. From 
the construction ledgers, an itemized account of the original cost of 
each construction division is secured, and having been secured, the 
next step is to check it by the records of the engineering depart- 
ment, where quantity books and tissue copy books of final esti- 
mates paid to contractors, and the like, are usually to be found. 
Frequently, however, it happens that a line has been purchased, and 
that only the engineering records were transferred at the time of 
the purchase. In which event it may be impossible to secure the 



1298 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

accounting records, except by going to the original owners of the 
property. 

Having gone rapidly through all the accounting and engineering 
records to ascertain what gaps, if any, exist as to original construc- 
tion data, the next step is to put engineers into the field to supply 
the missing links by actual inspection, measurement, etc. An 
attempt to estimate by field survey should be the last resort, not 
only on account of the greater cost of field work, but because of 
its greater inaccuracy, and finally — but not to be ignored — because, 
in case of a legal dispute as to the estimated cost, field surveys, and 
estimates made by different engineers are likely to differ widely. 
There is always so much that cannot be seen, like the foundation of 
bridges, the percentage of loose rocks in embankments, etc., that a 
field survey should be used only as a last resort. And, in our ap- 
praisal of the Washington railways, field surveys were made only . 
for a very small percentage of the total mileage. 

A field inspection of every mile of track should be made, prefer- 
ably by an engineer riding on a handcar. This engineer should be 
provided with complete, up-to-date profiles, and small scale plans 
of the road, showing all structures and their dimensions, etc. I 
made the mistake of accepting the existing profiles and plans for 
use by the field inspectors. These records were so often incorrect, 
through not having been kept up to date, as to cause much unnec- 
essary work subsequently in checking. Haste in sending out field 
inspectors is a mistake, as field inspection of this sort is the most 
inexpensive item of an appraisal, and can be quickly done even with 
a comparatively small force. One man on foot will inventory 
about 12 miles of ordinary track each day, or twice that amount 
on a handcar. Field inspection, therefore, should not be begun 
until corrected, up-to-date profiles and maps have been prepared, 
and until the investigation of the engineering records has been car- 
ried far enough to disclose the particular structures upon which 
the office records are incomplete. By doing this, the field inspec- 
tion resolves itself into a checking off of structures with an occa- 
sional pause to measure some structure on which the office records 
are defective. 

The appraisals heretofore made in other states have been based 
almost entirely upon field surveys and inspection, no attempt having 
been made to secure the necessary data from the engineering and 
accounting records of the railways. Why? The answer is found in 
the purpose of the appraisal. As previously stated, the' purpose of 
the appraisals in Texas, Michigan and Wisconsin was not the same 
purpose as in Washington. Where the purpose is taxation, a rail- 
Way naturally seeks a low valuation for its property, hence it pre- 
fers to refuse access to its own records, believing — and believing 
rightly — that what cannot be seen with the eyes will not be likely 
to appear in the appraisal. An appraisal by field examination 
solely is very apt to be below the true value of the property, hence 
the acceptability of such an appraisal by the railways where taxa- 
tion is the purpose of the appraisal. 



■ RAILWAYS. 1299 

Several of the principal railway system in Washington at first 
resisted our efforts to secure the records in their offices, and stated 
tliat the records were so incomplete as to be valueless. In some in- 
stances I have no doubt that this was an honest opinion. I am in- 
clined to believe, however, that their motive in resisting an ex- 
amination of the records was, in some cases at least, to secure an 
appraisal which could be fought in the courts, and probably upset 
by documentary evidence to prove its unreliability in parts, if not 
in its entirety. Therefore, I hold to the belief that an investigation 
of both the accounting and engineering records of the railways 
would have been the best policy, even had it cost many times what 
it did cost. And, to show my reason for this belief, I will cite 
just one example. In testifying before your honorable body, Mr. 
Hogeland, chief engineer of the Great Northern Railway, has esti- 
mated the cost of earth excavation to be made up of three different 
items, as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Average contract price up to 1,000 ft. haul $0,230 

Average overhaul 0.035 

Transportation of men's tools, supplies 0.045 

Total $0,310 

Had we not secured the actual records in the Great Northern 
offices, it might have been a difficult matter to convince the court 
that the last two items of the above estimate are ridiculously high. 
Having the records, it will not be so difficult. For example, the 
actual cost of the item of "average overhaul" was just one-seventh 
of Mr. Hogeland's estimate, or one-half cent per cubic yard, as 
shown in my statement of the actual cost of construction of the 
Great Northern Railway in the state of Washington. The item of 
transportation of men was similarly overestimated. 

I will not enter into such details further, but, in justice to myself 
and you, I feel it my duty to explain why a departure from prece- 
dent in railway appraisal was the Tiest policy. Such an illustra- 
tion as the above will serve better than many generalities to show 
the character of the reasons for our exhaustive investigations into 
the original cost of the railways of this state. Were you, as a court, 
or were any other court, confronted by the conflicting testimony 
of expert engineers, it would be difficult to arrive at a just opinion 
as to proper quantities and prices, unless the actual data were avail- 
able to guide you. The data are available and are now in your 
possession. 

I have not touched upon the very important matter of the ap- 
praisal of the rolling stock, or equipment, further than to say that I 
did not make a field inspection of it. The office records were so 
complete that such an inspection was superfluous, and for the 
reason above given. In order to apportion to the state of Washing- 
ton its share of the cost of the rolling stock, it was necessary to 



1300 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

appraise the entire equipment of every railway system entering" 
the state. This, in itself, is no slight task. Several states should 
share the cost of appraising the equipment of the railways, so that 
the whole cost would not fall on one state, as in this instance. 

If Washington, Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas and Minnesota 
could have acted in concert, the cost of railway appraisal would 
have been very much less, not only because of the distribution of 
the cost of appraising the equipment, but because of the facility 
With which an entire railway system can be appraised once an 
engineer becomes familiar with the accounting and engineering rec- 
ords of that railway system. For this reason, as well as for others, 
the railroad commissioners of certain groups of states should strive 
to act together. 

The appraisal of right-of-way lands and station grounds, as far 
as present value goes, was delegated principally to three right-of- 
way experts, men who had been buying lands for railway purposes 
in Washington and were familiar with prices. Tour honorable body 
adopted a method of arriving at land values which was entirely 
novel, and, to my mind, a vast improvement over any other 
method hitherto used in other states. The method consists in call- 
ing in real estate men in all the large cities, and securing testi- 
mony from those men as to land values. Your honorable body, 
sitting as a court, hears the testimony not only of the regularly em- 
ployed right-of-way experts, but of expert real estate witnesses, 
wliich those right-of-way experts have consulted, and other real 
estate experts which the railways may bring in. Hitherto the 
practice has been to examine all real estate transfers within a cer- 
tain distance of the railway property, and for a period of years 
prior to the appraisal, and to base the appraisal upon these trans- 
fers. Since property for railway purposes usually costs more than 
for other purposes, it is necessary to multiply the value ascertained 
from transfers of adjacent property by some factor, this factor 
being ascertained from expert testimony or otherwise. Unfortu- 
nately the records of the real estate transfers are not the best evi- 
dence of the value of the property transferred. Indeed the records 
are often made so as to conceal the real value of the property. For 
this reason alone the method devised by your honorable body Is 
much to be preferred. Moreover, it is a less expensive method of 
appraising lands. 

As to my methods of appraisal I need say little more. My testi- 
mony before your honorable body is complete on those matters, but, 
being of great length, I have thought it wise to summarize certain 
features in this report, giving also a few suggestions, which may 
assist any engineer who may be in the employ of the Washington 
Railroad Commission in future. 

It is needless to tell you, but for the sake of public record I 
desire to say that on all the smaller railways in Washington I was 
given most courteous treatment, and had ready access to all rec- 
ords. On the three large systems, namely the Great Northern, the 



RAILWAYS. 1301 

Northern Pacific, and the Oregon Railway & Navigation Com- 
pany, I met witli mucli resistance at first, and lost several months ot 
time in consequence. Denial as to the existence of certain important 
records was repeatedly made — records that I subsequently found. 
Possibly these denials were made in good faith, but, since free 
access to all records was not given me by the Great Northern and 
the Northern Pacific for a long time, and then only after I pieced 
together enough information to prove the existence of the desired 
records, my work was greatly retarded. I think that these rail- 
ways came ultimately to see that it was an error not to put all 
records at my disposal, and all I regret is that they were not 
prompt in reaching that conclusion. I regret it not only because 
of the Increased cost of the appraisal, but because I had business 
duties in New York that made my return imperative at as early a 
date as possible. 

In conclusion I wish to express my hearty appreciation of the 
loyalty and zeal with which my assistants worked. Those in the 
most important positions worked not only by day but by night. 1 
know of no one who seemed swayed by the fear of "working 
himself out of a job." My two principal assistants, JMr. Francis 
W. Collins and Mr. H. L. Gray, deserve special recognition in this 
report, for upon them fell the brunt of the task. Mr. Collins was 
located in St. Paul, at the offices of the Great Northern and the 
Northern Pacific railways, with a corps of men under his direction. 
Mr. Gray was located in Portland, in the offices of the Oregon 
Railway & Navigation Company, with a similar corps. 

To your honorable body I wish to express my sincere thanks for 
the many valuable suggestions that came from you as to the con- 
duct of my appraisal. I wish it were possible for me to convey 
to the people of "Washington my unbiased opinion of your honor- 
able body. As a non-resident my opinion is unbiased. 1 believe 
you have shown great wisdom in not allowing yourselves to be 
hurried into action, for the sake of being able to point to "results." 
No ordinary citizen can realize the magnitude and the intricacy of 
the problem before you. It can become appalling only to one who 
has come face to face with it, and has delved into its details. So 
far as I know, you are the first state railway commission in 
America that has not allowed itself to be drawn into action on rate 
making before securing the fundamental facts that should govern 
such action. One of those fundamental facts is the physical value 
of the railways in the state. A physical valuation is absolutely 
essential, if for no other purpose than to determine a reasonable 
amount to set aside annually from earnings to cover tlie depreci- 
ation from natural agencies and from wear and tear. Tell me the 
physical value of a given structure, and I can estimate its de- 
preciation in dollars closely. Conceal that value, and I am utterly 
in the dark. It has become the fashion to "poo-hoo" the necessity 
of a physical valuation of railways by commissions having rate- 
making powers. Even had the Supreme Court not ruled as to the 
necessity of a physical valuation, the necessity would exist, if for 



1302 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

no other reason than to solve the important problem of annual de- 
preciation. 

Original Cost and Cost of Production of the Great Northern Rail- 
way (768 Miles) in the State of Wasliington.* — This article will con- 
tain data that have not hitherto appeared in print. In fact 
the detailed, actual cost of construction of no large mileage of 
American railway has ever before been published, so far as we 
know. 

Two years ago the Railroad Commission of Washington con- 
ducted a hearing at which the data collected by the Chief Engi- 
neer of the Commission, Mr. Halbert P. Gillette, were put in evi- 
dence, together with testimony as to the methods used in securing 
the data. Mr. Gillette subsequently condensed his testimony, as to 
sources of information and general methods used, into a brief re- 
port which formed part of the annual report of the Commission, 
and was reprinted in Engineering-Contracting, April 7, 1909. It 
was obviously impracticable to print in the report the mass of type- 
written statistics forming Mr. Gillette's exhibits, so the Commis- 
sion wisely printed only the results of its "findings" after listening 
to testimony submitted by the railways. 

The gathering of the data kept a corps of some 20 engineers 
ahd land experts busy for a year in the office and in the field. 
Many of the data are of a character meriting publicity. We have, 
therefore, selected the most important parts from Mr. Gillette's 
exhibits and testimony, and will publish them. The first install- 
ment is in the present article and relates to the Great Northern 
Railway. 

The major portion of this road in Washington was built, as a 
single-track line, in the years 1891 to 1894. It was built by con- 
tract at reasonable prices, and, in spite of the fact, that a rugged 
range of mountains was crossed, the original cost of 488 miles or 
line was only ?21,673,780, as shown by the accounting records, or 
$44,400 per mile, including right of way and all costs except roll- 
ing stock. As will be noted below, the item of engineering was 3% 
of the total cost. 

While the accounting records of the Great Northern did not com- 
ply precisely with the requirements of the Interstate Commerce 
Commission, still the departures were few — and for the best — so the 
items, as given below, are practically self-explanatory. 

The section of line whose costs follow embraces the line as 
originally built (not including subsequent additions and improve- 
ments) from the Idaho-Washington boundary to Everett, from 
Seattle to Belfast, and from Anacortes lo Rockport, a total distance 
of 487.6 miles. The original cost of this mileage was as shown 
in Table VI. 



"Engineering-Contracting , Dec. 8, 1909. 



RAILWAYS. 1303 

Table VI. — Original Cost of 488 Miles of Great Northern Rail- 
way Line in Washington. 

Per Mile 
of Line or 
Item. Total. Roadbed. 

1. Engineering ? 643.513.39 $1,319' 

2. Right of way 1,978,874.53 4,05(5 

3. Real estate 112,064.64 230' 

4. Clearing and grubbing 536,157.05 1 098 

5. Grading 5,534,879.90 11 343 

6. Tunnels 2,744,686.14 5,624 

7. Masonry 459,436.06 942 

8. Cribbing and bulkheading 348,287.42 714 

9. Bridges and culverts 2,106,876.45 4,31S 

10. Cattle guards, road crossings and 

signs 114,274.79 234 

11. Ties 584,464.37 1,19S 

12. Rails 2,894,548.33 5,932 

13. Rail fastenings 377,508.94 774 

14. Progs, switches, etc 82,423.78 169' 

15. Tracklaying and surfacing 259,005.76 532 

16. B.allasting 530,483.41 1,088 

17. Surfacing, filling and lining track.. 30,256.99 61 

18. Transportation dept. buildings 300,141.08 615 

19. Road dept. bldgs 43,294.71 88^ 

20. Roundhouses and shops 159,715.46 328: 

21. Fuel and water stations 125,811.22 258 

22. Docks, wharves and inclines 21,476.57 44 

23. Columbia River incline 59,485.91 122 

24. Other buildings and structures.... 12,136.70 25 

25. Fences 11,219.03 Ti 

26. Telegraph 22,921.68 47 

27. Shop tools and machinery 47,233.90 96 

28. Protection against snow and ice... 77,187.95 158 

29. Locomotive and car service 42,287.03 86 

30. General expense 52,854.13 108 

31. Transportation men and materials. ' 45,065.31 92 

32. Insurance 549.90 1 

33. Operating expense 251,323.52 514 

34. Interest on advances 244,442.95 501 

35. Bond expenses 36,065.80 74 

36. Bond interest during constr 766,139.99 1,569 

37. Wagon roads 15,778.78 32 

Total $21,672,873.57 $44,412 

There were 488 miles of railway line, or roadbed, and the side 
tracks, etc., amounted to about 8% additional; so that the costs 
per "mile of line" in Table VI should be divided by 1.08 to arrive 
at the costs per "mile of track." 

Three items in Table VI bring out very clearly the rough char- 
acter of the country, namely. Items 5, 6 and 9. The Cascade 
Tunnel comprised almost the whole of Item 6, the actual cost of 
that tunnel being $2,524,212, including masonry lining. 

The original grading quantities and classification were as given 
in Table VII. 

The part of the Idaho Division that lies within the state of 
Washington was 48.77 miles long. The Washington Division ex- 
tended to the foot of the "switchback" line, which was called the 
"Overhead Line," over the Cascade Mountains. The "switchback" 
was subsequently abandoned in part when the tunnel was com- 



1304 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



_■ ^ » r-(_;D N_^= O 30 

Q •* = ir- i-H M c- c- 31 



30 rq io c- o t- ra jc-h- 



lO •*i0 30 
3OS0 N 



• (M 00 00 3i to ro 

S f 0000 ic 

"^ ^' ■* O 00 o t- 
. t- [- r)< ■* 

01 n et 



soomoico 
aTeo o» 

OiH 



^ CO !M CO 30 00 CO C<l 

^ t-rH«00 iH 

MUSM 00 



CQ. 



OStOrHOO 
OOC-OOC-M 
05r-l M 



O eO tH «C tH ,H 00 rH 
(f^ ^ 35 ^ CO 05 O^ W 

•g ^' 00 eq 10 T-i «o 03 
cri t-OOCSljO cdtjh'co 
■^ IMiH«>IM00eO 



00 t- (MOO 

0010 t-o 

IM005eOt- 






'2 oeo •t-ooeco5 

M t--<»< 'Oirarfit:- 

^ ^CO •tOUir-ICO 

> -rH 

o 

^ 00 CO U3 -^ lA 35 t- 

g oc-c-eoMffiO 

O ^ to CO 00 i-l 00 1-1 

"-H M Irt CO C<rO r-T -^ 

•S Cq ,H !>. TjitO CO to 

jjj in Tj< c<) CO 3> 00 



H ^- 



h- to 35 5<I (M S-^ CO 

Q t-X)Tj'OTI<ir535 
S ^(J 35 tH O Oa (M tH 

c^ -^ t- "^co CO CO cjT 

rQ (M N in CO 31 (rq 

M C-] CO rH tH Tt< 



02 01 

-d-d 

>.>5 



i3 



-d 

<Bo 
^O 

fdco 
=^ _ 

o ti 

. °^ 

2 c 5 

5 °! 






to' 



•t-T)<0 

• CO 000 

• iHinoo 



CO CO CO coo 

MiniOrHO 

eocqt-Nt- 



00 CO 

00 lO 

coco 



rt<00O5 30 o 

oraosso 

00tJ<U5Oc£> 



^-3 M-^'C W 

CJ'O CO >)'d 

fe > o S--U 
rf •Si! 2^ 

^ S3 iJ^ c'i fJ 

tj S o 3 s " 
CS 11 o o c i-' 



coco 

35-* 
COtJ< 



\i 

•s 

icd 

'O O ClJ 

OUOO 



RAILWAYS. 1305 

pleted. The Seattle and Montana (S. & M. ) extended along Puget 
Sound from Seattle to Belfast. The Seattle and Northern (S. & N. ) 
extended from Anacortes to Sauk. 

The contract prices were quite uniform, and were about as fol- 
lows per cubic yard : 

Earth excav. hauled less than 300 ft $0.17 

Earth excav. hauled 300 to 1,000 ft 0.21 

Cemented gravel hauled less than 1,000 ft 0.38 

Loose rock 0.43 

Solid rock 1.05 

Embankment from borrow pits 0.17 

Overhaul, for each 100 ft. beyond the free haul 

of 1,000 ft 0.01 

Grading was paid for but once. 

It is interesting to note that the average grading was 26,000 
cu. yds. per mile, classified as follows : 

Per cent. 

Earth excav. within 300 ft 14.4 

Earth excav. within 1,000 ft 10.3 

Cemented gravel 22.6 

Loose rock 5.9 

Solid rock 16.6 

Embankment from borrow pits 30.2 

Total 100.0 

There was less than 50 ft. of overhaul on the average cubic 
yard of excavation, or less than % ct. per cu. yd /or overhaul. 

The average cost of grading, including overhaul, was about 40 cts. 
per cu. yd. of all excavation. 

The price of clearing ranged from $28 an acre in the Idaho 
Division to $139 in the Pacific Division. Grubbing ranged from 
$14 a station in the Idaho Division to $25 a station in the Pacific 
Division. 

The price of tracklaying was about $230 per mile and the price 
of surfacing was about $200 per mile. 

Items 29, 30 and 31 are especially interesting in view of the 
absurd testimony that has often been given as to these items. 

Item 33, Operating Expense, is the cost of operating trains over 
the line prior to its being turned over to the operating department. 

Items 34, 35 and 36, total $2,144 per mile, or about 4.8% of 
the total cost, which shows that an allowance of 5% for interest 
during construction is ample, although it has been frequently 
claimed that double this amount should be allowed. 

A short line was built in northwestern Washington, from Belling- 
ham northward and southward, called the Fairhaven Southern Ry. 
Part of it was subsequently abandoned. The remaining part was 
32.3 miles long. Its cost was determined from the accounting rec- 
ords of its original builders, to which was added the costs shown 
in the Great Northern Ry. after it had passed into the latter' s 
hands. This total cost for the 32.3 miles of line was as given in 
Table VIII. 



1306 . HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table VIII. — Cost of Fairhaven Southern Rt. (32.3 Miles of 
Line or Roadbed). 

Per mile 
Item. of line. 

1. Engineering ? ^49 

2. Right of way 2,2d0 

3. Real estate ^^ 

4. Clearing and grubbing (very heavy) 1,083 

5. Grading 4,013 

6. Masonry 436 

7. Cribbing and bulkheading 248 

8. Bridges and culverts 4,196 

9. Cattle guards and signs 7 

10. Ties 751 

11. Rails 4,303 

12. Rail fastenings 498 

13. Frogs, switches, etc 16 

14. Tracklaying and surfacing 396 

15. Ballasting 653 

16. Transportation department buildings 545 

17. Road department buildings 149 

18. Roundhouses and shops 158 

19. Fuel and water stations 273 

20. Other buildings and structures 257 

21. Fences 121 

22. Telegraph 211 

23. Shop tools and machinery 239 

24. Locomotive and car service 189 

25. General expense 748 

26. Iftsurance 12 



Grand total $22,565 

The following were the grading quantities per mile and con- 
tract prices on the Fairhaven Southern : 

9,200 cu. yds. earth, at $0.21. 

2,000 cu. yds. cement gravel, at $0.35. 

400 cu. yds. loose rock, at $0.40. 
1,300 cu. yds. solid rock, at $1.02. 

12,900 cu. yds. total per mile. 
4,800 cu. yds. overhauled 100 ft., at $0.01. 

This is fairly typical of the j'ardage per mile of branch line built 
through "easy country." 

Item 14, tracklaying, does not include train service, which is given 
in Item 24 for the entire construction of the road ^nd is not pro- 
rated to the other items. 

No interest was charged on the books. 

The Spokane Falls and Northern Ry. was also built in the early 
90's, by an independent company, whose cost records could not 
be secured. A field survey was accordingly made, and its cost was 
estimated, using prices that were common at the time of the con- 
struction of the line. This line is 130.5 miles long, and its original 
construction cost was estimated to have been as given in Table IX. 



RAILWAYS. 1307 

Table IX. — Estimated Original Cost of The Spokane B'alls and 

Northern Ry. (130.5 Miles of Line or Roadbed). 

Per mile 
Item. of line. 

1. Engineering % 524 

2. Grading 5,132 

3. Bridges and culverts 1,164 

4. Cattle guards and signs 24 

5. Ties 1,612 

6. Rails 4,031 

7. Rail fastenings 791 

8. Frogs, switches, etc 70 

9. Tracklaying and surfacing ($700 per mile of track).... 835 

10. Ballasting 600 

11. Transportation department buildings 396 

12. Road department buildings 107 

13. Fuel and water stations 147 

14. Other buildings and structures 14 

15. Fences • 63 

16. General expense 150 

17. Bond interest during contruction 785 

Grand total $16,445 

In addition to the 130.5 miles of line there were 20.79 miles of 
sidetracks, etc. 

It will be noted that no land is included in this estimate, but 
$1,000 per mile of line was the estimated value of the land in 1906. 
It was certainly much less originally. This line was probably built 
for $17,000 per mile, including all land. 

The Great Northern Ry. had just completed in 1906 a stretch 
of branch line in northern Washington, known as the Washington & 
Great Northern Ry. The completed portion was 83.9 miles long, 
through a mountainous country. The grading yardage per mile 
of line, and contract prices, were as follows: 

9,200 cu. yds. earth excav. under 300 ft, at $0.18 

5,600 cu. yds. earth excav. under 1,000 ft, at $0.22 

9,000 cu. yds. cement gravel, under 1,000 ft, at $0.35 

1,800 cu. yds. loose rock under 1,000 ft, at $0.40 

6,900 cu. yds. solid rock under 1,000 ft, at $0.98 

32,500 cu. yds. total per mile 

19,000 cu. yds. overhauled 100 ft, at $0.01 

The actual cost of this line was as given in Table X. 



1308 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table X. — Original Cost of The Washington and Great North- 
ern Rt. (83.9 Miles of Line or Roadbed). 

Per mile 
Item. of line. 

1. Engineering $ 1,489 

2. Right of way 1,064 

3. Real estate 3 

4. Clearing and grubbing 65t> 

5. Grading 14,558 

6. Tunnels 75 

7. Masonry 928 

8. Bridges and culverts 3,623 

9. Cattle guards, road crossings and signs 17 

10. Ties 1,035 

11. Rails 5,261 

12. Rail fastenings 700 

13. Frogs, switches, etc 161 

14. Tracklaying and surfacing 866 

15. Ballasting 1,024 

16. Surfacing, filling and lining track 34 

17. Transportation department buildings 139 

18. Road department buildings. . . .-. 122 

19. Roundhouses and shops 22 

20. 'Fuel and water stations 389 

21. Other buildings and structures 5 

22. Fences 50 

23. Telegraph 127 

24. Locomotive and car service 575 

25. General expense 25 

26. Transportation of men and materials 2,378 

27. Insurance 2 

28. Operating expense Vi 

29. Interest on advances l,09'i 

30. Taxes 56 

31. Wagon roads 17 

Grand total $36,519 

In addition to the 83.9 miles of line there were 7.89 miles of 
sidetracks, etc., whose cost is included above. 

It will be noted that Item 1, Engineering, cost about 4% of the 
total ; and that Item 29, Interest During Construction, was about 
3% of the total. 

In addition to the foregoing lines belonging to the Great North- 
ern there was a short line, The Columbia & Red Mountain, 7.5 miles 
long, whose original cost could not be ascertained, but was esti- 
mated to have been $258,327, or $34,450 per mile. 

The preceding costs total as follows : 

Main line (487.6 miles) $21,673,780 

Fairhaven & Southern (32.3 miles) 728,976 

Washington & G. N. (83.9 miles) 3,054,042 

Spokane Falls & N. (130.5 miles) 2,145,682 

Columbia & Red Mt. (7.5 miles) 258,327 

Total original cost $27,860,807 

If we allow $140,000 for the probable cost of the right of way of 
the S. F. & N., we have $28,000,000, in round numbers, lor 742 miles 



RAILWAYS. 1300 

of line, or ?37,730 per mile, not Including rolling stock. This Is very 
close to tlie actual original cost. 

We come now to the additions and improvements made since 
the original lines were built. They total as follows : 

Fairhaven cut-off line (18.4 miles) $ 962,102 

New side tracks 74 7,20!) 

Right of way 745,370 

Real estate 2, 519, .513 

Grading (mostly bank widening) 1,142,369 

Tunnels 1,250,145 

Masonry 729,409 

Cribbing and bulkheading 19,457 

Bridges and culverts. 465,520 

Rails 52,207 

Transportation department buildings 503,968 

Road department buildings 50,541 

Roundhouses and shops 90,333 

Fuel and water stations 49,334 

Grain elevators, coal bunkers, etc 104,933 

Docks and wharves 546,926 

Other buildings and structures 177,480 

Fences 39,523 

Telegraph 6,884 

Shop tools and machinery 96,136 

Protection against snow and ico 111,501 

Total additions and improvements $10,410,859 

This brings the cost up to June 30, 1906. 

Unfortunately the account of New Sidetracks does not distribute 
the cost between the various items, as it should ; consequently Mr. 
Gillette adopted the following distribution : 

Per cent. 

Grading 25 

Ties 10 

Rails 40 

Rail fastenings 10 

Frogs and switches 10 

Laying and surfacing 5 

Total 100 

In this manner the total itemized cost (original plus additions 
and improvements) was arrived at very closely, as shown Mn 
Table XL 

Table XI includes no allowance for the right of way of the S. F. 
& N. and of the Columbia & Red Mountain ; but, as the present 
value of that right of way is only $139,678, it will be seen that the 
grand total cost was about $38,400,000. 

In using Table XI the reader should be cautioned that the Addi- 
tions and Improvements were not recorded in the accounting de- 
partment exactly under the same headings as were the original 
construction costs. It was an error not to have done so, but it is 
the common practice of railway companies to make this mistake. 
Engineering, for example, is not record'ed as a separate item in the 
Additions and Improvements (except on the "Fairhaven Cut-Off 



1310 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Line," where it was 3% of the total) ; hence one cannot estimate 
the total cost of engineering on any part of the Great Northern 
work other than the original construction. 

The same holds true of Locomotive and Car Service, Transporta- 
tion of Man and Materials, and Interest during the time that work 
is in progress. 
Table XL — Original, Cost of Great Northern Ry., Plus Addi- 

DITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS Up TO JUNB 30, 190G (767.75 MiLES 

OF Railway Line and 187.06 Miles of Side Track and Other 
Track). 

Per mile 

Item. Total. of line. 

1. Engineering % 897,523.10 ? 1,169* 

2. Right of way 2,885,290.66 3,759 

3. Real estate 2,634,533.12 3,432 

4. Clearing and grubbing 657,585.67 856 

5. Grading 9,561,212.68 12,454 

6. Tunnels 4,166,137.81 5,426 

7. Masonry 1,280,582.94 1,668 

8. Cribbing and bulkheading 375,779.13 ■ 489 

9. Bridges and culverts 3,275,652.60 4,266 

10. Cattle guards, road crossings and 

signs 119,026.15 155 

11. Ties 1,004,558.13 1,309 

12. Rails 4,425,000.32 5,763 

13. Rail fastenings 642,684.77 837 

14. Frogs, switches, etc 186,760.15 243 

15. Tracklaying and surfacing 505,533.96 658 

16. Ballasting 760,517.22 990 

17. Surfacing, filling and lining track. . . 34,095.90 44 

18. Transportation department buildings 885,130.96 1,153 

19. Road department buildings 122,739.99 160 

20. Roundhouses and shops 256,933.72 334 

21. Fuel and water stations 235,045.35 306 

22. Grain elevators, coal bunkers and 

stockyards 104,932.89 136 

23. Docks, wharves and inclines 627,888.57 817 

24. Other buildings and structures 200,984.65 261 

25. Fences 166,975.87 87 

26. Telegraph 47,185.27 61 

27. Shop tools and machinery 151,066.94 196 

28. Protection against snow and ice... 188,688.99 245 

29. Locomotive and car service 96,536.47 126* 

30. General expense 101,109.98 132* 

31. Transportation men and materials.. 243,860.20 318* 

32. Insurance 1,117.43 1* 

33. Operating expense 252,948.48 329t 

34. Interest on advances 336,342.11 437* 

35. Bond expenses 36,065.80 47* 

36. Bond interest during construction... 880,835.66 1,146* 

37. Taxes 4,696.89 6 

38. Wagon roads 17,198.97 22 

Total $38,270,760.50 $49,848 

39. Equipment (rolling stock) 3,973,586.18 5,176 

Grand total $42,244,346.68 $55,024 

*These items relate only to original construction, and not to any 
of the work done under additions and improvements. 

tOperating expense covers the cost of operating passenger and 
freight trains during constraction (before the road was turned over 
to the operating department). This expense should really not be 
regarded as part of the cost of construction. 



RAILWAYS. 1311 

Since there were 0.244 miles of sidetrack and otlier trades per 
mile of line, the costs in the last column of Table XI must be 
divided by 1.244 to arrive at the cost per mile of track. Multi- 
plying by 0.8 will give almost the same result as dividing by 1.244. 

Item 15 does not include all the surfacing, as will be seen by 
noting Item 17 ; but Item 15 includes locomotive and car service. 
The locomotive and car service of Item 29 relates to other work. 

From the records of quantities in the engineering department of 
the Great Northern, supplemented by data in the accounting depart- 
ment, and by field surveys where necessary, Mr. Gillette prepared 
the estimated cost of reproducing (new) the Great Northern lines 
in the state of Washington, as detailed in Table XII. Item 2 
(lands) in Table XII is based upon the final "findings" of the 
Washington Railroad Commission. 

Table XII — Estimate of the Cost of Reproducing the Great 
Northern Ry. in AVashington, up to June 30, 1906. 
(767.75 Miles of Line and 187.06 Miles of 
Side Tracks and Yard Tracks.) 

1. Engineering, 31/0% of items 3 to 26 inclusive ? 1,077,601.47 

2. Right of way, etc. 

Terminal land, Seattle $10,937,543.69 

Terminal land, Spokane 1,562,228.33 

Terminal land, Everett 1,077,750.00 

Terminal land, Bellingham 552,610.00 

Right of way, and other station grounds 2,975,560.02 

Total right of way, etc ?17,105, 692.04 

3. Clearing and Grubbing. 

Clearing, 4,968 acres at $100.00 ? 496,800.00 

Grubbing, 9,521 stations at $20.00 190,420.00 

Cutting dangerous trees, 6,596 at $2.00 13,192.00 

Total clearing and grubbing $ 700,412.00 

4. Grading. 

Earth excavation (300 ft. haul), 2,802,453 cu. 

yds. at $0.20 $ 560,490,6U 

Earth excavation (1,000 ft. haul), 3,911,918 cu. 

yds. at $0.25 977,979.50 

Cement gravel, 3,998,152 cu. yds. at $0.40 1,599,260.80 

Loose rock, 1,186,985 cu. yds. at $0.50 593,492.50 

Solid rock, 3,246,964 cu. yds. at $1.10 3,571,660.40 

Unclassified excavation, 299,866 cu. yds. at $0.50 149,933.00 

Embankment, 3,771,056 cu. yds. at $0.20 754,211.20 

Overhaul, cu. yds. hauled 100 ft, 8,361,186, 

at $0.01 83,611.86 

Widening roadbed (acctg. records) 1,142,368.85 

Grading new side tracks (acctg. records) 186,802.19 



Total grading (except- trestles filled, item 8).$ 9,619,810.90 



1312 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

5. Tunnels. 

Cascade tunnel (masonry lined), 13,813 lin. ft. 

at $180.00 ? 2,486,340.0(1 

Everett tunnel (in earth, timber lined), 2,259 

lin. ft. at $60.00 135,540.00 

Seattle tunnel (double track, in earth, masonry 

lined, % owned by G. N.), 5,141 lin. ft. at 

% of $360.00 ■ 1,233,840.00 

Other tunnels, 5,316 lin. ft. at $75.00 398,700.00 

W. & G. N. tunnel, 113 lin. ft. at $60.00 6,780.00 

Total tunnels ? 4,261,200.00 

6. Masonry. 

Riprap, slope wall and retaining wall (as per 
acctg. records, after deducting bridge and 
culvert masonry) $ 865,718.94 

7. Cribbing and Bulkheading. 

As per accounting records $ 375,779.13 

8. Bridges and Culverts. 

Trestles (av. 18 ft. high, 30,390,311 ft. B. M. at 
$30.00, and 1,234,583 lin. ft. piles at $0.25), 

128,400 lin. ft. at $10.00 $ 1,284,000.00 

Trestles filled, 2,048,038 cu. yds. at $0.20 409,607.60 

Howe Truss and Combination Bridges (8,046 ft.). 

Spans under 60 ft., 966 lin. ft. at $30.00 28,980.00 

Spans 60 to 100 ft., 825 lin. ft. at $35.00 28,875.00 

Spans 100 to 150 ft., 3,909 lin. ft. at $45.00 175,905.00 

Spans over 150 ft, 2,346 lin. ft. at $60.00 140,760.00 

Steel Bridges (11,722 lin. ft). 

Steel In place, 24,004,260 lbs. at $0.0475 $ 1,140,202.35 

Foundation masonry, 30,267 cu. yds. at $12.00 363,204.00 

Log Culverts (31,606 lin. ft culvert). 

Logs in place, 538,741 lin. ft at $0.16 86,198.56 

Timber Culverts (12,922 lin. ft culvert). 

Timb«r, 2,180,232 ft B. M., at $26.00 56,686.03 

Box Drains (3,709 lin. ft drains). 

Timber, 62,080 ft B. M., at $26.00 1,614.08 

Concrete Culverts (2,377 lin. ft culverts). 

Concrete, 4,740 cu. yds., at $9.00 51,660.00 

Stone Box Culverts (3,206 lin. ft culverts). 

Masonry, 4,074 cu. yds., at $5.00 20.370.00 

Vitrified Pipe Culverts (11,870 lin. ft culverts). 

12-in. pipe, 694 lin. ft., at $0.50 347.00 

18-in. pipe, 2,848 lin. ft., at $1.30 3,702.40 

24-ln. pipe, 4,058 lin. ft., at $2.60 10,550.80 

27-in. pipe, 3,583 lin. ft, at $3.00 10,749.00 

30-in. pipe, 687 lin. ft, at $3.50 2,404.50 

Cast Iron Pipe Culverts (6,159 lin. ft. culverts). 

8-in. pipe, 48 lin. ft, at $1.50 72.00 

12-in. pipe, 606 lin. ft, at $3.00 1,818.00 

18-in. pipe, 852 lin. ft, at $4.00 '. . 3,408.00 

24-in. pipe, 3,119 lin. ft., at $6.00 18,714.00 

30-in. pipe, 1,324 lin. ft., at $7.00 9,268.00 

36-in. pipe, 210 lin. ft, at $9.00 1,890.00 

Total bridges and culverts $ 3,850,986.32 

9. Ties. 

(954.8 miles, at 3,000), 2,864,400 ties, at $0.50.$ 1,432,200.00 
10. Rails. 

(954.8 miles), 98,237 tons, at $40.00 $ 3,929,480.00 



\ 



RAILWAYS. 1313 

Track Fastenings. 

Spikes, 6,111,960 lbs., at $0.028 S 171134 88 

Angle bars, 16,549,280 lbs., at $0.025 413.732'.00 

Bolts, 1,692,540 lbs., at $0.032 54 161 2« 

Rail braces, 382,500, at $0.10 38 250 00 

Tie plates (25% of line), 1,125,000, at $0.08 90,000.00 



Total track fastenings $ 767,278.16 

Frogs and Switches. 

Turnouts (frogs), 1,033, at $80.00 $ 82,640.00 

Ballast. 

Main line, 767.7 miles, at $1,000.00 $ 767,700.0(t 

Side track, 187.1 miles, at $600.00 112,260.00 



Total ballast $ 879,960.00 

Tracklaying and Surfacing. 

Main line and side track, 954.8 mi., at $700.00..$ 668,360.00 

Fencing Right of Way. 

As per accounting records plus 20% $ 80,371.04 

Crossings, Cattle Guards and Signs. 

Signs, 3,020, at $2.00 $ 6,040.00 

Road ci-ossings (grade), 1,044, at $6.00 6,264.00 

Cattle guards, 295, at $20.00 5,900.00 

Tell tales, 18, at $25.00 450.00 

Steel highway bridges, 1,743 lin. ft, at $80.00.. 139,440.00 

Wood highway bridges, 1,384 lin. ft, at $20.00. . 27,680.00 

Total crossings, etc $ 185,774.00 

Telegraph Lines. 

As per accounting records plus 20% $ 56,622.00 

Transportation Department Buildings. 

Passenger depots, frame, 95,573 sq. ft., at $1.25.? 119,466.25 

Passenger depots, brick, at Bellinghani 18,000.00 

Passenger depot, brick, at Spokane 130,000.00 

Passenger depot, brick and stone, at Seattle 

( y2 interest) 280,000.00 

Freight depot, brick, Spokane, 30,000 sq. ft., 

at $1.00 30,000.00 

Freight depot, brick, Everett, 9,350 sq. ft, 

at $1.00 9,350.00 

Freight depot brick, Seattle, 16,245 sq. ft, 

at $1.00 16,245.00 

Freight depot, brick, Seattle (stores), 27,440 

sq. ft, at $3.50 96,040.00 

Freight depot, brick, Seattle, 50,000 sq. ft., 

at $1.50 75,000.00 

Freight depot, frame, Seattle, 64,000 sq. ft, 

at $1.00 64,000.00 

Freight depot, frame, Seattle, 56,000 sq. ft, 

at $1.00 56,000.00 

Freight depot, frame, elsewhere, 21,822 sq. ft., 

at $1.00 21,822.00 

Warehouses, 18,648 sq. ft., at $1.00 18,648.00 

Stock yards, 277.662 sq. ft., at $0.04 11,106.48 

Track scales, 9, at $2,000.00 18,000.00 

Platforms, wood (other than depots), 38,422 

sq. ft, at $0.10 3,842.20 

Platforms, cinder, 25,575 sq. ft., at $0.06 1,534.50 

Platforms, brick, 600 sq. ft, at $0.25 150.00 

Water closets, 3,638 sq. ft., at $1.00 3.638.00 

Station furniture (other than Seattle) 10,692.08 

Total transportation department buildings.. $ 983,534.51 



1314 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

19. Road Department Buildings. 

Section houses (white men), 56,538 sq. ft., 

at $1.25 $ 70,672.50 

Section liouses (Japanese), 22,826 sq. ft., 

at ?0.80 18,260.80 

Tool houses, 14,050 sq. ft., at $0.50 7,025.00 

Total road department buildings ? 95,958.30 

20. Round Houses and Shops. 

Round houses, brick, 55 stalls, at $1,500.00 $ 82,500.00 

Round houses, frame, 19 stalls, at $900.00 17,100.00 

Cinder pits, 290 lin. ft., at $50.00 14,500.00 

Turntables, 9, at $3,000.00 27,000.00 

Machine and repair shops, brick, 117,315 sq. 

ft, at $1.25 146,643.75 

Machine and repair shops, frame, 8,123 sq. ft., 

at $0.50 4,061.50 

Transfer tables, 2, at $1,500.00 3,000.00 

Repair sheds, 24,000 sq. ft, at $0.25 6,000.00 

Total round houses and shops $ 300,805.25 

21. Fuel and "Water Stations. 

Water stations, 51, at $2,700.00 $ 137,700.00 

Coal chutes (5), 67 pockets, at $1,500.00 100,500.00 

Total fuel and water stations $ 238,200.00 

22. Shop Tools and Machinery. 

As per accounting records plus 20% ' $ 181,280.40 

23. Grain Elevators. 

Sack house, Seattle, 50,400 sq. ft., at $0.50 $ 25,200.00 

Elevator, Seattle 100,000.00 

Total grain elevators $ 125,200.00 

24. Docks and Wharves. 

Docks, Seattle $ 626,368.60 

Wharves elsewhere, 30,000 sq. ft, at $0.75 22,500.00 

Total docks and wharves $ 648,868.60 

25. Other Buildings and Structures. 

As per accounting records plus 20% (106,905 

sq. ft of miscellaneous buildings, etc.) $ 241,181.58 

26. Snow Protection. 

As per accounting records plus 15%, (consist- 
ing mainly of 4,558 lin. ft. snow sheds) $ 216,992.35 

27. Legal and General Expense. 

1%, of items 3 to 26, inclusive ? 307,866.13 

28. Interest During Construction. 

5%, of items 1 to 27 (except 2), inclusive. .'. .$ 1,608,705.05 

29. Stores on Hand. 

Necessary for maintenance and operation $ 360,904.26 

Total of items 1 to 29, inclusive $51,249,402.44 

30. Equipment. 

Locomotives $ 1,334,740.70 

Passenger cars 715,395.92 

Freight cars 2,320,036.29 

Work and miscellaneous 199,451.19 

Total equipment $ 4,569,624.10 

Grand total of items 1 to 30 $55,819,026.54 



RAILWAYS. 1315 

Regarding Item 2 of Table XII, it should be said that the Rail- 
road Commission did not include any land not needed in the im- 
mediate future for railway purposes. In the city of Seattle there 
was land, owned by the Great Northern, of the estimated value of 
$9,097,490, which is not included in Item 2. In Spokane there was 
similar land of the value of $221,750, and other leased lands (bring- 
ing $16,000 yearly income), whose value was not determined. 

The chief engineer of the Great Northern presented an estimate 
of the cost of reproduction far in excess of that of Mr. Gillette 
above given. The Railroad Commission finally determined that 
$58,671,559 would be a fair cost of reproducing (new) the Great 
Northern lines in Washington, and that $53,887,080 would be a 
fair "present value," or second-hand value, of all this propcrtj% 
including equipment. 

The accounting and engineering records of the Great Northern 
had been so kept that the yardage of earth in widening roadbed 
(subsequent to original construction) and in building new side- 
tracks, could not be ascertained without an amount of labor that 
did not seem to be warranted. 

Referring to the last two entries in Item 4 of Table XII, it will 
be seen that they total $1,329,170, or about 14% of the total of 
Item 4. At an assumed cost of 20 cts. per cu. yd. for this bank 
widening, etc., there were about 664,600 cu. yds., which is equiva- 
lent to 865 cu. yds. per mile of line. Dividing the items of yard- 
age in Item 4 by 768, the miles of line, we have the following: 

Cu. yds. per 
mile of line. 

Earth excav. (300 ft. or less haul) 3,640 

Earth excav. (300 to 1,000 ft. haul) 5,090 

Cement gravel 5,200 

Loose rock 1,540 

Solid rock 4,230 

Unclassified excavation 390 

Embankment from borrow 4,910 

Total ^5,000 

Widening roadbed (earth) 870 

Total 25,870 

Filling trestles (see Item 8, Table IV) 270 

Grand total 26,140 

In Item 8 it will be seen that the trestles averaged 18 ft. high. 
This was ascertained by dividing the total sum of the profile areas 
of the trestles by their total length. Trestle filling was kept in 
Item 8, in order to correspond with the accounting records. 

The prices assigned to all classes of construction include all labor, 
materials and costs of transporting men and materials, train serv- 
ice, etc. 



1316 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Item 12, Frogs and Switches, does not include cross- ties, which 
are included in Item 9. 

Item 17, Telegraph Lines, was taken from the accounting records 
and 20% added to cover increase in prices, transportation of men, 
etc. The Great Northern does not own the telegraph lines entirely. 

Table XIII summarizes the cost of reproduction, and gives also 
present value. 

Table XIII. — Cost of Reproduction and Present Value of Great 
Northern as Estimated by H. P. Gillette. 

Reproduction. Condition. Present 
New. Per cent. Value. 

1. Engineering ? 1,077,601 100.0 ? 1,077,601 

2. Right of way 17,105,692 100.0 17,105,692 

3. Clearing and grubbing 700,412 100.0 700,412 

4. Grading 9,619,811 110.0 10,581,792 

5. Tunnels 4,261,200 100.0 4,261,200 

6. Masonry (except in Item 8) 865,719 100.0 865,719 

7. Cribbing and bulkheading, . 375,779 22.0 82,672 

8. Bridges and culverts 3,850,986 78.2 3,011,471 

9. Ties 1,432,200 46.3 663,109 

10. Rails 3,929,480 80.0 3,143,584 

11. Track fastenings 767,279 80.0 613,823 

12. Frogs and switches 82,640 80.0 66,112 

13. Ballast 879,960 100.0 879,960 

14. Tracklaying and surfacing. 668,360 100.0 668,360 

15. Fencing right of way 80,371 54.5 43,802 

16. Crossings, cattle guards, etc. 185,774 90.0 167,197 

17. Telegraph lines 56,622 80.0 45,298 

18. Transp. dept. bldgs 983,535 89.5 880,265 

19. Road dept. bldgs 95,958 76.0 72,928 

20. Roundhouses and shops 300,805 83.5 251,173 

21. Fuel and water stations. .. . 238,200 80.0 190,560 

22. Shop tools and machinery. . 181,280 65.0 117,832 

23. Grain elevators 125,200 79.0 98,908 

24. Docks and wharves 648 869 79.0 512,606 

25. Other bldgs. and structures. 241,182 85.0 205.004 

26. Snow protection 216,992 72.4 157,103 

27. Legal and general expense. 307,886 100.0 307,886 

28. Interest during constr 1,608,705 100.0 1,608,705 

29. Stores on hand 360,904 100.0 360,904 

Total of items 1 to 29. . .$51,219,402 $48,741,678 

30. Equipment 4,569,624 70.33 3,213,747 

Grand total $55,819,026 $51,955,425 

In arriving at an estimate of the Present Value, or second-hand 
value, of the property, Mr. Gillette determined the average age of 
each class of structures, as explained in his report to the Railroad 
Commission (see Engineering-Contracting, April 7, 1909). Then 
an annual depreciation was determined from a study of the records. 
For example, the average age of existing trestles was 4.2 years, 
and the annual depreciation was taken at 10% ; hence the present 
condition was 100% — 4.2 X 10% =58%. 



RAILWAYS. 1317 

Table XIV gives average ages and annual depreciations. 

Table XIV. 

Annual Present 

Age deprec. condition 

years, per cent, per cent. 

Cribbing and bulkheading 4.2 10.0 58.0 

Howe truss bridges 5.0 10.0 50.0 

Log culverts 9.4 6.0 41.6 

Timber culverts 13.0 6.0 12.0 

Box drains 13.0 6.0 12.0 

Ties 4.3 12.5 46.3 

Rails, track fastenings, etc 8.0 2.5 80.0 

Fences 6.5 7.0 54.5 

Transportation dept. bldgs 3.5 3.0 89.5 

Road dept. bldgs 8.0 3.0 76.0 

Roundhouses and shops 5.5 3.0 83.5 

Fuel and water stations ... 80.0 

Shop tools and machinery 3.5 10.0 65.0 

Grain elevators 7.0 3.0 79.0 

Docks and wharves 7.0 3.0 79.0 

Other buildings 5.0 3.0 85.0 

Snow sheds 6.9 4.0 72.4 

The rate of depreciation of Fuel Stations was assumed at 3% ; 
"Water Stations at 2%%, the latter being lower because so much of 
the value exists in piping, reservoirs, etc. 

Equipment depreciation was put at 3.6% per annum. 

All other items were regarded as having suffered no depreciation. 
Grading was regarded as having actually appreciated 10% in value, 
due to the "seasoning" of the roadbed. This is equivalent to $1,280 
per mile, which was regarded as a liberal allowance for expenditures 
in track maintenance during the first few years after construc- 
tion, which might properly be charged to construction, although, 
in fact, they never are so charged in the company books. It also 
provides for the increased value of the roadbed due natural 
settlement. 

The actual cost of the equipment of the entire Great Northern Ry. 
system, as determined from the accounting records, was as follows, 
up to June 30, 1906 : 

Locomotives $10,020,193.14 

Passenger cars 4,070,424.68 

Freight cars 20,356,142.73 

"Work and miscellaneous 1,487,062.67 

Total $35,933,823.22 

Spokane Falls and Northern 190,742.00 

Grand total $36,124,565.22 

The actual original cost of the Spokane Falls & Northern equip- 
ment, as purchased by the Great Northern Ry., was not available, 
but was estimated to be $190,742, composed of the following items: 

Locomotives $ 71,500.00 

Passenger cars 33,500.00 

Freight cars 69,340.00 

"Work and miscellaneous 16,402.00 

Total $190,742.00 



1318 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

To arrive at the cost of reproducing the equipment new, present 
(1906) prices, were assumed and applied to all the locomotives and 
cars. This showed an increase of cost of about 15%, hence it was 
decided to add 15% to the original cost (as shown by the account- 
ing records) to obtain the cost of reproduction new. 

With the exception of the locomotives, the entire equipment was 
then prorated to the state of Washington on the ratio of the car 
mileage of the entire system to the car mileage of Washington. The 
work equipment was prorated on the basis of the miles of road 
operated. 

The cost of reproduction and the present value of the equip- 
ment for the state of Washington were estimated to be as follows : 

Cost of Present 

Reproduction "Value. 

Locomotives $1,334,740.70 $ 876,779.33 

Passenger cars 715,395.92 494,404.42 

Freight cars 2,320,036.29 1,635,410.98 

Work and miscellaneous 199,451.19 147,152.36 

Total $4,569,624.10 $3,213,747.09 

The present value (second-hand value) was not ascertained by a 
field inspection, which is practically impossible of satisfactory ac- 
complishment anyway, but by determining the average age of each 
kind of equipment and multiplying that age in years by 3.6%, to 
arrive at the percentage of depreciation suffered. 

Mr. Gillette's studies of the equipment records indicated to him 
that the average locomotive or car could not be expected to have a 
life exceeding 28 years, and that it would therefore be liberal to 
the railway to allow an annual depreciation of only 3.6% in arriving 
at the present value. He selected the straight line formula, rather 
than the sinking fund formula, for estimating depreciation. 

In determining the average age of locomotives the standard price 
of each locomotive was multiplied by its age. The sum of these 
products was divided by the total cost of the locomotives to secure 
the average age. It would be manifestly incorrect to use the actual 
average age obtained by dividing the sum of the ages by the total 
number of locomotives, for locomotives differ so in value that the 
"weighted average" must be obtained. In like manner the age of 
all rolling stock was determined. It will be noted that there was an 
average depreciation of 29.67% (since the condition was 70.33%). 
Hence the average weighted age of all equipment was 29.67 -^ 3.6 = 
S.24 years. The rolling stock on the Spokane Falls & Northern 
was all 10 years old, and on the rest it was as follows: 

Locomotives 9.5 years 

Passenger cars 8.5 " 

Freight cars 7.4 " 

Work and miscellaneous 7.0 " 

The cost of reproduction of the Great Northern, per "mile of 
line," is given in Table XV. 



RAILWAYS. 1319 

Table XV. — Cost of Reproduction of Great Northern Rt. in 

Washington, as Estimated by H. P. Gillette. 

Per mile 
of line.* 

1. Engineering $ 1,406 

2. Right of way 22,317 

3. Clearing and grubbing 914 

4. Grading 12,550 

5. Tunnels 5,559 

6. Masonry 1,030 

7. Cribbing and bulkheading 489 

8. Bridges and culverts 5,024 

9. Ties 1,870 

10. Rails 5,126 

11. Track fastenings 1,001 

12. Frogs and switches 107 

13. Ballast 1,148 

14. Tracklaying and surfacing 872 

15. Fencing right of way 105 

16. Crossings, cattle guard and signs 242 

17. Telegraph lines 74 

18. Transportation department buildings 1,284 

19. Road department buildings 125 

20. Roundhouses and shops 391 

21. Fuel and water stations 310 

22. Shop tools and machinery 236 

23. Grain elevators 163 

24. Docks and wharves 845 

25. Other buildings and structures 314 

26. Snow protection 282 

27. Legal and general expense 401 

28. Interest during construction 2,098 

29. Stores on hand 470 

Total of Items 1 to 29 $66,753 

30. Equipment 5,950 

Grand total $72,703 

*There are 1.244 miles of track per mile of line; hence multiply 
by 0.8 to get cost per mile of track. 

During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1906, there were 479,- 
847,387 ton-miles of freight carried over the Great Northern witliin 
the state of Washington. The freight car mileage was 33,428,695 
car-miles in Washington, or 9.681% of the car-mileage of the entire 
Great Northern system. 

Cost of the Northern Pacific Railway (1,645 Miles) In the State 
of Washington.* — This issue contains data relating to the Northern 
Pacific Ry., data that were submitted as exhibits by Mr. H. P. 
Gillette in his testimony at the hearings before the Railroad Com- 
mission, but not printed in the "findings," which contain only the 
conclusions as to costs reached by the commission after hearing all 
the evidence. 

Work was begun on the Northern Pacific in Washington in 1879, 
and the major part of the construction of the main line was done 
in the early 80's. The task of a'scertaining the original cost of the 
Northern Pacific was complicated not only by the age of the rec- 



*Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 12, 1910. 



1320 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ords but by the purchase of a number of important branch lines. 
The purchase prices were available, but it was exceedingly desirable 
to arrive at the actual cost to the builders of those branches. This 
was determined with considerable accuracy by securing construction 
quantities from old engineering records and applying prices current 
at the time of construction. The total original cost of main line and 
branches in Washington was found to be about $64,000,000, including 
improvements and betterments. Of this total 80% was ascertained 
with great accuracy from the accounting records. Of the remain- 
ing 20% fully half was determined wltli almost as great accuracy 
from old engineering records, leaving onlj- about 10% to be estimated 
by field inspection. 

It has been repeatedly stated that the original cost plus im- 
provements can be ascertained for very few railways in America. 
Doubtless this assertion has deterred other railway commissions 
from even attempting to secure the original cost. The facts are, 
however, that of the entire railway values in Washington, not 
much more than 5% were such that, the original cost plus improve- 
ments could not be found. Mere age of construction has less to do 
with the difficulty of arriving at original costs than is commonly 
supposed. The greatest difficulty exists where purchases of lines 
have been made without transfer of the construction ledgers from 
the original owners to the purchasers. In many instances such 
transfers of ledgers are made, and in nearly all cases transfers of 
cross section books and other engineering records are made. The 
importance of securing the original itemized costs plus itemized costs 
of improvements cannot be overestimated. The conflicting testimony 
of experts in court is the bane of a judge's life, but with actual 
original costs as a basis there is not great difficulty in determining 
costs of reproduction, for wages and prices are a matter of record 
and the increase or decrease in the value of any item of railroad 
construction is readily ascertained. 

The following is a summary of the mileage of the Northern Pa- 
cific railway in Washington up to June 30, 1906 : 

Miles. 

Main line 658.73 

Branch lines (incl. Wash, and Col. Rivers) . . . 986.53 

Total lines 1,615.26 

Second track, main line 41.65 

Spurs 117.59 

Yard tracks and sidings 400.75 

Total track. 2,205.25 

In the findings of the Railroad Commission the following mileage 
was assigned to the Northern Pacific : 

Miles. 

Main line 687.68 

Branches and spurs 911. 74 

Total lines 1.629.42 



RAILWAYS. 1321 

However, we shall use the mileage determined by Mr. Gillette — 
namely: 1,645 miles of line — since the following costs are based 
upon that mileage. 

The original cost of the Northern Pacific in Washington plus im- 
provements and betterments up to June 30, 1906, as determined by 
Mr. Gillette, was as given in Table XVI. In using the last column 

of this table it should be remembered that there were 1.34 miles of 

all tracks to each "mile of line" ; hence to arrive at the cost per 
mile of track, divide the items in the last column by 1.34. 

Table XVI. — Original Cost of the Northern Pacific Railway in 
Washington, Plus Improvements. 

(1,645 miles of line.) 

Per 

Total. mile. 

1. Engineering $ 2,907,344.26 § 1,768 

2. Right of way 1,796,272.00 1,092 

3. Real estate 1,360,895.38 827 

4. Clearing and grubbing 1,213,770.19 738 

5. Grading 15,589,712.88 9,479 

6. Tunnels 974,519.99 590 

7. Bridges, trestles and culverts 7,879,328.94 4,790 

8. Masonry 156,823.46 95 

9. Ties 2,278,007.25 1,385 

10. Rails 8,520,625.03 5,182 

11. Track fastenings 1,063,620.96 647 

12. Frogs and switches 255,243.07 155 

13. Tracklaying and surfacing 1,669,691.18 1,015 

14. Ballast 1,524,759.29 929 

15. Station buildings and fixtures 1,477,207.49 897 

16. Engine houses and turntables 246,663.97 150 

17. Engine and car shops 849,340.77 516 

18. Shop machinery and tools 294,507.95 179 

19. Water stations 325,042.66 198 

20. Fuel stations 79,544.48 47 

21. Fencing right of way 273,067.50 166 

22. Snow fences, etc 130,494.72 79 

23. Stock yards 31,064.11 19 

24. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 101,860.54 62 

25. Interlocking and signal apparatus 44,706.61 27 

26. Docks, wharves and coal bunkers 1,015,566.29 617 

27. Transfer boats and barges 31,662.70 19 

28. Section and tool houses 122,352.50 74 

29. Miscellaneous structures 1,179,108.09 717 

30. Telegraph lines 207,361.48 126 

31. Transportation charges and rent of equip- 

ment 1,756,796.39 1,068 

32. Operating expenses 261,910.26 159 

33. Construction equipment 63,743.75 39 

34. General expense 640,744.02 390 

35. Interest and discount 7,173,190.53 4,360 

36. Legal expense asn'oJo'fit ?«! 

37. Undistributed expense 480,21<J.6^ <J9i 



k 



Total $63,979,772.61 ?38,895 

38. Equipment (rolling stock) 11,478,121.38 6,978 

Grand total $75,457,893.99 $45,873 



1322 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Of this $63,979,772 cost of construction, $5,896,735 was spent for 
"improvements and betterments" between the years 1896 and 1906. 
The corresponding improvement expenditures prior to that time 
(charged to "Construction B") were $2,951,972, making a total of 
$8,848,707 spent for improvements. 

It will be noted that Item 1, Engineering, amounts to nearly 5% 
of the total cost exclusive of equipment. This very high percentage 
was due to several factors. The explorations for a pass through 
the Cascade Mountains were made at an early date when little was 
definitely known about their topography and that exploration alone 
cost $300,000. The engineering on the early branch lines cost 6% of 
the $11,400,000 spent in building them, due in part to slow progress 
of work in those early days. A very considerable part of the early 
Northern Pacific work was done by company labor, which added 
not only to the expenditures for engineering and supervision, but also 
made the entire cost of the work greater than it would have been 
had it been done by contract. 

Items 2 and 3 are small, because nearly all the right of way was 
given by the government. But as a matter of fact it should be a 
trifle higher than given in Table XVI, to provide for the unascer- 
tainable original cost of right of way of about 350 miles of branch 
lines. 

Item 31, Transportation Charges and Rent of Equipment, relates 
to the book charges for hauling construction materials over the N. P. 
lines. Under a proper system of accounting this item would have 
been distributed to the materials themselves. 

Item 32, Operating Expense, relates to the cost of operating 
freight and passenger trains over the lines before they were formally 
transferred to the operating department. 

Item 34, General Expense, was practically 1% of the total con- 
struction cost. 

On the early construction work, involving some $30,000,000, this 
item of general expense was nearly 1%%. 

Item 35, Interest and Discount, is inordinately high. It consists 
mostly of discount on the bonds. In fact the first $22,400,000 ex- 
pended, more than $5,900,000 was charged to interest and discount, 
or nearly 27% of the total. Hence no general conclusions can be 
drawn from this item. . 

Item 36, Legal Expanse, does not appear in any of the accounts 
except for a small branch line, where it amounted to nearly 1 
per cent of the cost of that branch. 

item 37, Undistributed Expense, relates to certain items which 
were so entered that they could not be prorated to Washington under 
any definite item, and were consequently grouped here. 

The cost of reproducing (new) the Northern Pacific Ry. in Wash- 
ington, as estimated by Mr. Gillette, is given in Table XVII, the 
values of right of way and land being those finally determined by 
the Railroad Commission. 



RAILWAYS. 1323 

Table XVII. — Cost of Reproducing the Northern Pacific Rail- 
way IN Washington, as Estimated by H. P. Gillette. 
(1,645 miles of line.) 

1. Engineering, 5% of Items 3 to 27 $ 2,510,580 23 

2. Right of Way, etc. : 

Terminal land, Seattle 13 038 jyg 50 

Terminal land, Tacoma '.'.'.'.'.'. Tiessiooe'.OO 

Terminal land, Spokane 5 306 455 qo 

Terminal land, Everett .\[\ 'seeisSo'.OO 

Termmal land, Bellmgham 215 330 00 

Right of way and other station groun.ls .'.'.* 6,2981364.50 

Total right of way, etc $~3'2,862,872.00 

3. Clearing and Grubbing : 

Clearing, 9,445 acres, at $100.00 $ 944 500 00 

Grubbing, 16,542 stations, at $22.00 330'84o'oo 

Extra trees cut, 4,942, at $2.00 .' . 996400 

Six branch lines (from acctg. records) 117811 04 

Improvements (from acctg. records) '. 24'069!4g 

Total clearing and grubbing $ 1,427,184.52 

4. Grading: 

Earth excavation, 18,566,958 cu. yds., at $0.22 $ 4 084 730 76 

Earth embank, (barrow), 3,265,120 cu. yds., at $0.22. '718326 20 

Unclassified, 318,512 cu. yds., at $0.50 159256 00 

Cement gravel, 3,483,838 cu. yds., at $0.40 1 393'535'''0 

Loose rock, 1,321,720 cu. yds., at $0.50 '660860 00 

Solid rock, 1,735,503 cu. yds., at $1.10 1 9090^;^ ?f> 

Overhaul, 13,767,359 cu. yds. 100 ft., at $0.01 '13767^^9 

Riprap, 186,064 cu. yds., at $1.10 204'670 40 

Slope wall, 3,350 cu. yds. at $2.50 fi\7K no 

Log cribs, 882,632 lin. ft. logs, at $0.16 141*221 i? 

Timber cribs, 127,774 ft. B. M., at $26.00 3'322 12 

Six branch lines (cost from acctg. records) 1,113*697 75 

S. L. S. & E. (estimated from field inspection) .... ' 88000 00 

Improvements and betterments (from acctg. records). 1, 988*673^81 

Total grading- $ 12,543,395.25 

5. Tunnels : 

Stampede, 9,844 lin. ft. (masonry lined), at $180.00..$ 1,771,920.00 
Seattle, one-half interest, 5,141 (dbl. track in earth), 

at 1/3 of $360.00 925,380.00 

Other tunnels lined with concrete, 2,570 ft., at $110.00 282,700 00 

Other tunnels lined with timber, 2,329 ft., at $70.00. . 163,030.00 

Total tunnels $ 3,143,030.00 

6. Bridges, Trestles and Culverts : 

Howe Tusses and Combination. 

30-ft. spans, 1 at $1,200.00 $ 1,200 00 

50-ft. spans, 4 at $1,600.00 6,400.00 

60-ft. spans, 8 at $1,800.00 14,400.00 

70-ft. spans, 1 at $2,000.00 2,000.00 

80-ft. spans, 3 at $2,300.00 6,900.00 

90-ft. spans, 1 at $3,000.00 3,000 00 

100-ft. spans, 15 at $4,000.00 60,000 00 

110-ft. spans, 1 at $4,500.00 4,500.00 

120-ft. spans, 3 at $5,500.00 16,500 00 

130-ft. spans, 1 at $6,200.00 6,200.00 

140-ft. spans, 5 at $7,000.00 35,000.00 

150-ft. spans, 19 at $7,500.00 142,500.00 

13 miscellaneous spans (2,390 lin. ft. at $60.00) 143,400 00 

8 draw spans, 1,625 lin. ft. at $60.00 97,500.00 

Total Howe trusses and combination spans. . . .$ 539,500.00 



1324 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Pile and frame trestles (44,130 M at $30,000, and 
1,304,533 lin. ft. piles at 0.25 ; av. height trestle 

19 ft.), 168,978 lin. ft. at $10.50 1,774,269.00 

Trestles filled with earth (139,862 lin. ft.). 5,988,784 

cu. yds. at $0.20 1,197,756.80 

Steel Bridges: 

Spokane River at Trent $ 40,000.00 

Snake River, Ainsworth 1,100,000.00 

Columbia River, Kennewick 500,000.00 

Tacoma Channel 105,000.00 

Chehalis River 100,000.00 

Walla Walla River, W. & C. R 43,190.00 

Three plate girders (260 ft.) and concrete ret. wall 

(350 ft), N. & C. R 30,200.00 

Steel in other bridges, 19,516,343 lbs. at 0.0475 927,026.44 

Masonry abutments and piers for 215 spans 537,500.00 

Total steel bridges $ 3,382,916.44 

Culverts : 

Log culverts, 264,943 lin. ft. logs, at $0.16 $ 42,390.88 

Timber culverts, 5,015,024 ft. B. M. at $26.00 130,390.62 

Box drains, 336,720 ft. B. M. at $26.00 8,754.72 

Total log and timber culverts $ 181,536.25 

Concrete arch, 11,510 cu. yds. at $9.00 103,590.00 

Stone drains, 6,731 cu. yds. at $8.00 53,848.00 

Total masonry culverts $ 157,438.00 

Vitrified Pipe: 

4-in., 62 lin. ft .at $0.25 $ 15.50 

10-in., 50 lin. ft. at 0.45 22.50 

12-in., 1,229 lin. ft. at 0.50 614.50 

15-in., 226 lin. ft. at 0.75 169.50 

16-in., 137 lin. ft. at 0.80 109.60 

18-in., 3,929 lin. ft. at 1.30 5,107.70 

20-in., 168 lin. ft. at 1.70 285.60 

22-in., 109 lin. ft. at 2.00 218.00 

24-in., 24,895 lin. ft. at 2.60 664,727.00 

30-in., 2,845 lin. ft. at 3.50 9,957.50 

36-in., 276 lin. ft. at 4.50 1,242.00 

Total vitrified pipe culverts. . . . $ 682,469.40 

Cast-iron Pipe: 

6-in., 300 lin. ft. at $1.00 $ 300.00 

8-in., 24 lin. ft. at 1.50 36.00 

12-in., 892 lin. ft. at 3.00 2,676.00 

14-in., 27 lin. ft. at 3.50 94.50 

16-in., 732 lin. ft. at 3.75 2,745.00 

18-in., 5,095 lin. ft. at 4.00 20,380.00 

20-in., 889 lin. ft. at 4.75 '. . 4,222.75 

24-in., 28,411 lin. ft. at 6.00 170,466.00 

30-in., 2,432 lin. ft. at 7.00 17,024.00 

36-in., 4,453 lin. ft. at 9.00 40,122.00 

42-in., 663 lin. ft. at 13.00 8,619.00 

48-in., 1,028 lin. ft. at 18.00 18,468.00 

54-in., 516 lin. ft. at 21.00 10,836.00 

60-in., 198 lin. ft. at 25.00 ■ 

36-in. corrugated iron, 900 ft. at $3.00 4,950.00 

Total iron pipe culverts 2,700.00 

Masonry walls, etc 303,639.25 

Total bridges, trestles and culverts $ 7,776,348.11 



1 



RAILWAYS. 1325 

7. Ties: 

(2,205.24 miles at 3,000), 6,615,750, at $0.50 $ 3,307,875.00 

8. Rails: 

221,367 tons at $40.00 $ 8,854,680.00 

9. Track Fastenings : 

Spikes (6,500 lbs. per mi.), 14,334,125 lbs. at $0.028..$ 401,355.50 
Angle bars (17,600 lbs. per mi.), a8,S12,400 lbs., 

at $0,025 970,310.00 

Bolts (1,800 lbs. per mi.), 3,969,450 lbs. at $0.032... 127,022.00 

Rail braces, 838,950 at $0.10 83,895.00 

Tie plates, 1,525,000 at $0.08 122,000.00 

Total track fastenings $ 1,704,582.90 

1 0. Frogs and Switches : 

Switches, 2,850 at $80.00 $ 228,000.00 

11. Ballast: 

1,645 miles at $1,000.00 $ 1,645,000.00 

,560 miles at $600.00 336,000.00 

Total ballast $ 1,981,000.00 

12. Tracklaying and Surfacing: 

2,205.25 miles at $700.00........ $ 1,543,675.00 

13. Fencing Right of Way: . 

From accounting records plus 20 7o $ 227,682.00 

14. Snow Fences and Sheds: 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 156,595.00 

15. Crossings, Cattle Guards and Signs: 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 122,232.00 

1 6. Telegraph Lines : 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 248,835.00 

17. Station Buildings and Fixtures: 

Seattle terminal station ( 1/2 interest) $ 280,000.00 

110 combination depots (frame), 167,062 sq. ft. at 

$1.50 250,593.00 

100 passenger depots (frame), 121,684 sq. ft. at $1.25 152,105.00 

Spokane passenger depot (brick), 8,050 sq. ft. at $4.00 32,200.00 

31 freight depots (frame), 591,050 sq. ft. at $1.00... 591,050.00 

3 freight depots (brick), 81,320 sq. ft. at $1.50 121,980.00 

"Warehouses (frame), 376,741 sq. ft. at $1.40 527,437.40 

720 wood platforms, 1,006,790 sq. ft. at $0.10 100,679.00 

15 cinder platforms, 26,492 sq. ft. at $0.06 1,589.52 

2 cement platforms, 34,631 sq. ft. at $0.15 5,194.65 

198 water closets, 10,666 sq. ft. at $1.00 10,666.00 

Track scales, 28 at $1,300.00 36,400.00 

Total station buildings $ 2,109,894.57 

18. Engine Houses and Turntables: 

8 engine houses (frame), 27,686 sq. yds. at $0.75 $ 20,764.50 

Engine houses (frame), 20 stalls $900.00 18,000.00 

Engine hou.ses (brick), 71 stalls at $1,500.00 106,500.00 

Turntables, 28 at $2,800.00 78,400.00 

6 ash pits, 277 lin. ft. at $15.00 4,155.00 



L 



Total engine houses and turntables $ 227,819.50 



1326 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

19. Engine and Car Shops: 

43 machine shops and car houses (frame), 114,523 

sq. ft. at $0.50 $ 57,261.50 

39 machine shops and car houses (brick), 299,685 

sq. ft. at $2.90 869,086.50 

Transfer tables, 2 at $1,500.00 3,000.00 

83 sand, coal, wood, oil and store houses, 20,245 sq. 

ft. at $0.50 10,122.50 

3 bins, 2,053 sq. ft. at $0.25... 513.25 

Total engine and car shops $ 939,983.75 

20. Shop Machinery: 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 353,408.00 

21. Water Stations: 

91 tanks, 41 pump houses, etc. (from accounting rec- 
ords plus 20%) $ 390,050.00 

22. Fuel Sta,tions: 

BYom accounting records plus 20% $ 95,453.00 

23. Stock Yards: 

63 yards, 603,397 sq. ft. at $0.05 $ 30,169.85 

24. Interlocking and Signal Apparatus : 

From accounting records plus 20% 53,648.00 

25. Docks, Wharves and Coal Bunkers: 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 1,216,680.00 

26. Section and Tool Houses: 

124 section houses, 89,866 sq. ft. at $1.25 $ 112,332.50 

80 bunk houses, 29,430 sq. ft. at $0.70 20,601.00 

147 tool houses, 27,839 sq. ft. at $0.50 13,919.50 

Total section and tool houses $ 146,853.00 

27. Miscellaneous Structures : 

From accounting records plus 20% $ 1,382,530.00 

28. Legal and General Expense: 

1% of Items 3 to 27 inclusive $ 502,116.04 

29. Interest During Construction: 

5% of Items 1 to 28 (except Item 2) $ 2,661,215.04 

30. Stores on Hand $ 530,677.00 

Total of Items 1 to 30 inclusive $ 89,279,064.76 

31. Equipment: 

Locomotives $ 4,242,950.51 

Passenger 1,447,593.23 

Freight 8,040,254.92 

Work and miscellaneous 603,578.55 

Total equipment $ 14,334,377.21 

Grand total of Items 1 to 31 inclusive $103,613,441.97 

It will' be noted that Item 1, Engineering, was estimated at 5%, 
instead of the Sy2% which was used for the Great Northern. Since 
engineering had actually cost the Northern Pacific 5%, Mr. Gillette 
considered it fair to allow . that amount, particularly in view of the 
fact that there was a large mileage of cheap branch lines where the 
item of engineering would form a larger percentage than on main 
line construction. The Railroad Commission, however, adopted a 



RAILWAYS. 1327 

uniform 3%% for all the railways in the state as a fair allowance 
for engineering. 

Item 2. Land, does not include any land not actually used or 
needed for railway purposes in the immediate future. The North- 
ern Pacific Ry. has a right of way 400 ft. wide on much of its line, 
given to it by the government. The Railroad Commission allowed 
a 100 ft. strip as being all that is actually needed for railway 
purposes, except in towns and cities. In addition to the lands owned 
and used for terminals, there was land of the following value, which 
was not included in Item 2 because it is not needed for railway pur- 
poses at present : 

Spokane $ 1,194,156 

Tacoma 4,980,417 

Seattle 9,250,000 

Total $15,424,573 

The value of the right of way land not needed for railway pur- 
poses was determined to be $913,184, and is not included in Item 2. 
Item 4, Grading, is equivalent to the following yardage per mile 
of line : 

Cu. yds. per mile. 

Earth excavation 11,325 

Earth embankment (borrow) 1,990 

Unclassified '. 195 

Cement gravel 2,125 

Loose rock 805 

Solid rock 1,055 

Total 17,495 

6 branch lines (unclassified) 1,700 

S. L. S. & E. (unclassified) 130 

Improvements (unclassified) 4,545 

Trestles filled (Iteni 6) 3,650 

Grand total 26,520 

The items of yardage in the "6 branch lines" and of yardage in 
"improvements" are estimated by assuming that the unclassified 
yardage on these branch lines cost 40 cts. per cu. yd. and that the 
yardage in improvements cost 30 cts. per cu. yd. Since most of the 
improvement yardage was bank widening, the lower unit price for 
this unclassified work is justified. By referring to our issue of 
Dec. 8 it will be seen that the yardage per mile on the Great 
Northern was 28,570 cu. yds. per mile. 

Table XVIII gives a summary of Mr. Gillette's estimate of the 
cost of reproduction (new) and the present value (second hand) of 
the Northern Pacific in Washington. The annual rates of depreci- 
ation of the different classes of structures and of equipment were 
the same as those used in calculating the present value of the Great 
Northern. 



1328 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Tablb XVIII. — Cost of Reproduction and Present Value of the 

Northern Pacific Ry. in Washington. 

(1,645 Miles.) 

Cost Condition 

of reproduc- per Present 

• tionnew. cent. value. 

1. Enginering $ 2,510,580 100.0 

2. Right of way, etc 32,862,872 100.0 

3. Clearing and grubbing 1,427,185 100.0 

4. Grading 12,543,395 110.0 

5. Tunnels 3,143,030 100.0 

6. Bridges, trestles and culverts 7,776,348 84.7 

7. Ties 3,307,875 50.0 

8. Rails 8,854,680 80.0 

9. Track fastenings 1,704,583 80.0 

10. Frogs and switches 228,000 80.0 

11. Ballast 1,981,000 100.0 

12. Tracklaying and surfacing. . 1,543,675 100.0 

13. Fencing right of way 227.682 55.0 

14. Snow fences and sheds 156,595 72.0 

15. Crossings, cattle guards and 

signs 122,232 55.0 

16. Telegraph lines 248,835 75.0 

17. Station building and fix- 

tures 2,109,895 81.5 

18. Engine houses and turntables 227,819 68.2 

19. Engine and car shops 939,984 66.4 

20. Shop machinery 353,408 65.0 

21. Water stations 390,050 65.5 

22. Fuel stations 95,453 77.5 

23. Stock yards 30,170 45.5 

24. Interlocking and signal ap- 

paratus 53,648 85.0 

25. Docks, wharves and coal 

bunkers 1,216,680 75.0 

26. Section and tool houses..^.. 146,853 61.0 

27. Miscellaneous structures.'.. 1,382,530 61.0 

28. Legal and general expense . . 502.116 100.0 

29. Interest during construction 2,661,215 100.0 

30. Stores on hand 530,677 100.0 

Total of Items 1 to 30....$ 89,279,065 $83,363,454 

31. Equipment 14,334,377 67.5+ 9,677,947 

Grand total $103,613,442 $93,041,401 



RAILWAYS. 1329 

Table XIX. — Cost of Reproduction of the Northern Pacific in 

Washington. 

Per mile 
of line.* 

1. EJngineering $ 1,526 

2. Right of way, etc 19,980 

3. Clearing and grubbing 867 

4. Grading 7,626 

5. Tunnels 1,911 

6. Bridges, trestles and culverts 4,728 

7. Ties 2,011 

8. Rails 5,384 

9. Track fastenings 1,036 

10. Frogs and switches 139 

11. Ballast 1,206 

12. Tracklaying and surfacing 938 

13. Fencing right of way 138 

14. Snow fences and sheds 95 

15. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 74 

16. Telegraph lines 151 

17. Station buildings and fixtures 1,283 

18. Engine houses and turntables 138 

19. Engine and car shops 571 

20. Shop machinery 215 

21. "Water stations 237 

22. Fuel stations 58 

23. Stock yards 18 

24. Interlocking and signal apparatus 33 

25. Docks, wharves and coal bunkers 740 

26. Section and tool houses 89 

27. Miscellaneous structures 840 

28. Legal and general expense 305 

29. Interest during construction 1,618 

30. Stores on hand 322 

Total of Items 1 to 30 $54,277 

31. Equipment 8,715 

Grand total $62,992 

*There are 1.34 miles of track per mile of line. 

The actual cost of the eauipment on the entire Northern Pacific 
system, up to June 30, 1906, was as follows: 

Locomotives $12,977,823.23 

Passenger 5,074,739.99 

Freight 21,436,740.43 

Work and miscellaneous 1,904,185.11 

Trust equipment 3,032,526.48 

Discount and commission 939,858.42 

Total equipment $45,365,882.66 

The above does not include the equipment of the Washington and 
Columbia River Ry., which was estimated by Mr. Gillette to have 
cost as follows: 

Locomotives $ 60,000 

Passenger 24,000 

Freight 62,000 

Work 1,200 

Total $147,200 



1330 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the locomotives in Washington was based upon the 

cost of those actually used in that state. The cost of passenger 
and freight cars was apportioned to Washington according to car 
mileage. The cost of work equipment was apportioned according 
to mileage of railway line operated. On this basis the following 
costs were arrived at for the state of Washington : 

Original Cost Present 

cost, reproduction. value. 

Locomotives 3,689,522 4,242,950 2,715,488 

Passenger 1,598,184 1,447,593 868,556 

Freight 5,665,564 8,040,255 5,668,380 

Work and miscellaneous 624,851 603,579 425,523 

Total $11,478,121 $14,334,377 $9,677,947 

The "cost of reproduction" was determined by adding 15% to the 
original cost to provide for increased prices. The "present value" 
was determined by deducting from the "cost of reproduction" a de- 
preciation of 3.6% per annum. 

In this connection it is interesting to note that the report of the 
Northern Pacific Ry. to the Interstate Commerce Commission for 
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1906, gave the value of the equipment 
at $32,044,260, or about 70% of its original cost. Mr. Gillette's esti- 
mate of the "present" value was 67.6% of the original cost, which 
shows that the Northern Pacific Ry. had charged off for depreciation 
only slightly less than Mr. Gillette has estimated. 

It is also worthy of comment that many railway engineers have 
erred in their estimates of the cost of equipping railways, largely be- 
cause they have taken the total cost of equipment given in the 
Interstate Commerce Reports and have divided it by the total 
mileage of railway lines. It has not been generally known that 
the costs given in the Interstate Commerce Commission reports are 
depreciated, or second hand, values. 

In roughly estimating the probable cost of equipment of a steam 
railway line the proper method is obviously to base the estimate 
upon the ton-miles (or car-miles) of freight per year per mile of line. 
In Engineering-Contracting^ June 19, 1907, the freight carried per 
mile of railway in America was shown to have been 830,000 ton- 
miles in 1904. Since the Northern Pacific carried 845,000 ton-miles 
in 1906 per mile of line in Washington, it may be regarded as nearly 
typical of the average American road, so far as freight is concerned. 
On the other hand, its passenger traffic is considerably less dense 
than that of the average American road. It is safe to say, there- 
fore, that the cost of the equipment of the Northern Pacific is fairly 
typical of the average railway in America. Roughly speaking, then, 
the cost of equipment of an American railway is $10 per 1,000 ton- 
miles carried per annum per mile of line. 

During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1906, there were 1,390,064,- 
467 ton-miles of freight carried over the Northern Pacific within the 
state of Washington, or 845,000 ton -miles per mile of line. This 
was almost 50% more per mile of line than was carried by the Great 
Northern, which accounts for the higher cost of the Northern Pacific 
equipment per mile of line. 



RAILWAYS. 1331 

In drawing conclusions relative to the probable average cost of 
railway lines throughout the country, serious errors have been made 
by considering only the costs in one or two states. It will be noted 
that the cost of terminal lands in Washington is enormous when 
charged entirely to the road mileage within that state. In the find- 
ings of the Washington Railroad Commission it was determined 
that 56.8% of the entire value of lands used by the whole Northern 
Pacific Ry. system exists in the state of Washington. 

The Railroad Commission also determined that G2.3% of the entire 
cost of tunnels and 31.6% of the entire cost of bridges on the N. T. 
system is found in Washington. 

These figures show clearly the rugged character of much of the 
country traversed by the N. P. in Washington. Unquestionably the 
cost of its lines in that state far exceeds the cost in any other state 
through which it oasses. The same also is true of the Great 
Northern. 

Cost of 500 Miles of the O. R. & N. — My appraisal of the Oregon 
Railroad and Navigation Co. lines in the state of Washington gave, 
briefly, the following results : 

On June 30, 1907, there were 501 miles of single track main line 
and branches, and 68 miles of sidings and yard track. The con- 
struction period was from 1875 to 1899, but most of the mileage 
was built in the 80's. 

The following was the original cost of construction per mile of 
single track main line and branches (501 miles) : 

Per mile. 

1. Engineering $ 623 

2. Superintendence and inspection ; 78 

3. Right of way 400 

4. Lands and depot grounds 1,884 

5. Grading 6,603 

6. Clearing and grubbing 65 

7. Tunnels 260 

8. Bridges, trestles and culverts 2,518 

9. Ties 1,397 

10. Rails 5,589 

11. Track fastenings 684 

12. Frogs and switches 68 

13. Ballast 526- 

14. Tracklaying and surfacing 798 

15. Fencing, crossings, cattle guards and signs 118 

16. Telegraph lines 4 

17. Station buildings and fixtures 345 

18. Section houses 141 

19. Engine houses and shops 190 

20. Turntables 50 

21. Shop machinery and tools 10 

22. Water stations 265 

23. Miscellaneous structures 39 

24. Legal expenses 6 

25. Interest and discount 575 

26. General expense 106 

27. Taxes 8 

28. Miscellaneous, undistributed 581 

Total original construction $23,931 

Betterments, undistributed . . 2,388 

Grand total $26,319 



1332 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

My estimate of the cost of reproducticn new was as follows per 
mile of single track main line and branches (501 miles) : 

Per mile. 

1. Engineering (3% % of Items 2 to 21) $ 706 

2. Grading 6,886 

3. Tunnels 260 

4. Bridges, trestles and culverts 2,782 

5. Ties 1,666 

6. Rails 4,515 

7. Track fastenings 919 

8. Frogs and switches 76 

9. Ballast 721 

10. Tracklaying and surfacing 828 

11. Fencing right of way 255 

12. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 44 

13. Interlocking and signal apparatus 48 

14. Telegraph lines 30 

15. Station buildings and fixtures 283 

16. Shops, roundhouses and turntables 165 

17. Shop machinery and tools 46 

18. Water stations 166 

19. Fuel stations 52 

20. Storage warehouses 112 

21. Miscellaneous structures 307 

22. Taxes 8 

23. Section equipment 22 

24. Legal and general expense (1% of Items to 

to 22) 202 

25. Interest (5% of Items 1 to 24) 1,055 

26. Stores on hand 481 

Total $22,635 

27. Right of way and terminal grounds 4,487 

Total $27,122 

28. Equipment (rolling stock) 2,994 

Grand total $30,116 

For a more detailed statement of the foregoing items, consult the 
files of Engineering-Contracting, year 1910. 

Note that there were 68 miles of sidetracks in addition to the 
501 miles of main line. Hence the above costs per mile of main line 
should be divided by 1.136 to ascertain the cost per mile of track. 

Appraised Value of the Steam Railways of Wisconsin.* — In our 
issue of June 26, 1907, was published the appraised value of the 
railways of Wisconsin, as of June 30, 1903. The following is a 
brief summary of the last valuation, as of June 30, 1907, which was 
completed in December, 1908, under the direction of Prof. W. D. 
Pence, Engineer of the Wisconsin Tax Commission and of the 
Railroad Commission. Table I is a summary of the first and the 
last valuations. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 19, 1910. 



RAILWAYS. ■ 1333 

Table XX. — Comparison Between First and Fifth Wisconsin 
Steam Road Valuations. 

— Valuation as of date. — 
June 30, 1903. June 30, 1907. 
Number of railroad properties included. .. 4 7 52 

Total length, road mileage 6,656.88 7,090.39 

Cost of reproduction : 
Property, new total $205,760,519 $244,128,868 

Cost of reproduction : 
Existing condition, total 169,758,518 196,239,314 

Reproduction cost per mile of line : 

Property new 30.900 34.400 

Present value per mile of line 25,500 27,700 

Per cent condition 82.5 80.3 

The mileage on June 30, 1907, was as follows: 

Main line 6,519.69 

Main line, joint, % interest 9.80 

Branch line 551.83 

Branch line, joint, Va interest 9.07 

Total main and branch line 7,090.39 

Second track 431.57 

Third track 40.62 

Fourth track 35.54 

Total "trackway" 7,598.12 

Spurs and sidings 2,523.33 

Spurs and siding joint, % interest 52.83 

Spurs and sidings joint, % interest 4.32 

Spurs and siding joint, % interest 0.29 

Crossovers 0.04 

Grand total track 10,178.93 

The total appraised values, new and in present (depreciated) con- 
dition, as of June 30, 1907, are as in Table XXI. 

Table XXI. — Valuation New and in Depreciated Condition of 
Wisconsin Railways. 

Cost of reproduction. 
Present 
New. condition. 

1. Right of way and station grounds $ 26,339,419 $ 26,339,419 

3.' Grading . . .'.'.'.'.'.\\'.'.'.'.'.'. '. '. '.'.'.'. '. '. '. '. '. 39,'39'l',367 39,V9V,367 

4. Tunnels 797,412 776,972 

5. Bridges, trestles and culverts 1«, 616, 486 14,688,887 

6. Cross ties and switch ties 11 181,399 5,826,021 

7. Rails 30,111,358 24,605,740 

8. Track fastenings 5,254,013 3,367,649 

9. Frogs, switches and crossings 1,179,056 743,079 

10. Ballast 5,768,084 3,969,476 

11. Track laying and surfacing 3,345,555 2,770,572 

12. Fencing 1,611,775 826,512 

13. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 440,896 269,880 

14. Interlocking and signal apparatus 613,354 538,801 

15. Telegraph lines 167,840 99,587 

16. Telephone lines and distribution system 89,639 81,439 

17. Station buildings and fixtures. 3,918,995 2,902,418 

18. Shops and round houses, power houses 

and car barns 3,892,882 3,048,497 

19. Tools 144,419 86,384 

20. Water stations 1,345,218 986,357 

21. Fu£l stations 466,745 351,432 

22. Grain elevators 826.706 612,171 

23. Warehouses 262,539 200,278 

24. Docks and wharves ■ 3,645,907 2,956,821 

25. Miscellaneous structures 2,106,101 1,409,949 

26. Sub-stations 45,130 44.119 

Totals of all the above items $161,562,235 $136,893,767 



1334 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

27. Engineering, superintendence, and 

legal expenses, 4.5% of all the above 

items 7,270,300 6,160,220 

28. Locomotives 11,531,174 7,331,573 

29. Passenger equipment 5,317,465 3,193,301 

30. Freight equipment 30,944,348 20,479,648 

31. Miscellaneous equipment 901,935 588,260 

32. Ferries and steamships 

33. Electric plants 161,476 146,114 

34. Shop machinery and tools 1,573,000 1,186,363 

Totals of all the above items $219,261,933 $175,979,252 

35. Freight on construction material, 0.7% 

of items 1.34 1,523,656 1,209,539 

36. Interest during construction, 3% ; Or- • 

ganization, ^ contingencies, 5.5%; in 

all, 2, of items 1.34 20,738,225 16,463,297 

37. Stores and supplies on hand for use 

in Wisconsin 2,605,054 2,587,226 



Totals ., $244,128,868 $196,239,314 



n% and 1.5%. 
29.5% and 10%. 

Includes dock property and all lines under construction. 
Dividing each of the items in the first column of Table XXI by 
7,090, we have the following cost per mile of roadbed: 

Per mile 
of roadbed. 

1. Right of way, etc $ 3,714 

2. Real estate 

3. Grading 5,554 

4. Tunnels 112 

5. Bridges, etc 2,625 

6. Ties 1,577 

7. Rails 4,246 

8. Track fastenings. 741 

9. Frogs, etc '. 166 

10. Ballast 813 

11. Track laying and surfacing 472 

12. Fencing 227 

13. Crossings, etc 62 

14. Interlocking and signal 86 

15. Telegraph 24 

16. Telephone - 13 

17. Station buildings 553 

18. .Shops and roundhouses 548 

19. Tools 20 

20. Water stations 189 

21. Fuel stations 66 

22. Grain elevators 121 

23. Warehouses 37 

24. Docks and wharves 514 

25. Miscellaneous structures 297 

26. Substations 6 

Total of above $22,783 



RAILWAYS. 1335 

27. Engineering 1,025 

28. Locomotives 1,625 

29. Passenger equipment 750 

30. Freight equipment 4,363 

31. Miscellaneous equipment 127 

32. Perries, etc 

33. Electric plants 23 

34. Shop machinery and tools 222 

Total of above $30,918 

35. Freight on construction materials 215 

36. Interest during construction, contingencies, 

etc 2,924 

37. Stores on hand 367 

Grand total $34,424 

Since there are 1.435 miles of track per mile of roadbed, each of 
the above items should be divided by 1.435 (or multiplied by 0.7) 
to obtain the cost per mile of track. For example, item 11, "Track 
laying and surfacing," is $472 per mile of roadbed, which is 
equivalent to 0.7 X $472 =: $331 per Tnile of track, which, by the 
way, is an exceedingly low estimate of cost. 

Cost per Mile of Railways in Wisconsin and Michigan.* — In the 
year 1900, Prof. Mortimer E. Cooley made an appraisal of all the 
steam railways in Michigan for the Board of State Tax Commis- 
sioners. A field inspection was made of every structure to deter- 
mine its "present value" expressed as a percentage of its value now. 
About 33,000 freight cars were inspected for the same purpose. By 
examining records of transfer of lands it was decided to use a factor 
of 2 to 2^4 by which to multiply the market value of adjacent 
property to obtain its "value for railway purposes." It is a well- 
known fact that a railway usually pays two to three times the 
ordinary market value of land in securing its right of way. 

Prof. Cooley did not secure the "original cost" of the railways, 
that is, he did not secure the cost as determined by an inspection of 
the railways' records ; but he made his own estimate of the "cost 
of reproduction" under the then (1900) existing conditions as to 
prices, wages, etc. An examination of his estimate leads us to think 
that it was, in many items, much too low, even though he added 
10% for contingencies. But the railways have, as yet, not fought 
the estimate, because it was made for taxation purposes, and the 
lower the estimate to the more to their liking. 

The Wisconsin appraisal was made by Prof. W. D. Taylor for 
the State Board of Assessment. He began this work in June, 1903, 
and made his final report 18 months later. Prof. Taylor pursued 
much the same plan as that pursued by Prof. Cooley, except that he 
required the railways themselves to submit first their own estimates 
of the cost of reproduction, which he subsequently checked, adding 
13%% to their appraisal. Of course the railways tried to keep 
their estimates as low as possible, for the reasons above given, and 
it is quite apparent that the estimates were too low, even after 
Prof. Taylor had added the 5%% for contingencies. 



* Engineering-Contracting, June 26, 1907. 



1336 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



X 
<D 

<D 

> 

a 

v 
to 

<0 

M 



^ X ■ 
aj o fe 
o t< P 

Wo a 

a3^J O 
D O o 

to o 3 



SrHr-lr-lrH tH 



ti-OO 
l>f-(rH 



;CTiOO<Ot-C-NNOOOTHi-(CTit-t--USOOasifl>000500 
•0503t-lOt-t-«D500r»HU5t-UJt-t-t-«D«Ot- t-"t- tO 



2 1 

15 § 



§5S 

o 



0) M ■OcoN0500t-t-0-*e^OOtOOsMOO-*MCOteMMOST-(«it-oO 
g Ctf-"oc-iOiHt--*e<ic<ic-0500t-eou5t-ix>co(Mtr-Tj<CT»e<5t-e<50ir3 

;3 _ « B 02 t- lO rH t- rH O Tf «0 Tj< iH ■* 00 eo lO N rH rH t- iH 



^t- 



Z>' 



y"-; t-OOMCOtDCOtDUSOOIMCOrHtOOlOMrHlOTftOUSlOMt-IO 
I M)ra^-Q5l0-*?CK505'*O00t-00(Me0C0e<lT-IOOmC0iH50iHt~C0 
5d^ O JSNCOOOOeOk^TjHr-lOrHMrHOOOOqT-ioOOOOoio 

" (1)<H 
O O 






52 



G Cy fH C^ ^7^ ' — I W ^ l-'^ L^* liNI f T— 1 lis I.KJ "^T" U-^ L 



-^-^IMt-H >H 



Ofe 



u 



vi'-; ■<!J<MOoost-lffll-^ooou5lo«lt>.^-^o■*oouo<^^t-0(^^■*TJ< 

i CS -2 .OOOm(ro«CaiMOT)<m-*i|:-THiHOU5COtOlOrH-*rHOOrH 
OJ-WOMMMOWOt^^-^criffqOC^T-HOOo'O'iHTHOOOOOOiH 

O O 



• 01 

• -o 

• CI 

• 3 
_: o 

s« 

o 

an 

02 

M C ij .S OJ 






to OJ 
0) 

H ta 



bsco CO 

fqotf 



o 



'd 

(3 
to =^ 
Wito 

"So 
to'S 



• to to • -to • 

• C 3 • • «J • 

-^^""■^ : 

, to (^ rtj (p TO . 

. -d o,.s 3 fl . 

. D .3' (U rt „ d 
. (p'o tm3_, 

• d mS'O "S o 



.c 



o 5t o) 



^"IIS^ 



lira's M).2So^ 

" 2 » fe -M ft ft-M 



oj.- OJ 






•;3^ to 
cij 0) g 



CO 


o 


01 


s 


> 


tn 


fc.-H 


cti 


10 


* 




^ 


3 


-O 


§ 


c c 


rt cs 



(3 






7Hei5M-*U550t-OOo>0,-IC<lCO-*mCDt-OOOJOr-l(MCOT)<m 
iHr-li-li-HTHrHi-lrHi-lTHffqcqirqCOirqW 



RAILWAYS. 



1337 



COrHasOCOCDOOOCviw 



^ 






t^^t^Tj*OC-OOOOi-* 



U5 O C^ (?5 M rH CD CO CD 00 



TJ«U5COCOOOOOIOCOOI>" 
-^ tH (35 O O O O C<i rH oi O 



n 1* ta o 
t-00005eol£DlOCqt- 
„WCOt- 05 eq b- tH M 



^■CO CO 



lOcciniMOcoc^b-csooo 

COOt^-C^JOOCDCDOOasCO 



1) ft 
am 






« o 

H 

a 3 



0*0110 

to <U"3 S 



g « jjj) a> .S X3 

O to <U M iH ^ 



bD 



0.5 ^ wS 

o n c! <i> "^ 
, ^ "u s 

tH e tH o-M 



^ 



«0t-0005O7-INC<5-*lO«0 
(MCClCM(MMcOCOeOCCCOCO 



O 

Eh 



o 


<0 


o 






6 


(V 

S 


ft 


ft 


OS 


3 

D* 


o 


<u 





c 

V 

u 



'^. ^h' 





f^ 


IC 


o 
o 


o 

CO 


o 
o 




IH 



< 
<! 

o 

w 

o 

M 

Q 
2 a) 

■«) a 

.^ 

M 

to 

o 
o 
m 









c 

6C»eo 
ot- 



to 





fes 


-*l 


o 


00 


o 


00 


o 


c^ 


o 




T-t 



3 ^ 



to 

Oooc- 
ocaco 
to - 

«h50 



l-v us o^ 

^ COM 

to e<r 



a « 
o 



!- 10 



03 

fcfl 

c 

O 

E-i og 
<u ft 

mm 






^ 
;:?; 



oo'd'-s 

to to'tJio 
aj to 2m 
C d S 

.C 05 o2 
Cd 0! T-t 



o 



O) 



-I-"-' q--' " o5C<i 

•CcS co^o.-SU*'© 

"o _ _ *j " c ji 



o 

a __ 

.Q ft 
^ 0) 



® 5 

-M Cg 
rrt'O 

•2s 



(dSp5 



+^--1.52 



ig^--»£lr 



c 5 6 2 

.'O „, oj m C , e aJ H 

-i^'S'S "Slip's 

ti Cfl m wj 10^ C to 02 



1338 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Now that the state of Wisconsin has begun to use the appraised 
values of the railways as a basis for rate making, the shoe is on 
the other foot, and it is not unlikely that the railways will ulti- 
mately demand a new appraisal, just as some of the railways in 
Texas have already done. 

The appraised values of the Wisconsin and Michigan railways 
are given in the reports of Prof. Taylor and Prof. Cooley in such 
form as to admit of ready comparison. Table XXII is presented 
herewith in the belief that it may be of use to many of our readers. 

The column showing the percentage of cost of each item is par- 
ticularly interesting. It will be noted that grading cost only 16.5% 
in Wisconsin and 10.6% in Michigan. To the average engineer 
grading seems such a very important item that a knowledge of its 
real relative importance becomes very instructive. Grading in the 
more rugged state of Washington is far more expensive per mile 
than in the states of Wisconsin and Michigan. Indeed, there is 
scarcely an item of cost in Washington that will not exceed the 
costs given in the accompanying tables. 

In using these tables the reader is cautioned to bear in mind the 
fact that the costs are expressed in the "mile of line" as the unit, 
and not in the "mile of track." There are practically 1.4 "miles of 
track" in each of the two states per "mile of line." 

It will be noted that the "mile of line" is here used as synonymous 
with the "mile of roadbed." 

Prof. W. D. Taylor used the following method in appraising the 
"present value" of steel rails in Wisconsin lines. If the market 
value of new rails is ?28 per ton, and the scrap value is $12, then 
the wearing value is $16. If inspection Indicates that 40% of the 
life has been used up, the present condition of the rail is 60%, 
and its present value per ton is $12 + 60% of $16 = $21.60 per ton. 

Mr. Taylor adds, however, that another point of view might be 
taken. If the price of new rails at the mills in Chicago is $28, and 
the scrap price at the mills is $14, and if the rail is used at a point 
200 miles from Chicago, then the cost of transportation is $1 per 
ton. This would make the price of the new rail $29 delivered, and 
Would reduce the value of the scrap rail to $13 at the place of re- 
moval. To lay the new rail would cost $2.50 per ton, making a 
total of $31.50 per ton in place. To take up and load the old rail 
would cost $1 per ton, making the net realization from its sale in 
Chicago but $12 per ton. In addition the old rail has lost 3 to 6% 
of its weight. 

Mr. Taylor states that the Chicago and Northwestern Ry. ex- 
pended $11 per mile of roadbed in preparing the cost data for some 
1,800 miles of its road. But he does not state what the state of 
Wisconsin spent in reviewing these data submitted by the railways. 

In the appraisal of the Michigan railways the following unit prices 
were used : 

Earth (incl. overhaul), per cu. yd $ 0.30 

Rails, new, per ton 28.00 

Rails, scrap, per ton 12.00 

Rails wearing valuo per ton 16.00 

Ties (15 to 17 per 30 ft. rail), oak, each 0.55 



RAILWAYS. 1339 



Life of trestles was considered to be 10 years. 
Life of telephone poles and cross-arms, 12% years. 
Oopper wire depreciation : 



Per cent. 



For 2 years and iess than 3 years 2V^ 

For 3 years and less than 5 years 5 

For 5 years and less than 10 years 10 

For 10 years and over (junk value) 20 

Underground conduit, per year 2 

Cable (aerial or underground), lead covered and 

rubber, per year 10 

Switchboards, per year 10 

It has been stated that the cost of appraising tlie Michigan rail- 
ways was $50,000, or $6.40 per mile of roadbed; but the railways 
themselves spent an amount which is unknown. 

Appraisal of the Railways of Minnesota.* — We had hoped to be 
able to present in this issue of Engineering-Contracting abstracts of 
the reports of the chief engineers of two railway commissions, 
namely the report of Mr. Dwight C. Morgan to the Railroad and 
Warehouse Commission of Minnesota and the report of Mr. Halbert 
P. Gillette to the Railroad Commission of Washington. Mr. Mor- 
gan's report was submitted Nov. 30, 1908, and has just been pub- 
lished. Mr. Gillette's report was submitted a year ago but its publi- 
cation has been delayed. 

The two reports present many interesting contrasts in methods 
used in attacking the same problem, and, for that reason as well 
as because they are the first appraisals ever made for railroad com- 
missions as a basis for railroad rate making, it was desirable to 
present them simultaneously. However, there are so many of our 
readers who will be interested in the methods and data given in Mr. 
Morgan's report that we present a summary in this issue, as follows, 
condensing the explanations of methods into our own language. 

Mr. Morgan began the appraisal of the Minnesota railways Jan. 
15, 1906, and rendered his report Dec. 1, 1908, the work having 
occupied almost three years, during which time 7,596 miles of rail- 
ways were appraised. The method of making the appraisal was 
essentially the same as that used by Mr. William D. Taylor, engi- 
neer of the Wisconsin Tax Commission, who made an appraisal of 
Wisconsin railways for taxation purposes. 

This method is what might be called the co-operative method 
of appraisal, because the railway companies are asked to co-operate 
with the railway commission, and, indeed, are required to submit 
their own detailed estimate of costs to the commission. The theory 
is that the commission is thus saved much unnecessary labor, and 
has merely to check over the estimates of the railways. In prac- 
tice, however, it is our opinion that the engineers of the railway 
commission must either accept the returns of the railways without 



^Engineering-Contracting, March 3, 1909. 



1340 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

question or else spend almost as much time and labor in checking 
the estimate as was originally made by the railways in preparing it. 

Blank forms were furnished to all the railways, upon which they 
were required to enter their detailed estimates. Two estimates were 
required, one giving the "cost of reproducing the property new. The 
other giving the "present value of the physical properties." The 
"cost of reproduction" means the cost of reproducing the property 
new. The "present value" is the depreciated or second-hand value, 
ascertained by deducting depreciation from the "cost of repro- 
duction." 

The unit prices used by Mr. Morgan were the average prices for 
the year 1905. which, he states, were about an average of the 
prices for the five-year period ending June 30, 1907. 

In estimating the various railway lines, sections of about 100 
miles were taken, but the "terminal properties" in St. Paul, Minne- 
apolis and Duluth were treated as separate sections. 

In valuing the lands, Mr. Morgan did not wait for a report from 
the railways, but started an independent investigation at once. 
Special agents were appointed to ascertain the value of lands adja- 
cent to all railway lines. These agents examined and noted naore 
than 55,000 bona fide sales of property, involving considerations of 
$100,000,000, and representing 1,300,000 acres of land. To do so 
they examined the records of the transfer of property for several 
years prior to Jan. 1, 1900, for a distance of 1% miles on each side 
of each railway line, using the official county records for infor- 
mation. 

The figures thus ascertained were plotted on maps, which facili- 
tated arriving at values per acre in any given section. This, in our 
judgment, was an excellent procedure, but it has a serious defect. 
No such records can be introduced in court, for the reason that rec- 
ords of property transfers are often falsified as to values by the 
parties engaged in the transfer. However, such data form an ex- 
cellent guide to the judgment of the experts engaged in determining 
land values, particularly where the opinions of people differ widely 
as to such values. 

Having ascertained the value of lands adjacent to the railways, 
the next step is to multiply these values by some factor to arrive 
at the value of land for "railway purposes." Mr. Morgan says, in 
his report : 

"The purchase of lands for a railroad right-of-way requires the 
consideration of two elements : First, the fair value of the land 
taken, and, second, the damage to the residue in consequence of a 
part of the tract having been taken for railroad purposes. The 
element of damage is dependent upon a variety of conditions, several 
of which may be mentioned as, the location and direction of the 
proposed railroad with respect to the boundaries of the property ; 
the inconveniences and dangers likely to be suffered and attributable 
to the construction and operation of the line, such as the separation 
of the owner's house from his barn, or of his barn from his well. 



RAILJVAYS. 1341 

The Influence of public opinion for or against the construction of a 
line of railway Is a most potent factor in respect of cost: [If one 
railway already exists, a projected second railway nearby will have 
to pay much higher prices for land, due to the fact that land owners 
do not feel the necessity of a second road and will "hold up" the new 
railway for the highest possible prices. — Editor.] In varying de- 
grees, these and other considerations make the lands purchased for 
a railway right-of-way usually more costly than the true or normal 
value of lands for other purposes." 

Mr. Morgan goes on to say that his agents had examined the 
bona fide sales of lands to railway companies, covering the more 
recently constructed lines, involving 7,000 acres and an expenditure 
of $4,200,000 in acquiring them in various parts of the state. As a 
result of this investigation and of a study of tlie whole subject, the 
conclusion was reached that a multiple of 3 should be used in con- 
verting the normal value of right-of-way lands to the "value for 
railway purposes." This multiple of 3 was not applicable to lands in 
the large terminals. St. Paul, Minneapolis and Duluth. 

Mr. Morgan calls attention to an illuminating instance of the high 
cost of land acquired by condemnation as compared with tlie cost of 
land purchased by agreement. On the Illinois Central, in the coun- 
ties of Mower and Freeborn, about 35% of the right-of-way was 
secured by condemnation proceedings and the company paid 4i/i 
times the normal value of the land. The remaining 65% purchased 
by agreement cost only 1.7 times the normal value of the land. 

The multiples used in arriving at the values of terminal property 
for railway purposes were 8,s follows: For St. Paul, 1.75; for 
Minneapolis, 1.60 ; for Duluth, 1.25. In other words, the normal 
value of the bare Jand (not including buildings) in St. Paul was 
multiplied by 1.75 to obtain the "value for railway purposes." 
These multiples were arrived at as follows : Investigations 
made (in 1906) by a special tax committee of the city coun- 
cil of St. Paul had shown that property was assessed at about 
60% of its selling price. Hence the assessed value of property ad- 
jacent to the terminals in St. Paul was divided by 0.6 (or multiplied 
by 1.66) to arrive at its normal value. This normal value was then 
multiplied by 1.75 to arrive at its "value for railway purposes." 

The multiples of 1.75 for St. Paul, 1.60 for Minneapolis and 1.25 
for Duluth were based upon the purchases of real estate by rail- 
ways in those cities during the preceding six years. During that 
period more than 320 acres of property had been purchased by rail- 
ways for about $3,000,000, Comparing the prices thus paid by rail- 
ways with the prices paid by other corporations and individuals 
during the same period, the multiples above given were arrived at. 
Fortunately two railway companies had purchased land for ter- 
minals in St. Paul and one in Duluth during this six-year period, so 
that sufficient data were available to enable Mr. Morgan to arrive 
at a fair decision as to the multiples to be used. 

An inspection of the physical property of the railway was made, 
practically all this inspection being done in a manner that will be 



1342 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

regarded as rather superficial by many of our readers. Bach rail- 
way company provided a special train which carried the inspectors. 
"The train was moved at a low rate of speed so that observation 
could be had of the character and standards of construction and 
maintenance. Stops were made every mile in places, but usually 
every two miles, and sometimes every five miles, to enable measure- 
ments of the roadbed and ballast, to observe the brand, weight and 
age of the rails and fastenings, to ascertain the average number of 
ties per mile by test measurements and counts ; in fact, to make 
complete record of all the physical elements at these given points. 
Additional stops were frequently made at bridges and culverts for 
the purpose of measurement and inspection, and at all stations 
measurements of buildings were made, the inventories checked and 
notes made of any important changes. 

"The detailed reports of the railway companies having been com- 
piled on the forms prepared for that purpose, were in such sys- 
tematic order by subjects as enabled the ready checking of the 
various items enumerated. The profiles were continually made use 
of to determine their accuracy. * * * Also as to whether sand, 
gravel, loose or solid rock cuttings, which would later serve as a 
guide in the classification of material in making the compilations 
and estimates of quantities in the ofRce." 

That this inspection was cursory is shown from the fact that 
about 100 miles of line were inspected each day of 10 hours from 
each train. 

No inspection of rolling stock was made, as in the Wisconsin 
appraisal above referred to ; but the "equipment reports were 
checked by the serial numbers of locomotives and cars." 

The inspection was begun early in May, 1907, and continued 
almost without interruption until the middle of December, 1907, 
completing this feature of the work, "except the range roads, which 
were examined in the early part of 1908." 

The unit prices assumed for estimating costs "are the results of 
much research." The unit prices submitted by the railways in their 
reports differed widely, and often in a manner not susceptible of ex- 
planation. For example, the price of steel rails varied from $20 
to $31.50 per ton f. o. b. St. Paul ; bridge steel of the same class 
ranged from 2 % to 4 Vi cts. per lb. ; locomotives of the same type 
and weight varied from 6% to 12% cts. per lb.; engineering, super- 
intendence and legal expense, between 1% and 15%; interest during 
construction, 1 to 12% ; contingencies, 5 to 50%. 

Mr. Morgan selected unit prices to fit the local conditions and did 
not assume invariable unit prices for all roads, as was done in the 
Wisconsin appraisal. 

"Adaptation and solidification of roadbed," or "seasoning of the 
roadbed," was regarded by Mr. Morgan "as a labor account cover- 
ing a period of years," and treated as a separate item of cost, 
although it never appears in the records of any railroad company as 
a part of the cost of construction. According to the allowance made 
by Mr. Morgan, this item of "adaptation and solidification of road- 



RAILIVAYS. 1343 

bed" amounted to $11,743,000 foi the 7,596 miles of railways in Min- 
nesota, or $1,545 per mile, or nearly 3% of the grand total cost of 
construction and equipment. 

There is no doubt that the roadbed of a newly built railway re- 
quires more labor to maintain and that the cost of running trains of 
the roadbed is more expensive than after the embankments have 
settled and land slides and slips have become less frequent ; but 
no two engineers will agree as to what allowance, if any, should be 
made for the cost of "seasoning." The fact is that much of tliis 
"seasoning" is due the action of rain, and casts nothing. Practically 
all the rest of it is done by the trackmen who are maintaining the 
track, as a part of operating expenses. The 7,600 miles of railways 
in Minnesota averaged 23,140 cu. y^s. of earth, loose rock and solid 
rock. Hence, according to Mr. Morgan's estimate of $1,545 per 
mile for "seasoning," it would have cost nearly 7 cts. per cu. yd. 
for "seasoning" alone. Since earth can be spread and rolled for only 
a fraction of this 7 cts. per cu. yd., it is evident that most of this 
$1,545 item of "seasoning" must be due to some other class of work 
than grading. In giving his reasons for his seemingly large allow- 
ance for "adaptation and solidification of roadbed," Mr. Morgan 
says: 

"The newly made excavations wash and slip, the ditches fill from 
the action of the elements, the embankments settle and the track 
superstructure is in almost constant need of attention ; resurfacing, 
lining and dressing of ballasted and unballasted track is necessary, 
waterways become clogged up, bridges settle or go out of line, 
station grounds are to be improved and finished, scattered and un- 
used material must be picked up and stored ; in fact, all the loose 
ends which are the immediate sequence of construction must be 
gathered in and the property brought to an orderly condition." 

While engineers will never agree as. to the exact amount that 
should be allowed for "seasoning" of roadbed, still the majority 
would probably favor some allowance in estimating the cost of re- 
production of an existing railway. 

On the other hand, there will not be so many engineers who will 
favor any allowance for "contingencies" in estimating the cost of 
an existing railroad line. Mr. Morgan favors a small allowance for 
contingencies, and, as will be seen below, selected 5% as a fair 
estimate for this item, instead of the customary 10% used on esti- 
mates of projected lines. He says : 

"Considering the detail with which the estimates have been pre- 
pared and the inclusion in them of many items of a contingent 
nature, it does not appear justifiable to consider an estimate of the 
cost of reproducing a railway as synonymous with an estimate 
for constructing a projected line. The essential difference rests in 
the fact that in reproduction cost the estimate is prepared in the 
light of known conditions, whereas for a projected line the con- 
tingencies are wholly unknown. These facts have been instrumental 
in reaching a determination that 5% for contingencies is fair under 
the circumstances attaching to the work of this appraisal." 



1344 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In estimating the item of "interest during construction," Mr. 
Morgan assumed a rate of interest of 4% per annum on the money 
tied up during construction. "This rate of interest was applied to 
the total estimated cost of reproduction, assuming that the neces- 
sary funds would be fully employed one-half of the estimated time 
required to build the respective lines, which according to their 
mileage varied from 1 to 8 years." It will be seen from the data 
given below that this interest item amounted to about 8.8% of the 
total cost of reproduction as estimated for all the railways of the 
state. 

The "present value" of each item was arrived at by deducting 
an estimated percentage of depreciation from the estimated "cost of 
reproduction." This estimated , percentage of depreciation was 
furnished by hardly any of the railway companies, for they held 
that no real depreciation had occurred, and that a road is more 
valuable as a working tool years after its construction than when 
new. Mr. Morgan made his own estimates of depreciation, based 
upon the inspection above referred to, and thus arrived at the 
"present value" given below. It will be noted that the total 
"present value" is about 13% less than the "cost of reproduction." 

Mr. Morgan did not secure the original cost of construction and 
betterments, and he states that such data were so incomplete as 
to render the task hopeless, lie says that "for the older and more 
important railways, representing the greater part of the mileage 
of the state, the data for some of them is not available at all, and 
for others it is so incomplete as to render its development for 
practical use an impossibility." 

We believe that Mr. Morgan is wrong in this conclusion, for in 
making the appraisal of the railways of Washington these same 
arguments were used by the railways, and it was only after a bitter 
struggle in some cases that access to all their records was secured 
which developed that practically all the costs of construction and 
betterments could be found, even for the lines built forty years ago. 
Among these Washington lines was the Great Northern, which 
has nearly 30% of the mileage in Minnesota. Its original records 
of cost (in the St. Paul office) are exceptionally well kept and 
complete, as well as its records of betterment costs. If only used 
as a guide in estimating the cost of reproduction, these original 
records (both in the accounting department and in the engineering 
department are practically invaluable. Furthermore, . they are of 
great value in cases of litigation between the railway commission 
and the railway company where the accuracy of estimates of cost 
of reproduction are brought into question. 

Another point of great importance is the percentages allowed for 
contingencies, for interest during construction and for engineering. 
Mr. Morgan has allowed 5% for contingencies, nearly 9% for 
interest during construction, and. 4%% for engineering, superin- 
tendence and legal expense. Each of these percentages alone sounds 
small, but they aggregate more than $61,000,000 in Mr. Morgan's 
estimate. So enormous is this sum that the correctness of these 



RAILWAYS. 1345 

percentage allowances becomes a very Important matter to the 
railway companies and to the state. We know of no satisfactory 
way of determining the correctness of these percentages except by 
ascertaining from the accounting records of the railways what their 
expenditures for such items actually have been. A thorough 
analysis of the accounting records would probably eliminate all of 
the item of "contingencies," amounting to $17,869,000 in the estimate 
for Minnesota, for any allowance for "contingencies" is always a 
confession of ignorance as to what the exact expenditure will be or 
has been. On the other hand, an analysis of accounting records 
might disclose that the percentages allowed for interest during 
construction and for engineering are too low, as claimed by many 
of the railways. We do not say that such would be the result, but 
so long as the claim is made and so long as such enormous sums 
of money are at stake, an analysis of the accounting records of 
every railroad should be made, even though the records may be 
incomplete for some of the older lines. It does not costw more 
than ?6 or ?7 per mile of road to make such an investigation and 
analysis of costs of original construction and betterments. Mr. 
Morgan informs us that his appraisal cost the state of Minnesota 
$8.50 per mile of main track, but of course, this does not include 
what it cost the railways to make the estimates which Mr. Mor- 
gan's forces checked, nor, as we have stated, did Mr. Morgan make 
an investigation and analysis of the original cost and betterments. 
The state of Minnesota has secured an exceedingly valuable esti- 
mate at a very low cost, but we can not urge too strongly the 
desirability of a thorough investigation of the accounting records 
of the railways and the subsequent use of accounting records in 
keeping cost estimates up to date. 

We pass now to a summary of the data collected by Mr. Morgiin : 

Mileage in Minnesota. 

(June 30, 1907) 

Miles. 

Roadway, or 1st main track 7,596 

Other main tracks 428 

Side tracks 2,414 

All tracks, total 10,438 

From this it will be seen that there are 1.38 miles of tracks to 
each mile of roadway. Hence, the subsequent items of cost per 
mile of roadway must be divided by 1.38 to get the cost per mile 
of track. 



1346 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Table XXIII. — Cost op Reproduction and Present Value (7,596 

Miles of Roadway.) 

Cost of 

Reproduction Present 

New. Value. 

1. Land for right of way, yards 

and terminals $ 73,201,757.70 $ 73,201,757.70 

2. Grading, clearing and grubbing. 56,006,782.11 56,006,782.11 

3. Protect, work, rip rap, ret. walls. 2,419,292.42 2,419,292.42 

4. Tunnels 253,250.00 253,250.00 

5. Crossties and switch ties 17,491,500.06 9,627,539.85 

6. Ballast 9,413,351.34 9,413,351.34 

7. Rails 33,010,087.72 25,199,668.20 

8. Track fastenings- 5,936,740.60 4,543,054.70 

9. Switches, frogs, r. r. crossings.. 1,389,363.52 962,741.45 

10. Track laying and surfacing 5,340,689.05 5,340,689.05 

11. Bridges, trestles and culverts... 19,567,524.80 14,518,834.30 

12. Track and bridge tools 201,918.21 151,438.71 

13. Fences, cattle guards, signs 2,768,394.93 1,403,082.54 

14. Stockyards and appurtenances.. 559,896.21 349,759.71 

15. Water stations 1,606,164.62 1,144,535.43 

16. Coal stations 717,519.88 507,703.49 

17. Station buildings and fixtures... 5,855,258.56 4,097,249.08 

18. Miscellaneous buildings 4,344,684.37 3,403,171.52 

19. Steam and electric power plants, 

gas plants 797,484.52 656,069.99 

20. General repair shops 4,123,119.91 2,959,019.07 

21. Shop machinery and tools 1,831,671.22 1,484,756.11 

22. Engine houses, turntables and 

cinder pits , 2,837,988.58 1,874,436.40 

23. Track scales . .. 184,130.00 1*9,474.45 

24. Docks and wharves (incl. coal 

and ore docks) 6,065,496.69 5,392,960.85 

25. Interlocking plants 403,071.57 293,197.56 

26. Signal apparatus 155,766.71 126,217.89 

27. Telegraph lines, appurtenances.. 1,316,048.16 994,227.19 

28. Telephone lines, appurtenances. . 94,526.17 70,926.17 

29. Adapt, and solid, of road bed... 11,743,007.15 11,743,007.15 

Total of items 1 to 29 inclusive. . .$269,636,486.78 $238,230,206.93 

30. Engineering, superintendence, le- 

gal expense, 41/2% 12,133,641.89 12,133,641.89 



Total of items 1 to 30 inclusive. . .$281,770,128.67 $250,363,848.82 

31. Locomotives 17,090,953.40 12,608,422.67 

32. Passenger equipment 6,616,170.78 4,554,442.63 

33. Freight car equipment 46,911,106.58 34,068,095.26 

34. Miscellaneous equipment 1,326,666.16 876,057.17 

35. Marine equipment 43,500.00 . 32,625.00 



Total of items 1 to 35 inclusive. . .$353,758,525.59 $302,503,491.55 

36. Freight on crossties, rails, fast- 
enings, switches and frogs... 3,635,535.03 3,635,535,03 



Total of items 1 to 36 inclusive. . .$357,394,060.62 $306,139,026.58 

37. Contingencies, 5% on total of 

items 1 to 36 17,869,703.02 17,869,703.02 

38. Stores and supplies 5,210,010.98 5,210,010.98 

39. Interest during construction 31,261,419.93 31,261,419.93 



Grand total $411,735,194.55 $360,480,160.51 



RAILWAYS. 1347 

In Table XXIII it will be noted that the cost of reproduction and 
the present value of item 36 (freight on track materials) are 
identical ; but since freight is a part of the cost of these materials 
delivered, and since the materials depreciate, the present value of 
item 36 should be less than the cost of reproduction. The error in 
this case arises from the segregation of freight as a separate item, 
which should not be done. 

Item 37 (contingencies) is a percentage of all the previous items. 
It is not clear why contingencies should be figured on lands, nor on 
equipment. 

By dividing each of tlie above items of cost of reproduction by 
7,596, we have calculated the itemized cost of reproduction per 
mile of railway, tabulated below. To convert any of these items 
into cost per mile of track, divide it by 1.38, as above explained: 

Cost of Reproduction per Mile of Roadway. (7,596 Miles.) 

1. Land for right of way, yards & terminals.. $ 9,637.00 

2. Grading, clearing and grubbing 7,373.00 

3. Protection work, rip rap, retaining walls. 318.00 

4. Tunnels 33.00 

5. Cross ties and switch ties 2,302.00 

6. Ballast 1,240.00 

7. Rails 4,345.00 

8. Track fastenings 782.00 

9. Switches, frogs and railroad crossings. . . . 183.00 

10. Track laying and surfacing 703.00 

11. Bridges, trestles and culverts 2,576.00 

12. Track and bridge tools 27.00 

13. Fences, cattle guards and signs 364.00 

14. Stock yards and appurtenances 74.00 

15. Water stations 211 

16. Coal stations 95 

17. Station buildings and fixtures 772 

18. Miscellaneous buildings 572 

19. Steam and electric power plants, gas plants. . 105 

20. General repair shops : . . . 543 

21. Shop machinery and tools 241 

22. Engine houses, turntables and cinder pits. ... 373 

23. Track scales 24 

24. Docks and wharves (inc. coal and ore docks) 779 

25. Interlocking plants 53 

26. Signal apparatus 20 

27. Telegraph lines and appurtenances 173 

28. Telephone lines and appurtenances 13 

29. Adaptation and solidification of roadbed.... 1,546 

30. Engineering, superintendence and legal exp. 1,598 

Total of items 1 to 30 inclusive $37,095 

31. Locomotives 2,250 

32. Passenger equipment 872 

33. Freight car equipment 6,175 

34. Miscellaneous equipment 175 

35. Marine equipment 6 

36. Freight on cross ties, rails, switches and 

frogs, track fastenings 478 

37. Contingencies 2,352 

38. Stores and supplies in Minnesota 686 

39. Interest during construction 4,115 

Grand total ?54,204 



1348 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The details of item 1 (land) are as follows per mile of roadbed: 

Per mile. 

12.636 acres right of way $1,217.90 

0.620 acres gravel pits, etc 33.32 

2.973 acres station grounds 1,538.28 

0.638 acres terminals (St. Paul, Minneap- 
olis and Duluth) 6,846.84 

16.866 acres, total $9,636.34 

These values are not the "normal values" of the land for ordinary- 
purposes, but the "values for railway purposes" as ascertained by 
applying the multiples above given. 

The most significant fact in this land appraisal is the very high 
percentage that the land for terminals forms. Station grounds also 
form a large percentage of the total cost for lands. There are 
many states in which such expensive terminals do not exist, and 
there are others, like Illinois, Pennsylvania and New York, where 
the cost of terminals is probably greater per mile of railway. 

The details of item 2 (grading, etc.) are as follows per mile of 
roadway : 

22,230 cu. yds. earth at 28.7 cts $6,380.01 

565 cu. yds., loose rock at 51.62 cts 291.65 

345 cu. yds. solid rock at $1.077 371.57 

4.56 acres clearing and grubbing at $69.85. . , . 318.52 

Total $7,371.75 

Grade revision at Owatonna ($27,625) 3.63 

Total $7,375.38 

Mr. Morgan's report contains no further data as to unit costs. 

The itemized costs of each of the different railways in Minnesota 
are given in the report, and it was from a summary of those items 
that the above given totals and averages were prepared. 

We append Table XXIV prepared by the Railway Age Gazette 
from the data contained in Mr. Morgan's report. 

Appraising the Land Value of the Michigan Railways.* — The two 
letters that follow speak for themselves, and contain matter of 
interest not only to engineers who are likely to be engaged in rail- 
way appraisals but to engineers who may be called upon to appraise 
real estate and other property for taxation purposes. 
H. P. Gillette, 
Dear Sir : 

In connection with some of your statements relative to the 
appraisal of the Michigan State Railroads made some years ago, 
you discuss admirably the element of real estate values and the 
methods which you think best to follow. 

I gather that you are not quite as familiar with the methods 
finally employed in this work, because they were so in keeping with 
your own ideas and even went them one better that it is a pleasure 
for me to call it to your attention, knowing that you are highly 
appreciative of original work of this kind, and will be pleased to 
see that this particular expert's ideas and methods follow your 

*Engineering-Contracting, May 5, 1909. 



RAILWAYS. 



1349 



3 , 



o-H: 


















S '-tf^ t.'j '«*< "iS f— I o » 



es^^^<M,-(Oa 



S' 






ma- 
o 






o . 

fen . 



«"8 









00 C^ CO CI 
t^CROO OS 



t--. t^ lO lO Tj< -^ i-H 
O t* Q? «3 t^ i-H CO 
CS I^- O »0 CO t^ ♦-< 



gcopbcooog^o 
l-H CO i-< 00 CO rH CO 



5<-H 1— iCOiOiOiO-^C 



S05 050C 
MCOOOl— << 



JCOOCOOOIOCD 
» CO 05 »-H CD C^l 1-H 

) Oi Oa O CO -^ c^ 






CDCOO^tMi-HCOCD-^C^CQiO 
t^^i-HCi>QOOOOOiOcD»OCS 
G0OOO0SOC0C^0»C<)'«*^O 



CO coc^ OS r 

1-^iOCOt^i; 






cDos*-tt^»>-icooo>'«*<r*i^«-( 

t^COOOt^-^ttlLOC^OOOCOt^^iO 
OSOOCOOOOOCOWiOOt^COO 



^HcOO-^i-HCDiOOSCOI^COcOiOiOOC 



iiOOOiOOOlCCOCOtM 



05i-»-^»-ll>-"««*t>-W^"^"^OS05CDCOi-l'^J*'*fOS"«*<10Cq'^OOCOI>- 



HTt^iocaeot-^oo^fcot-coi 



3-^OSt^C^ 
_ ___ _. D<ClTf«-^CO 

■4CCCNt^I>-00COCO0000CO 



OO^iOCOO(MOS*-HCOiO-^^COiOOOCDOOOTt*^COC^'-<»-c<*i 
O>i-tt^OScCii-Hl>-i-(t>-OSCOOS'^C^»-l»OOSCC'00lO'^t^(MCCub 



0»-H W3CD 



0500T-iOSt-*iO*CC^Q?iO«C)01iOiOOt^t^i— icDrfii— 1 
|>.COt*0'-*l^^H(MOb-t^05iO'rt^Oi— l-^C^ilOOOOi 
C^OOt^05l>-cD'^0'«4'iOCSlO'^COOOCOOOOOS — "^ 



O-^ cooo 

COOiCO 



(M cq lo 00 c 

. _ iCt--COO< 

cq io^ocoooot 



i o?c^40»c CO 

•OOC^iOlM 

3 cocoes 0> CO 



CSlcSOOOOf-fCVJCO 

»ooosco*ocoooo 
cococo-^csoocsc^ 



COOi^HM<C 

C^CDOSf-Hr 



3Tt*t^05 

• CO coio 
-iOOOO 



OOOt- 



COO<MI^O 

CD Oi iM OS 00 
OS OS CO CO t^ 



TH-^Ot-*!— lOO'^CO 
CO-^f-HOOC^Jt^iOt-^ 

lOOSOOSCOOCOOO 



C^OOi-t'-* 



OOS 

1— icD 



-^ GOOD 

T-IOS*^ 



osoo »o 
CO coo 
ooscq 



1:^ fh CO OO ■<— I 
lO 1-H OS CO --S^ 



•^■^I>-CDiOOSiO00 
i(^4Or-<T-<C^00r-ia» 



l>-OSOO-tt<Ot^I^'^'^OOCOiO'<S<CS»Cr^OOOSOsOOOsCOU3lOt* 

lOCOOOT-lOOi-HCOCOcOCOCqcq'<t'OS"<*^r-lCOlO»-H»-(CDI>-*VOsr- 
OSCD00 05Cq(MCqOCOOSOOcOOSOsOOOOCqos00005l>-t>-'^t^ 



l>-i-H10*0 



C^iO'«*'"^iCOOOOO<M lOOCOr-OOcDOO 
Tt^t^-^iOO-^OOOOOSC^^r-iCOOOOOiO-* 

CS00O0ScDiOOK5OO'rt<-*OOS0S-^C0cDcD 



b-co 



1— (00 iCh-.csicoooot^iCio-<*< 00 looses 

t^cDOSf— <COiOOOCOCOr«»OOOOSCOCO^- 
COOOt^CSi-HiOCSCSCScoC^°OCtt<MiOi-t 



M. rCJ 0,1' Elo h 
oj w b - w w P 

«.2 a^ E-s 8'1 

.a-H«» ^ o jH g>w, 
^ Et-^og..So 



C a; 



s 



c p rt C ""^ '" 

« E ^ 0. »•*• 3 jj 

mo lU- 

Ceo: 'Km a/vC*" 

•§21^ --^--^ 2 

o"c:;5 "- -S. 



T-H "^ OJ rt 






E i'fuc 



E<; 



i-l (M «0 WJ< N t-l 



O rHUSraos 







H 1-. 



>.c 






5 o o" o o 6" 



,;5"=8 



ea 



• 'S oj C 0^ <u (u 
g ji M m m'SH 



ooooooQOPPOSSco 



o e.E-S 

0-C log 
'.S 0-" '"■— 3.S.S.S '.S 



30 



^ Ot C^ O4T— I o 
m j; rt rt ni S M 
- -ij 0) (U (U rt cj 



^"5 '"v.:Srt-i3: 

mtflMOJ+^cw,, 
-M^--o rt S OJ g'g 

^-p igw o "'::5.S § 
o^a^>.j;« 2 5 

!«!•« g**"^ E S <=! SS 
(S S g O M^^ O d <D 

;S-2m £.><•? §5:3 

Ml!; o " ni "■«. V 

ujjV !r!" -.5 " S 
R u to ctt: U R P 



1350 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

own so very closely and yet are carried out with a little different 
method as to details ; for precision of detail and speed of accomplish- 
ment was only possible to a very well defined and carefully consid- 
ered metnod entirely and exclusively evolved by Mr. Edward A. 
Dunbar, a former West Pointer and expert engineer, and well 
acquainted with real estate matters himself in large enterprises. 

For economy of costs and in the completeness of the returns I 
think it is unexcelled, and has never been approached by any other 
equally reliable method, except your own ; but all of them are 
much the same and splendid in their discussion of a very difficult 
and what has heretofore been a vexatious problem to solve. 

I hope sometime in the near future to have the great pleasure 
of meeting you personally, for we highly appreciate your method 
of thinking about a good many things. 

There has been in all this property so much theoretical stuff 
injected into it that it is very wearisome to practical men, and 
it is a relief to find some one like yourself who has the courage 
and the earnestness of purpose and honesty of intention to say so. 

Tours truly, 

F. T. Barcroft, 
Director of Appraisal. 
Detroit, Mich., April 26, 1909. 

My Dear Mr. Barcroft. — In compliance with your request I 
•submit herewith a statement of the method by which the land 
values of the Michigan Railroad Appraisal were deduced. 
Land Valuation. 

The limited time in which full results had to be made known 
precluded the general adoption of any of the usual methods of land 
valuation and for that reason the following method was adopted: 

Determining the Quantity. — The ofHce inspectors, as they were 
called, took direct from the maps and other data of the railroad 
company, and of the registers of deeds offices, all the information 
necessary to determine the area of the railroad land throughout 
the state. They subdivided the land, in taking it off by counties and 
also subdivided it so the right-of-way between stations showed 
separately from the right-of-way and additional land at stations, or 
at points where the density of population would enhance the values 
of land beyond that of farm land. 

In the cities the land was all divided into small blocks, so that 
It might be estimated either by square feet or by the front foot, as 
might seem most expedient. 

Determining the Quality. — As the land throughout the state is 
not uniform quality the railroads' lands were subdivided into 83 
subdivisions — following county lines. And on the basis of its 
physical characteristics, it was also subdivided into six separata 
classes, viz. : 

1st. Farm land. 

2d. Barren land. 

3d. Towns under 500 population. 

4th. Towns under 3,000 population. 



RAILWAYS. 1351 

5th. Towns under 10,000 population. 

6th. Towns over 10,000 population. 

To determine the percentage on each railroad In each county of 
farm and waste land a representative was sent to each of the 
railway centers of the state. He interviewed roadmasters, assistant 
roadmasters, locomotive engineers and freight train conductors, as 
being men who knew every foot of the land over which the railroad 
passed and from tliem secured the information which enabled him to 
report on the percentage of waste land on each railroad by counties. 

In the smaller cities and a few of the larger villages the quality 
of land was determined by our representative going over the land 
within the city, dividing it up according to the use to which the 
various sections were put, viz. : 

Laborers' residence property. 

Mechanics' residence property. 

High class residence property. 

Manufacturing property. 

Second-class store property. 

First-class store property. 

He also got local experts to value each division, but this really 
falls under the next head which is: 

Determining the Price. — The price of the land In the first five 
classes, except as next before noted, was determined by sending a 
letter of inquiry, enclosing a card for reply, to some five hundred 
representative citizens of the state, taking about six from each 
county and choosing these citizens from among land dealers, 
bankers, county surveyors and county treasurers. Each man 
selected was supposed to be peculiarly adapted as a judge of land 
values within his county and on the card enclosed was requested to 
give his estimate of the present value of an average acre of land 
in his county in each of the five classes. 

This method it will be observed assumes that every acre of land 
of the same class, in a county, is equally valuable and that that 
value may fairly be taken to be the average price of the land of 
that class in that county. An average of the prices by classes as 
given on the cards for each county was therefore taken as the 
present valuation, for the first four classes and partly for the fifth. 
For part of the fifth and all of the sixth, the price was determined 
in the usual manner by a board of experts ; going over every foot 
of the property in question and valuing each piece separately ; 
taking into consideration surrounding values, both from selling 
prices of adjoining land and assessment rolls. 

Our method of accumulating this information was by means of a 
card index file, of which I enclose a sample card. One card was 
made for each county through which each railroad passed. It is 
evident therefore that by applying the average prices to the class 
quantities, determining as hereinbefore described, that each card 
would represent the total present market value of all the land 
belonging to the railroad in question in that particular county, 
and the sum of the values given on all the cards, for any given rail- 
road (that is one card for each county) would equal the actual 



1352 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

present market value of all the land owned by that railroad in the 
State of Michigan and that the total of all the cards would equal 
the total present value of all the railroad lands in the State of 
Michigan. 

The question arose in our minds at the outset whether in ad- 
dressing five hundred strangers, nearly all of whom were busy 
men, we should get any considerable number of replies to our 
inquiry and if we did, whether they would not be mere off-hand 
guesses rather than thoughtful estimates. It is extremely gratify- 
ing to be able to say that out of five hundred cards sent out less 
than fifty have failed to respond. In only one case was the failure 
to comply with the request based upon the plea of no compensa- 
tion, and of all the answers received there is scarcely one that does 
not bear either in itself, or in an accompanying letter, evidence of 
the most painstaking care. It was noticed in many instances that 
before making out his card the writer would correspond with from 
five to twelve different persons in his county, getting their views 
and then summarizing them on his card. 

I do not believe that had we gone over every acre of the land In 
this state, with a board of inspection and valuation, at enormous 
expense, we would have arrived at any better result than we did by 
the inexpensive and expeditious method detailed above. 

Yours very truly, 

E. C. DUNBAH. 

Cost of 1,100 Miles of the C, M & St. P. R. R. in South Dal<ota.* 

■ — In the "Spokane Rate Case" before the Interstate Commerce 
Commission, Mr. A. H. Hogeland, chief engineer of the Great 
Northern Railway, and Mr. "W. L. Darling, chief engineer of the 
Northern Pacific Railway, presented itemized estimates of the cost 
of reproducing those two railway systems. Acting for the city of 
Spokane, Mr. Halbert P. Gillette offered testimony showing that 
the estimates of Mr. Hogeland and Mr. Darling were too high. 
Among the facts most strongly in dispute was the allowance to be 
made for transporting the contractors' men and supplies over the 
railway to and from the site of the work. Mr. Hogeland testified 
that iy^ cts. per cu. yd. should be added to the contract price of 
each yard of earth excavation to cover the added cost to the 
railway company for transportation. Mr. Darling testified that 3 
cts. per cu. yd. would cover this item and Mr. Gillette testified that 
1 ct. would be an excessive allowance. In substantiation of his 
estimate Mr. Gillette presented data of his own and estimates made 
by other engineers. Among the latter was an estimate of Mr. D. J. 
Whittemore, made while he was chief engineer of the Chicago, 
Milwaukee & St. Paul. Mr. Whittemore presented his testimony in 
1898 in the "South Dakota Rate Case" under conditions that made it 
desirable for him to claim all he reasonably could claim on the 
cost of construction of his road. His estimate covered the original 
cost of 1,101 miles of main line and 86 miles of sidetracks in 
South Dakota, which is equivalent to 1.08 miles of main line and 



^Engineering-Contracting, July 24, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. 1353 

sidings to each mile of main line. The unit prices used by Mr. 
Whittemore were based upon those prevailing in 1879 to 18S7, the 
years during which the road was built. He testified that there wa.s 
practically no rock excavation, which accounts in part for the low 
unit price in the earthwork. 

Believing that Mr. Whittemore's estimate is worthy of being 
placed permanently on record, we reproduce it herewith. In a 
subsequent issue we shall give Mr. Hogeland's and Mr. Darling's 
itemized estimates of tlie cost of the two great railroad systems of 
which they are chief engineers: 

Per mile of 

main line 

(1,101 miles). 

11,300 cu. yds. embankment at 15.16 cts % 1,713.10 

4.55 cu. yds. riprap at ?1.50 6.80 

10,000 ft. B. M. timber in bridges and culverts at 

$30 per M 300.00 

425 lin. ft. piles in bridges at 35 cts 148.75 

Truss bi-idges at ?4,437 each 31.05 

% iron pipe culvert in place of wooden one 

(betterment) at ?50 12.50 

96.63 tons (gross) rails at $46.76 4,518.40 

7,555 lbs. track spikes at 2 V, cts 188.90 

380 pairs rail joint splices at $1 380.00 

3,238 cross ties at 30 cts ' 971.40 

0.63 switches at $100 63.00 

0.01 railroad crossings at $200 2.00 

1.08 miles main and side track laid and surfaced 

at $450 486.00 

0.24 miles track ballasted at $500 120.00 

Moving track material from store depot to tiie 

front 140.00 

0.92 miles fence at $1.40 128.80 

29 panels (0.1 miles) snow fence at $2.10 60.90 

260 ft. B. M. crossing plant (1.1 crossings per 

mile) at $20 5.20 

1 cattle guard 10.00 

Freight on track materials. % ct. per ton mile. . . 2,130.00 

Freight on contractor's tools and supplies 7.50 

Freight on contractor's teams 6.00 

Freight on bridge and culvert material 99.00 

Transportation of laborers, 6 men transported 500 

miles to work at 2 cents per mile 60.00 

0.23 station sign board, at $6.00 1.40 

1.1 highway sign board, at $5.0 5.50 

0.04 R. R. crossing sign board, at $6.00 .25 

0.04 R. R. crossing stop board, at $6.00 .25 

2 whistle posts, at $1.00 2.00 

0.45 mile posts, at $1.00 .45 

1 rail rest, at $1.00 1.00 

Buildings 855.00 

1 mile right-of-way and station grounds 128.00 

Telegraph lines 64.80 

Engineering, superintendence, legal and general 

ofBce expense 300.00 

Interest on the above items for % of two years 

at 6% 777.00 

Track tools, % section at $138 per section 17.25 

Station furniture, 1/12 station, at $78 6.50 

Betterment to roadbed and bridges, estimated at 

5% of above 687.00 

Stores and supplies 300.00 

Total (exclusive of equipment) $14,725.70 



1354 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Whittemore testified tiiat tlie $140 per mile for distributing 
track material from the store yard was estimated thus: 

2 engines and crews at $25 per day $50.00 

36 cars at 50 cents per day 18.00 

1 caboose 2.00 

Total §70.00 

He stated that one-half mile of track was laid per day, hence it 
cost two times $70, or $140 per mile, to distribute track materials 
from the material yard. 

It will be noted that the cost of transporting men and supplies, 
as given by Mr. Whittemore, consisted of three items, namely : 

Freight on contractor's tools and supplies $ 7.50 

Freight on contractor's teams 6.00 

Transportation of laborers ■ 60.00 

Total per mile $73.50 

This is equivalent to 0.66 ct. per cu. yd. of earthwork, if charged 
entirely to the earthwork. 

Prices Used in Estimating Cost of Railways !n Texas.*— The 
Railroad Commission of Texas has appraised the value of roads 
recently constructed, using a schedule of unit prices which we 
reproduce herewith. 

The railways were paying $1.50 to $1.75 per day of 10 hrs. for com- 
mon laborers in 1906, and found labor very scarce at these wages. 

The following unit prices were used in valuing the Trinity & 
Brazos "Valley Ry., from Mexia to Houston, a distance of 165 miles: 

Price. 

Right of way, per acre $ 50.00 

Depot grounds, per acre (minimum) 100.00 

Reservoir grounds, per acre 25.00 

Clearing and grubbing, per acre 25.00 

Clearing and grubbing, per acre 50.00 

Earth excavation, per cu. yd 0.15 

Loose rock excavation, per cu. yd 0.40 

Solid rock excavation, per cu. yd 0.75 

Trestle timber, in place, per M 40.00 

Trestle piling, in place, per lin. ft 0.40 

Wood drain boxes, per M 35.00 

Tile drains, 24 in., per lin. ft 3.00 

Cattle guards, wooden surface 40.00 

Fences, 4-v/ire, cedar posts (16 ft. apart) per 

mile of fence 160.00 

Road crossings, per M 35.00 

Ties, L. L. Y. pine (6" x 8" x 8') 0.70 

Rails, 75 lb., per ton 35.00 

Joints, including bolts, each 1.20 

Spikes, 34 kegs per mile, per keg 5.25 

Track laying and surfacing per mile '. 500.0.0 

Car and engine hire during construction, per mi. 250.00 
Sidings (60-lb. rail, 2,640 ties per mile), per 

lin. ft 1.15 

Switch furniture, per set 135.00 

Ballast, sand (about 2,500 cu. yds. per mile), 

per mile 750.00 

Telegraph line (for 1 wire, construction only, 
materials furnished by Western Union), per 

mile 50.00 

Passenger depots, small frame, per sq. ft.. .... . 1.00 

Platforms for ditto, per sq. ft 0.16 

Cotton platforms, per sq. ft 0.18 

"Ensiineerinjj-Contracting, July 24, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. 1355 

Engineering and legal expense, 5 per cent of total cost of con- 
straction. 

Interest during construction, 5 per cent of total cost of con- 
struction. 

For comparative figures the reader is referre:^! to Lavis' "Railroad 
Location, Surveys and Estimates," page 193 et. seq. 

Itemized Cost of the Northern Pacific Railway System as Esti- 
mated by Its Chief Engineer.* — In tliis article we give an estimate 
prepared by Mr. W. L. Darling, cliief engineer of the N. P. Ry., 
and introduced as part of his testimony in the "Spoltane Rate 
Case" before the Interstate Commerce Commission a few months 
ago. 

While many of the quantities were guessed at by Mr. Darling, 
and while no quantities at all are given for many items, but simply 
himp sum estimates, still these data are worthy of being recorded, 
if only to indicate the relative cost of different items. Engineering, for 
example, is estimated at 3 per cent of the total, and this percentage 
is undoubtedly not far from correct, although tlie actual amount 
estimated for engineering is unquestionably very liberal. 

The reader should bear in mJnd that this estimate was prepared 
for the purpose of proving that the Nortliern Pacific Ry. is not 
earning an unreasonable amount of money, considering what the 
physical value of the property is today. The city of Spokane 
contends not only that it is discriminated against in the matter of 
transcontinental freight rates, but that the rates are in themselves 
too high, and yield an unreasonable profit to the railways. The 
Northern Pacific and Great Northern Rys. contend that their rates 
are reasonable and yield only a fair profit ; and, in proof, they 
have submitted estimates of the cost of reproducing tlieir entire 
systems as they stand today, using what they claim to be current 
unit prices. Regarding these unit prices, it is only fair to say, tliat 
the City of Spokane contends that they are, in nearly every instance, 
unreasonably high. Mr. Halbert P. Gillette, in behalf of tlie City 
of Spokane, testified that much lower unit prices are commonly paid 
by railways in the northwest. He also criticised the quantities in 
many instances, claiming that they were mere guesses, and not 
trustworthy. We shall not go into all the testimony that was 
offered by both sides in the controversy, further than to put on 
record an abstract of the testimony of Mr. W. L. Darling, chief 
engineer of the N. P., and Mr. Hogeland, chief engineer of th3 G. N. 

The mileage of the N. P. is as follows: 

Miles. 

Main line, single and second track 2,860.67 

Branch lines, main and second track 3,014.24 

Spurs, sidings and yard tracks 1,819.88 

All tracks, total 7,694.79 

Of this track only 112 miles is second track. 



"Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 15, 1908. 



1356 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Darling' s estimate of the cost was presented in the following 
form : 

Grading- and track $138,745,971 

Grade revisions, 1897 to 1901 2,350,600 

Turnouts 1,838,750 

Permanent bridges 9,950,248 

Temporary bridges 4,284,580 

Culverts 3,091,000 

Wooden bridges filled 4,518,600 

Tunnels 3,921,421 

Fencing 707,290 

Snow fences 537,600 ', 

Telegraph 1,443,000 

Water supply 1,971,200 

Coaling stations 635,900 

Wharfs and docks 1,725,000 

Stock yards 152,857 

Track scales 107,671 

Cattle guards 57,195 

Round houses, turntables, power houses, 

etc 1,680,448 

Shop buildings. 2,091,650 

Miscellaneous buildings 1,578,528 

Warehouses 2,886,016 

Headquarters building 756,600 

Furniture 440,000 

Passenger stations 1,102,304 

Combination stations 1,408,960 

Duluth Union depot 343,300 

St. Paul Union depot 159,200 

Interlocking 123,555 

Block system 44,307 

Mile posts and signs 129,584 

Ash pits 79,067 

Oil and sand houses 120,960 

Shop tools and machinery 1,106,000 

Kalama ferry and steamer 617,400 

Lines in Manitoba 7,000,000 

Joint work, Seattle 2,457,000 

Total $200,155,762 

Engineering, 3 % 6,004,673 

Total $206,160,435 

Contingencies, 10% 20,616,643 

Total $226,776,478 

Interest during construction — 4% for 2% 

yrs., 10% 22,677,648 

Total $249,454,126 

Freight ■ equipment -30,486,000 

Passenger equipment 5,898,000 

Power 16,480,200 

Floating equipment 497,000 

Grand total $302,815,326 



RAILWAYS. . 135? 

This does not include lands which were estimated to be worth as 
follows : 

Right of way, not including large terminals? 31,889,587 

Large terminals '75,000,501 

N. P. interest in terminal companies 882,655 

Coal properties 50,720,120 

Total $158,492,913 

Grand total 461,308,239 

This estimate of the value of lands was not made by Mr. Darling. 
In estimating the cost of grading, Mr. Darling stated tliat an 
estimate of quantities was made in 1898, and was as follows: 

Per mile 
Total. (4,419 mi.). 

Clearing, acres 15,089 3.4 

Grubbing, stations 21,124 4.8 

Earth, cu. yds 88,334,218 20,000 

Loose rock, cu. yds 7,258,532 1,640 

Solid rock, cu. yds 5,164,479 1,170 

Riprap, cu. yds 1,548,911 350 

At that time there were 4,419 miles of main track and branches, 
plus 850 miles of siding and yard tracks, or a total of 5,269 miles 
of track. In the year 1907, however, there were 1.4605 times as 
many miles of track. Hence, it is reasonable to suppose that each 
of the above quantities is 1.46 times larger now than in 1898. But, 
m addition to this, Mr. Darling claimed that all embankments had 
been widened from an original 14 ft. to a present 18 ft., and he 
estimated that all the above quantities (except the clearing and 
grubbing) should be multiplied by 1.20 to allow for this increase 
in bank widening. This would make a total increase of 1.20 X 
1.4605 = 1.7526. Accordingly, Mr. Darling increased the grading 
quantities by 75.26% and secured the following quantities, to which 
he affixed the following unit prices : 

22,036 acres clearing at $80.00 $ 1,762,880 

30,851 stations grubbing at $16.50 590.042 

116,110,913 cu. yds. earth at $0.28 32,511,055 

38,703,637 cu. yds. hardpan at $0.42 16,255,528 

12,721,303 cu. yds. loose rock at $0.50 6,360,651 

9,051,266 cu. yds. solid rock at $1.10 9,956,39"? 

2,714,621 cu. yds. riprap at $2.00 5,429,242 

Total grading, etc $72,865, '?91 

It will be noted that the 1898 estimate of quantities showed the 
following classification : 

Per cent. 

Earth 88 

Loose rock 7 

Solid rock 5 

But Mr. Darling claimed that fully one-quarter of this earth (or 
22% of the total excavation) must have been hardpan, hence his 
estimate of 38,703,637 cu. yds. of hardpan above given. 

Mr. Gillette testified that this 22% allowance for hardpan was 
fully three times too high. He also testified that it was not at 
all probable that branch lines built and acquired since 1898 had 
required as heavy grading as the work done before that time, and 



1358 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

that, in any event, an estimate of increase in yardage would mora 
properly be based upon the increase in the miiles of railway "line" 
rather than in the increase in the miles of "track." The miles of 
"line" had only increased 33%, as compared with an increase of 
46% in the track mileage. Mr. Gillette testified that while it was 
possible that bank widening had increased the original yardage 
20%, he knew that no such increase had occurred in the 1,500 miles 
of line owned by the Northern Pacific in the state of Washington ; 
but, even conceding that an increase in the widths of embankments 
had been made throughout the system, certainly no rock cuts had 
been widened, no hardpan dug, no loose rock excavated, and very 
little riprap widened. Practically all bank widening had been made 
by steam shovels working in gravel pits, and that it was not 
right, therefore to increase the original yardage of solid rock, loose 
rock and hardpan by 20% when practically no such work had been 
done. 

Mr. Darling's unit prices of reproduction were arrived at as 
follows : 

Clearing : 

Contract price per acre $75.00 

Transportation of men and tools 5.00 

Total $80.00 

Grubbing : 

Contract price per station $15.00 

Transportation of men, etc 1.50 

Total $16.50 

Earth. Per cu. yd. 

Contraot price, average haul 400 ft $0.22 

Overhaul 0.03 

Transportation of men, etc 0.03 

Total ?0.28 

Hardpan and cement gravel : 

Contract price $0.35 

Overhaul 0.04 

Transportation of men, etc 0.03 

Total $0.42 

Loose rock : 

Contract price $0.43 

Overhaul •- . 0.04 

Transportation of men, etc 0.04 

Total $0.50 

Solid rock : 

Contract price $1.00 

Overhaul 0.05 

Transportation of men, etc 0.05 

Total $1-10 

Riprap : 

Contract price, per cu. yd $1.75 

Extra haul and work ■_ 0.15 

Transportation of men, etc 0.10 

Total $2.00 



RAILWAYS. mSO 

As to the unit prices for grading, Mr. Gillette testified that all 
the contract prices were very liberal, and that tlie allowances for 
overhaul and transportation were fully three times too liigh. The 
unit prices for clearing were too high, because most of tlie clearing 
was light clearing, a great deal of it being sage brush. The unit 
price for riprap was excessive, except for hand placed riprap, and 
that ordinary riprap could be contracted for at $1.25 or less. 

The cost of the track was estimated as follows by Mr. Darling: 

Cost per mile of main track : 

117 tons steel at St. Paul at $31 $3,627.00 

7.3 tons angle bars at $34 249.66 

0.75 tons bolts and nuts at $55 41.25 

3.4 tons spikes at $42 143.48 

7.5 tons tie plates at $44 330.00 

135.95 tons handled in material, yard, at $1. . . 135.95 

1 extra switch, per mile 27.50 

Contract price for laying track 357.50 

Train service and rent of equipment used in 

hauling to the front 375.00 

3,000 ties at $0.55 1,650.00 

Transportation of ties, rails, etc. (steel hauled 
1,000 miles and ties hauled 400 miles at 0.4 

ct. per ton mile) 1,023.80 

3,000 cu. yds. gravel ballast at $0.66 1,980.00 

Total, per mile $9,941.14 

Cost per mile of branch lines : 

97 tons steel at St. Paul at $31 $3,007.00 

6.46 tons angle bars at $34.20 220.93 

0.75 tons bolts at $55 41.25 

3.4 tons spikes at $42.20 143.48 

107.61 tons handled in material yard, at $1. . . 107.61 

1 extra switch 27.50 

Contract price for track laying 375.50 

Train service, hauling to the front 375.00 

2.880 ties at $0.55 1,584.00 

Transportation of steel and ties 891.24 

1,500 cu. yds. ballast at $0.66 990.00 

Total, per mile $7,763.51 

The ballast was estimated thus : 

Per cu. yd. 

Contract price $0.27 

Repairs to steam shovels, etc 0.03 

Transportation 1% tons, 60 miles at 0.4 ct. per 
ton mile 0.36 

Total $0.66 

• 

In testifying regarding these quantities and prices, Mr. Gillette 
states that the Northern Pacific was not fully tie plated even on 
its main line ; that the contract price for track laying was ex- 
cessive ; that the allowance for train service was nearly three times 
what such service actually costs ; that the price of ties was 
excessive ; that the estimated price of the gravel ballast was at 
least 50% too high, and that the quantity of ballast per mile was 
fully 50% in excess of the actual quantity. 



1360 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Darling estimated the cost of eacli turnout as follows : 

Set of switch ties .....'...$ 54.00 

Switch stand... ..^ 13.3^0 

Connecting rod 1.55 

Frog , 33.00 

Split switch 31.00 

Rail braces 1.60 

Switch lamp 5.00 

Guard rails 8.80 

Freight charges 14.40 

Total $162.75 

For the weight of rail used, and considering the character of 
the average turnout, this estimate is high. 

Mr. Darling estimated the cost of the tunnels on the system as 
follows : 

3,390 lin. ft. tunnels under 700 ft. in length. 

1,090 lin. ft. tunnels of 700 to 1,200 ft. each. 

7,548 lin. ft. tunnels of 1,200 to 4,000 ft. each. 

9,833 lin. ft. tunnels, very long tunnel. 

The above are single track tunnels lined with concrete. Beside 
these there were 4,919 lin. ft. of single track tunnels lined with 
wood, and 1,656 lin. ft. of double track tunnel lined with concrete. 

The cost of single tunnels per lineal foot was estimated as 
follows : 

Concrete lining : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price $ 9.00 

1 Vi bbls. cement 2.50 

Freight 1.00 

Total $12.50 

With concrete averaging 2 ft. in thickness, there would be 4.1 
cu. yds. per lin. ft. ; hence the cost of lining would be 4.1 X $12.50 
= $51.25 per lin. ft. of tunnel. 

The cost of short tunnels (up to 800 ft.) was estimated as follows 
per lin. ft. : 

Per lin. ft. 

Contract price .$ 50.00 

Add 10% for extra excavation to make room 

for lining 5.00 

Concrete lining 51.25 

False work 13.00 

Total . $119.25 

iFor similar tunnels lined with wood instead of concrete, the 
estimate was $24.75 per lin. ft. for wood lining plus $55 for ex- 
cavation, making a total of practically $80. 

For longer tunnels the item of lining remained the same, but 
the item of excavation was estimated as follows: 

Length of tunnel: Price per ft. 

Up to 700 ft $50 plus 10% = $55.00 

700 to 1,200 ft 55 plus 10%= 60.50 

1,200 to 4,000 ft 75 plus 10% = 82.50 

4,000 to 10,000 ft 90 plus 10%= 99.00 



RAILWAYS. 1361 

The 10% is added to cover the cost of the extra excavation to 
make room for the lining, and to these prices must be added the 
cost of the lining itself. 

Mr. Gillette testified that the unit prices for tunnel excavation 
were very liberal, and that the allowance for lining was excessive. 
The allowance for "falsework," he said, seemed to be in error by a 
misplaced decimal point, and would be nearer correct if it were 
$1.30, since it could refer to nothing but the materials used in the 
forms, centers, etc. 

Mr. Darling's estimate of the cost of short double track tunnels 
was as follows per lin. ft. : 

Contract price $50 plus 10% % 55.00 

11.5 cu. yds. extra excavation at $3 34.50 

5.2 cu. yds. concrete at $12.50 65.00 

Falsework 13.00 

Total $167.50 

Mr. Darling's estimate of bridges was not given in much detail, 
but was as follows: 

Howe truss bridges $ 694,580 

Steel and combination bridges 9,950,248 

359,000 lin. ft. trestles at $10 3,590,000 

Trestles filled with earth 3,012,415 

Total bridging $17,247,243 

Other items were estimated as follows: 

4,575 miles fencing at $154.55 % 707,290 

Water supply 1,971,200 

1,750,000 sq. ft. wharfs and docks at $0.70. . 1,725,000 

Coaling stations 635,936 

3,412,000 sq. ft. stock yards at 4.48 cts 152,857 

74 track scales at $1,456 107,671 

3,464 cattle guards at $16.80 57,195 

Roundhouses, turntables, power houses, etc. 1,680,448 

Shop buildings 2,091,650 

Warehouses 2,886,016 

Headquarters building 756,600 

Passenger stations 1,102,304 

Combination stations 1,408,960 

Interlocking plant 123,555 

Mile posts and signs (5,785 miles at $22.40) 129,584 

Ash pits 79,067 

Oil and sand houses at $1.68 per sq. ft 120,960 

Block system 44,307 

Miscellaneous buildings and piping 1,578,528 

320 miles snow fences at $1,680 537,600 

The above costs include freight on the materials, and, in nearly 
every instance, this freight was estimated at 12% of the unit price 
assumed ; thus, oil and sand houses were estimated at $1.50 per 
sq. ft. plus 12% for freight, making a total of $1.68 per sq. ft. 



1362 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following unit prices for building were used by Mr. Darling, 
and do not include freight : 

Frame roundhouses, per stall $1,300.00 

Brick roundhouses, per stall 2,100.00 

Turntables, each 5,000.00 

Brick shops (l-story) per sq. ft 1.50 

Brick shops (f-story) per sq. ft 2.50 

Frame shops (1-story) per sq. ft 1.00 

Frame warehouses, per sq. ft 1.20 

Brick warehouses, per sq. ft 1.60 

Frame passenger stations, per sq. ft 1.50 

Brick passenger stations, per sq. ft 2.50 

Frame combination stations (1-story) per 

sq. ft , . . 1.50 

Frame combination stations (2-story) per 

sq. ft 2.50 

Oil and sand houses, per sq. ft 1.50 

Mr. Darling failed to give the number of square feet of each 
of these different kinds of buildings. 

For purposes of comparison, Mr. Gillette rearranged the foregoing 
figures of cost, following the classification used by the Interstate 
Commerce Commission, and divided each item by 5,875 miles, which 
is the mileage of main line and branches on the Northern Pacific 
system. The following table gives the results of this calculation, 
showing the cost per mile of main line and branches, and the 
percentages : 

Per mile. Per cent. 

1. Engineering ? 1,027 2.04 

2. Grading 12,814 25.44 

3. Tunnels 670 1.33 

4. Bridges, trestles and culverts 3,722 7.38 

5. Ties 2,719 5.40 

6. Rails 4,850 9.63 

7. Frogs and switches 342 0.68 

8. Track fastenings 705 1.40 

9. Track laying 1,128 2.24 

10. Ballasting 1,776 3.53 

11. Fencing 116 0.23 

12. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 30 0.06 

13. Interlocking and signal 25 0.05 

14. Telegraph lines 247 0.49 

15. Station buildings 1,138 2.26 

16. Shops and roundhouses 675 1.34 

17. Machinery and tools 186 0.37 

18. Water stations 337 0.67 

19. Fuel stations Ill 0.22 

20. Warehouses 488 0.97 • 

21. Docks and wharves 292 0.50 

22. Miscellaneous structures 4.03 0.80 

23. Interest 3,860 7.66 

24. Marine equipment 106 0.21 

25. Contingencies 3,509 6.97 

26. Freight equipment 5,202 10.32 

27. Passenger equipment 1,002 1.97 

28. Locomotives 2,804 5.57 

29. Floating equipment 86 1.17 

Total $ 50,370 100.00 

Total 295,916,693 

Right of way and station grounds.... 107,772,743 

Grand total $403,689,436 



RAILWAYS. 1363 

The above does not include lines In Manitoba, estimated to cost 
$7,000,000 to reproduce, nor the coal properties valued at $50,720,120. 

It will be noted that the $50,370 per mile multiplied by the 
5,874.91 miles does not give exactly the total of $295,916,693. This 
is due to the fact that a slide rule was used in computing the cost 
of each item per mile, and absolute precision was not obtained. 
However, the error is only $4 per mile. 

The reader should also note that the above costs per mile are 
not costs per mile of track, but per mile of all main and branch 
lines. Since there are 7,694.79 miles of all track, and only 5,874.91 
miles of main and branches, there are 0.77 mile of main and 
branches for each 1.00 mile of "all tracks." Hence if we multiply 
any of the above 29 items by 0.77 we shall have the cost per mile 
of all tracks. Thus, item 9, Track Laying, is $1,128, which is the 
cost per mile of main line and branches, sidings and yards being 
lumped in. But the estimated cost of laying each mile of every 
kind of track is 0.77 X $1,128 = $868. 

In our issue of June 22, 1907, are given estimates of the cost 
of all the railways in "Wisconsin and Michigan. In a subsequent 
issue we shall give the estimated cost of the Great Nortliern Ry. 
system. A comparison of these various estimates sliould prove 
instructive to every engineer interested in railway construction. 

Itemized Cost of the Great Northern Railway System as Esti- 
mated by Its Chief Engineer.* — In our issue of April 15 we gave an 
estimate of the cost of the Northern Pacific Railway similar to the 
one that will be given here. Both these estimates were presented 
as testimony before the Interstate Commerce Commission in their 
hearing of the "Spokane Rate Case." Since the object of the hearing 
was to ascertain the reasonableness of railway rates on the N. P. 
and on the G. N. railways, the railways naturally claimed a high 
physical value for their property. As stated in our April 15 issue, 
Mr. Halbert P. Gillette, testifying in behalf of the city of Spokane, 
claimed that the estimates presented by the railways were much too 
high, frequently being high not only as to unit prices but as to 
quantities. 

Mr. A. H. Hogeland, Chief Engineer of the Great Northern Rail- 
way, presented the following as his estimate of the cost of reproduc- 
ing the railway new at present prices. 

The mileage of the Great Northern under operation April 1, 1907, 
was: 

Miles. 

Main track 6,523.09 

Second, 3d, 4th, 5th and 6th track 112.25 

Side track 1,480.24 

Grand total of all tracks 8,115.58 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908. 



1364 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Hogeland's estimate of the cost was presented in the following 
summarized form: 

1. Engineering $ 6,870,187 

2. Right of way and station grounds.... 87,067,532 

3. Grading 93,098,889 

4. Tunnels 7,447,620 

5. Bridges, trestles and culverts 17,953,028 

6. Ties 18,690,731 

7. Rails 31,054,392 

8. Track fastenings 7,375,495 

9. Frogs and switches 904,450 

10. Ballast 10,509,000 

11. Track laying and surfacing 6,998,409 

12. Fencing right of way 760,815 

13. Crossings, cattle guards and signs. . . . 1,922,160 

14. Interlocking or signal apparatus 386,190 

15. Telegraph lines 2,198,283 

16. Station buildings and fixtures 3,276,300 

17. Sliops, roundhouses and turntables. . . . 3,667,900 

18. Shop machinery and tools 1,779,692 

19. Water stations 1,983,325 

20. Fuel stations 575,700 

21. Grain elevators 2,708,100 

22. Storage warehouses 276,500 

23. Docks and wharves 1,222,900 

24. Gas making plants 15,000 

25. Miscellaneous structures 3,194,850 

26. Track and bridge tools '. 142,877 

27. Stores and supplies on hand Feb. 28, 

1907 5,395,463 

28. Contingencies 15,291,252 

29. Equipment: 

Locomotives $10,756,324 

Passenger cars 4,915,764 

Frt. cars and other equip. 25,249,096 

40,921,184 



Total $373,688,224 

30. General and legal expenses (1%) 3,736,882 



Total I $377,425,106 

31. Interest during constr. (10% ) 37,742,510 



Grand total $415,167,616 

Engineering was estimated at 3% of all items requiring engineer- 
ing supervision, being all items except items 2, 26, 27, 29, 30 and 31. 

Right of way and station grounds were estimated by the Right of 
Way Department. 

The grading was estimated as follows : 

27,018 acres clearing at $82.50 $ 2,228,985 

340,000 sq. rods grubbing at $1.65 561,000 

165,438,650 cubic yards earth at $0.31 51,285,982 

33,973,350 cubic yards hardpan at $0.45 15,288,008 

8,441,860 cubic yards loose rock at $0.55 4,643,023 

12,771,060 cubic yards solid rock at $1.10 14,048,166 

1,765,675 cubic yards riprap at $2.00 3,531,350 

92,500 cubic yards retaining wall at $9.00 832,500 

194,250 cubic yards slope wall at $3.50 679,875 



Total grading $93,098,889 



RAILWAYS. 1365 

Mr. Hogeland testified that the quantities of grading were arrived 
at as follows: "For 82% of the mileage of the system the actual 
quantities moved in construction were obtained from Engineering 
Department records. For the balance of the system the quantities 
could not be obtained In that way, because no records were avail- 
able, and they were estimated from profiles and by comparison with 
adjacent portions of the system where the quantities were known. 
To these quantities were added the quantities moved since con- 
struction, in widening banks, reducing grades, taking out sags, filling 
bridges and widening and deepening cuts. The result being the 
actual quantities as nearly as possible to arrive at same, required to 
make the roadbed as it exists to-day." 

It will be noted that Mr. Hogeland's estimate gives an average of 
33,250 cu. yds. of excavation per mile of main track, distributed 
thus: 

Per cent. 

Earth 75.0 

Hardpan 15.4 

Loose rock 3.8 

Solid rock 5.8 

Total 100.0 

Mr. Hogeland testified that the part of the G. N. east of Havre 
(4,553 miles of main line) averaged 27,760 cu. yds. per mile, 
whereas the line west of Havre (2,082 miles of main line) averaged 
45,250. 

Mr. Hogeland gave the percentages as follows : 

East of West of 

Havre. Havre. 

Per cent. Per cent. 

Earth 88.4 57.0 

Hardpan 10.2 22.4 

Loose rock 1.1 7.4 

Solid rock 0.3 13.2 

Total 100.0 100.0 

Mr. Gillette testified that Mr. Hogeland's estimate of yardage 
per mile was much too high, and cited actual records of the G. N. 
In the state of Washington where much of tlie heaviest grading on 
the G. N. is found. But. as we shall publish in detail Mr. Gillette's 
quantities and estimates of cost of each of the railway systems 
in the state of Washington, the reader may make comparisons for 
himself. 

Mr. Hogeland arrived at his unit prices as follows : 

Clearing : Per acre. 

Contract price $75.00 

Transporting men, tools and supplies 7.50 

Total .?82.50 



1366 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Grubbing : Per sq. rod. 

Contract price $1.50 

Transporting men, etc 0.15 

Total $1.65 

Earth : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price up to 1,000 ft. liaul $0.23 

Overliaul 0.035 

Transporting men, etc 0.045 

Total $0.31 

Hardpan : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price up to 1,000 ft $0.35 

Overhaul 0.045 

Transporting men, etc ' 0.055 

Total $0.45 

Loose rock': Per cu. yd. 

Contract price up to 1,000 ft $0.45 

Overliaul 0.045 

Transporting men, etc 0.055 

Total $0.55 

Solid rock : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price up to 1,000 ft $1.00 

Overhaul - 0.045 

Transporting men, etc ; . 0.055 

Total $1.10 

Riprap : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price $1.50 

Overhaul or train service 0.35 

Transporting, etc 0.15 

Total $2.00 

Retaining wall : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price (concrete or rubble) '. . . $7.50 

Train service 0.80 

Transporting men, etc 0.70 

Total $9.00 

Slope wall : Per cu. yd. 

Contract price $2.50 

Train service 0.75 

Transporting men, etc 0.25 

Total .$3.50 

It is interesting to note in this connection that the actual yardage 
oC excavation on about 700 miles of the G. N. in the state of 
Washington was 26,000 cu. yds. per mile for the original con- 
struction in the early '90's, and that the item of "overhaul" actually 
averaged less than % ct. per cu. yd. for every yard of material 
excavated, as compared with the 4% cts. estimated by Mr. Hoge- 
land. The free haul limit was 1,000 ft. Much the same criticism 
also applies to Mr. Hogeland's estimate of the cost of transporting 
men and supplies to and from the site of the work. 



RAILWAYS. 1367 

Mr. Hogeland's estimate of tunnels was as follows : 

5,232 lin. ft. unlined single track tunnel at $70 $ 366,240 

17,346 lin. ft. timber lined'single traclt tunnel at $120.... 2,08l',520 
6,139 lin. ft. concrete lined single track tunnel (Boulder) 

at $175 ■ 1.074,325 

13,813 lin. ft. concrete lined single track tunnel (Cascade) 

at $195 2,693,535 

5,141 lin. ft. concrete lined double track tunnel at Seattle, 

$1,848,000, two-thirds to G. N 1,232.000 

Total $7,447,620 

The unit prices were arrived at as follows : 

Unlined tunnel : Per lin. ft. 

Contract price for standard unlined section $55.00 

Extra excavation 8.00 

Transporting men, tools, supplies, etc 7.00 

Total $70.00 

Timber lined tunnel : Per lin. ft. 

Contract price for standard unlined section $ 55.00 

Enlargement for timber lining 30.00 

Timber and iron in place 25.00 

Transporting men, etc 10.00 

Total $120.00 

Concrete lined tunnels : Per lin. ft. 

(Boulder Tunnel.) 

Excavation $ 90.00 

Temporary timber lining 20.00 

Permanent masonry lining 45.00 

Transporting men, etc 20.00 

Total $175.00 

(Cascade Tunnel.) 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavation $ 95.00 

Temporary timber lining 25.00 

Permanent concrete lining 50.00 

Transporting men, etc 25.00 

Total $195.00 

Bridges, trestles and culverts : 

1 stone arch (Minneapolis), 1,770 lin. ft. ..$ 867,000 
260 steel bridges with masonry piers, 63,557 

lin. ft 6,941,645 

3,934 timber trestles, 429,851 lin. ft 5,216,480 

189 Howe truss spans, 19,996 lin. ft 905,478 

4,940 permanent culverts 3,021,685 

4,021 timber culverts 1,000,740 

Total $17,953,028 

Mr. Hogeland did not give the number of pounds of steel, yardage 
of masonry, etc. He stated, however, that he used the following 
unit prices, to which, he subsequently added % ct. per ton per mile 
for transporting the materials, so that these unit prices do not in- 
clude the cost of transporting the materials: 



1368 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Steel in bridges : Per ton. 

Contract price ready to erect, f. o. b. St. Paul. . .$65.00 

Mill and shop inspection ' 75 

Erection 12.00 

Painting , 2.25 

Total $80.00 

This is equivalent to 4 cts. per lb. erected, exclusive of the cost 
of transportation from St. Paul. 

Masonry : Per cu. yd. 

First class $12.00 

Second class 8.00 

Concrete 6.00 

Excavation, coffer dams, pumping, etc., variable. 

Timber trestles : 

Timber in place, per M $31.50 

Piling in place, per ft 0.35 

Wrought iron, per lb 0.05 

Freight to be added. 

Howe truss spans : Per lin. ft. 

44 ft $18.50 

60 ft 27.00 

75 ft 34.00 

87% ft 35.50 

100 ft 37.50 

125 ft 42.00 

150 ft 45.00 

Freight to be added. 

Howe truss timber, per M $25.00 

Rods, plates, etc 0.03 

Bolts 0.025 

Freight to be added. 

Vitrified pipe culverts : Per lin. ft. 

12-in. pipe $0.25 

18-in. pipe 0.50 

24-in. pipe 1.15 

27-in. pipe , 1.52 

Freight to be added. 

Cast iron pipe culverts, $30 per net ton, plus freight. 
Mr. Hogeland estimated 2,SS0 ties per mile of main track and 
2,750 per mile of side track, at the following cost: 

Delivered on right of way $0.48 

Train service and loading and handling 0.09 

Burnettizing y^ of all ties at 16 cts 0.04 

Transporting 500 mi. at % ct. ton mile 0.21 

Total $0.82 

He estimated 8,880 sets of switch ties as follows per set: 

P. o. b. mill, per M $60.00 

Transporting 500 miles, per M 15.00 

Total $75.00 



RAILWAYS. 1369 

The rails for the main traclt averaged 68.1 lbs. per yd. and for 
the side track 60 lbs. Five rails per mile were added for "repair 
rails." The cost of rails was estimated to be : 

Per gross ton. 

P. o. b. St. Paul, including handling $32.00 

Transp. 800 miles at % ct. ton mile 4.00 

Total .136.00 

Angle bars were estimated at 17,600 lbs. per mile of side track 
at a cost of: 

Per net ton. 

F. o. b. St. Paul ,140.00 

Transporting 800 miles 4.00 

Total $44.00 

Bolts and nuts were estimated at 1,800 lbs. per mile of main 
track and 1,500 lbs. per mile of side track, at a cost of: 

Per net ton. 

F. o. b. St. Paul $54.00 

Transporting 800 miles 4.00 

Total $58.00 

Spikes were estimated at 6,500 lbs. per mile of track, at a 
cost of : 

Per net ton. 

F. o. b. St. Paul $42.00 

Transporting 800 miles 4.00 

Total $46.00 

Tie plates were estimated at 29,000 lbs. per mile of track where 

fully tie plated (or 5 lbs. per tie plate), and it was assumed 

that 2,451 miles were fully tie plated and 1,950 miles half tie 

plated, as a cost of: 

Per net ton. 

F. o. b. St. Paul $45.00 

Transporting 800 miles 4.00 

Total $49.00 

It was assumed that 750 miles of track were provided with rail 
braces at 2,000 braces per mile, at a cost of 10 cts. per brace. 
Summary of track fastenings : 

Angle bars $3,090,736 

Bolts and nuts 431,288 

Spikes 1,304,284 

Tie plates 2,399,187 

Rail braces 150,000 

Total $7,375,495 



1370 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Gillette testified that these items were substantially correct 
except as to the number of tie plates, which was very much over- 
estimated. 

Frogs and switches: 
Complete turnout, f. o. b. St. Paul (3,750 lbs.) .. .$85.00 
Transp. 800 mi. at y^ ct. ton mile 7.50 

Total $92.50 

8,880 turnouts (except ties) at $92.50 $821,400 

302 crossing frogs at $275 83,050 

Total $904,450 

The "complete turnout" Includes switch stand and bolts, lamp, 
switch points, connecting and tie rods, plates, rail braces, clips, 
frog and guard rail, but does not include cross ties. 

Mr. Hogeland estimated that 3,750 miles of the main track 
averaged 3,000 cu. yds. of gravel ballast per mile, and that 1,900 
miles averaged 2,250 cu. yds. per mile. Of the 1,480 miles of side 
track, he estimated that 950 miles were ballasted with 1,500 cu. 
yds. per mile. This made a grand total of 16,950,000 cu. yds. of 
ballast on the system, the cost of which was estimated as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 
Loading, unloading, putting under track and 

dressing track $0.27 

Maintenance and repairs of steam shovels 0.05 

Train service, hauling, repairs and rental of equip- 
ment, transp. of men, tools and supplies 0.30 

Total $0.62 

Mr. Gillette testified that this estimate of unit cost was fully 50 
per cent more than the actual cost as shown by the records of the 
G. N. and that gravel ballast could be placed for less than 40 cts. 
per cu. yd. under existing conditions. 

Mr. Hogeland estimated the cost of track laying and surfacing as 
follows : 

Per mile. 

Curving rails, laying and surfacing $350.00 

Labor of tie plating (average) 45.00 ;• 

Train service and rental of equipment and haul- 
ing to front 390.00 

Transporting men, supplies, etc 50.00 

Total $835.00 

8,115.58 miles at $835 $6,776,409 

8,880 switches placed at $25 220,000 

Total $6,998,409 

Mr. Gillette testified that the item of train service was about 
three times higher than the actual cost, and that the transportation 
of men, etc., was even more excessive. 



RAILWAYS. 1371 

Mr. Hogeland estimated 4,611 miles of right of way fences at the 
following cost per mile : 

Per mile. 

Standard fence $150.00 

Train service distributing materials 10.00 

Transporting men, etc 5.00 

Total 1165.00 

He estimated the cost of crossings, cattle guards and signs as 
follows : 

6.635.34 miles of $75 for cattle guards, signs, etc.$ 497,650 

58 steel highway bridges (overhead) 1,344,000 

Timber bridges (overhead) 80,510 

■ Total $1,922,160 

Interlocking and signal apparatus : 

Interlocking $327,750 

Block signaling 58,440 

Total $386,190 

Telegraph lines : 

Labor $ 650,614.48 

Material 1,295,207.46 

Train service 16,638.00 

Transp. men, tools, material, etc 219,598.22 

Quadruplex instruments, batteries, furni- 
ture, etc., in 8 malij offices 16,225.00 

Total ; $2,198,283.16 

This is equivalent to the following cost per mile of telegraph line: 

Per mile. 

Labor $ 98.00 

Material 200.00 

Train service 2.50 

Transporting men, etc 33.00 

Quadruplex instruments, etc 2.50 

Total $336.00 

Mr. Gillette testified that this was an excessive estimate, and 
that, so far as the state of Washington was concerned, the G. N. 
did not own a large part of the telegraph lines and that, in fact, 
it was the common practice for railways to share the ownership of 
the lines with telegraph companies, as shown by the accounting 
records of tho railways : 

Passenger depots : 

Seattle (one-half interest) $ 295,000 

Spokane 137,500 

Grand Forks 37,500 

Fargo 41,800 

Sioux City 180,000 

Minneapolis imion depot 342,500 

29 other passenger depots of brick or stone. . 419,600 
705 frame passenger and freight depots. . . . 1,226,700 

14 freight depots of brick or stone 422,900 

Frame freight houses 172,800 

Total $3,276,300 



1372 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The St. Paul union decot (of which the G. N. owns one-ninth 
interest) and the Superior depot (of which the G. N. owns one- 
third interest) are not included above, but are included under 
"right of way and station grounds." Mr. Hogeland did not give 
any dimensions of buildings, so that it is impracticable to check 
his estimates. 

Shops, roundhouses and turntables : 

Shop, St. Paul $ 854,400 

Shop, St. Cloud 75,400 

Shop, Superior 91,000 

Shop, Barnesville 17,500 

Shop, Sioux City 12,500 

Shop, Devils Lake 60,000 

Shop, Havre 91,000 

Shop, Great Falls 42,000 

Shop, Spokane 124,800 

Shop, Everett 70,200 

Roundhouses, frame, 88 stalls, at $1,400 123,200 

Roundhouses, masonry, 554 stalls, at $2,100 1,163,400 

Boiler houses, power houses and small shops 216,000 

Turntables, frame, 10, at $1,800 18,000 

Turntables, steel, 57, at $6,500 370,500 

Cinder pits 140,000 

Store houses, oil and sand houses and scrap 

bins 198,000 

Total , ..$3,667,900 

Water stations : 

420 water stations (at $4,722). $1,983,325 

This includes tanks, pump houses, pumps, engines, wells, reser- 
voirs and all appurtenances of water stations. It will be noted 
that this supplies one station every 16 miles of road. 
Fuel stations : 

52 standard coaling stations at $9,500 $ 544,500 

52 platforms coaling stations, portion with 

cranes and buckets, $600 31,200 

Total $ 575,700 

Grain elevators : 

Minneapolis $ 240,000 

Superior, A and X 823,100 

Superior S (steel) 1,536,400 

Seattle, Smith's Cove 108,600 

Total $2,708,100 

Storage warehouses: 

Superior, flour shed $ ' 142,800 

Five wool houses 19,800 

Seattle, warehouse. Smith's Cove 113,900 

Total $ 276,500 

Docks and wharves (including dredging) : 

Superior No. 1 $ 175,000 

Superior No. 2 80,800 

Superior Nos. 5 and 6 and machinery 449,500 

Seattle, Smith's Cove dock 517,600 

Total $1,222,900 



RAILWAYS. 1373 

Miscellaneous structures : 

General office building, St. Paul % 590,000 

Division office buildings 18,000 

Boarding houses 87,500 

Section houses, bunk houses, hand car houses 853,500 

Ice houses 107,500 

Stock yards 157,600 

Track scales 92,250 

Snow eheds 295,000 

Snow fences 450,000 

Loading platforms 71,000 

Quarry and crusher plants 45,000 

Tie treating plant 85,000 

Commissary buildings 15,000 

Miscellaneous buildings 327,500 

Total $3,194,850 

Mr. Hogeland allowed 10 per cent of items 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 16, 17, 
19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 25 for "contingencies," to cover the increased 
cost of the work due to unforseen causes, such as fires, floods, 
tornadoes, accidents, etc. Mr. Gillette testified that, while an allow- 
ance for "contingencies" is certainly permissible in estimating the 
cost of projected work, it is not permissible in estimating the 
cost of completed work, particularly where the actual costs are on 
record for nearly all the work, as is the case of the G. N. 

In estimating the interest charges during construction, Mr. 
Hogeland assumed that the system, including equipment, would be 
unproductive for a period of two years. He assumed that it would 
take eight years to reproduce the system, 1,000 miles of track (main 
and side) being built per year, and that it would be two years 
after the beginning of the work before the first 1,000 miles would 
produce sufficient revenue to pay interest on the investment, and 
so on with the rest. Hence, two years at 5% is 10% of the total 
cost to be charged for interest. 

It will be interesting to compare this estimate with the actual 
Interest charges as taken from the ledgers of the different railway 
companies operating in the state of Washington. These data will 
be published in this journal in the near future, along with the 
other items of actual cost as ascertained by Mr. Gillette for the 
Railroad Commission of "Washington. 

For purposes of comparison with the estimated cost of the N. P. 
(published in our April 15 issue) we append the estimated cost of 
the G. N., by items per mile of main and second track, as deter- 
mined by dividing Mr. Hogeland's items by 6,635.34. 

The mileage of the Great Northern under operation April 1, 1907, 
was: 

6,635.34 miles main and second tracks. 
1,480.24 miles side tracks. 

8,115.58 miles total tracks. 

There are only 112.25 miles of second track included in the 
above, and it will be seen that there is 0.22 mile of side track 
per mile of main and second track. 



1374 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of repro- 
duction per mile 
of main and 
sscond track. 
(6,635.24 miles.) 

1. Engineering $ 1,035 

2. Right of way and station grounds 13,160 

3. Grading 14,030 

4. Tunnels 1,070 

5. Bridges, trestles and culverts 2,705 

6. Ties 2,820 

7. Rails 4,680 

8. Track fastenings 1,110 

9. Frogs and switches 135 

1 0. Ballast 1,585 

11. Track laying and surfacing 1,055 

12. Fencing right of way 115 

13. Crossings, cattle guards and signs 290 

14. Interlocking and signal apparatus 60 

15. Telegraph lines 330 

16. Station buildings and fixtures 495 

17. Shops, roundhouses and turntables 550 

18. Shop machinery and tools 270 

19. Water stations 300 

20. Fuel stations 90 

21. Grain elevators 420 

22. Storage warehouses 40 

23. Docks and wharves 185 

24. Gas making plants 2 

25. Miscellaneous structures 480 

26. Track and bridge tools 20 

27. Stores and supplies on hand 815 

28. Contingencies 2,300 

29. Equipment 6,170 

30. General and legal expense 563 

31. Interest 5,690 

Grand total $62,570 

Deduct right of way and station grounds 13,160 

Cost, exclu. of right of way and sta. grounds. .$49,410 
Deduct equipment 6,170 

Cost, exclusive of lands and equipment $43,240 

Contract Prices for Railway Work in the State of Washington.* — 

In building the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul line through the 
state of Washington, the contract prices for work let in 1906 were 
as follows: 

Average 
price 

per cu. yd. 

Earth excavation, haul 300 ft. or less, $0.17 to $0.22 $0.19 

Earth excavation, haul 300 to 1,000 ft, $0.21 to $0.27 0.23 

Hard pan, haul 1,000 ft. or less, $0.30 to $0.43 0.37 

Cement gravel, haul 1,000 ft. or less, $0.36 to $0.40 0.38 

Loose rock, haul 1,000 ft. or less, $0.33 to $0.45 0.42 

Solid rock, haul 1,000 ft. or less, $0.80 to $1.00 0.90 

Riprap, loose, haul 1,000 ft. or less 0.75 

Riprap, hand placed, haul 1,000 ft. or less 1.25 

Overhaul, for each 100 ft. beyond 1,000 ft 0.01 



* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 15, 1909. 



RAIUVAYS. 1375 

Other prices were as follows for different units : 

Clearing, per acre. $40.00 to $300.00 $120.00 

Grubbing, per station. $10.00 to $20.00 15.00 

Ties made on right-of-way, each 0.18 

Tunneling (800 ft. long or less), per lin. ft 45.00 

Tunnel enlargement, per cu. yd 3.00 

Tunnel timber in place, per M 28.00 

Log culverts, per lin. ft. of logs 0.14 

The contract prices on the Portland and Seattle Ry.. built in 
"Washington at the same time as the C, M. & St. P., were as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

Earth excavation, haul 300 ft. or less $0.17 

Earth excavation, haul 300 to 1.000 ft 0.21 

Hardpan, haul 1.000 ft. or less 0.35 

Loose rock, haul 1,000 ft. or less 0.40 

Shell rock, haul 1,000 ft. or less 0.30 

Solid rock, haul 1.000 ft. or less 0.90 

Riprap, loose, haul 1,000 ft. or less 0.90 

Riprap, hand placed, haul 1,000 ft. or less 1.25 

Overhaul for each 100 ft. beyond 1,000 ft 0.01 

Other prices were as follows on different units : 

Clearing, per acre $ 25.00 

Grubbing, per sq. rod 1.50 

Wrouglit iron, spikes, etc., in structures, per lb 0.05 

Cast iron in structures, per lb 0.05 

Square timber in culverts, per M 20.00 

Flatted timber in culverts, per lin. ft 0.12 

Tunnel in rock (16 x 24 ft.), per lin. ft 45.00 

Tunnel, extra excavation, per cu. yd 3.00 

Tunnel timber lining, including iron, per M 20.00 

Piling, per lin. ft., cut off 0.10 

Piling per lin. ft., driven 0.20 

44-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 9.25 

60-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 13.50 

75 to 88-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 19.00 

100-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 20.00 

120 to 125-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 21.00 

150-ft. Howe truss bridge, per lin. ft 22.00 

Concrete (cement furnished by the company), per cu. yd.. . . 6.00 
Concrete in tunnels (cement furnished by the company), per 

cu. yd 7.00 

Track laying, including loading all material, per mile 300.00 

Switches placed, each 25.00 

Placing tie plates, per mile, fully tie plated 75.00 

Ballast (gravel), including track surfacing, per cu. yd 0.27 

The price for ballast does not include hauling it, which was done 
hy the railway company. The prices for Howe truss bridges in- 
clude all materials except the iron, and all framing and erecting. 

Record of Rapid Construction on the C. P. Ry. — In the Jour. 
Assoc, 1884, p. 150, Mr. E. T. Abbott gives a brief account of the 
rapid construction of 500 miles of single track road across the 
prairies from Brandon (132 miles west of Winnipeg). Ground was 
broken May 28, 1882. and continusd co Dec. 31. In 182 working 
days, including stormy ones, with a force of about 5,000 men and 
1,700 teams, the contractors did the following: 

6,104,000 cu. yds. earth excavation (or 14,000 cu. yds. per mile), 
2,394 M. timber in bridges and culverts, 85,700 lin. ft. piling, and 
435 miles of track-laying. The track was all laid from one end, 
and in no case were the rails hauled ahead by team. Two iron 



1376 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cars were used, the empty one on its return being turned up 
beside the track to let the loaded one by. The tracklaying crew 
was equal to 4 miles a day. In the month of August, 32 miles of 
track were laid. The grading forces were scattered along 150 
miles ahead of the track. Sidings 1,500 ft. long were graded 7 
miles apart. 

It will be noted that the grading force averaged 34,000 cu. yds. 
excavation, 13 M. timber, and 500 ft. piling, per day. Hence each 
horse, plus 1% men, averaged 10 cu. yds. per day. 

Weight and Cost of Steel in Brooklyn Elevated Railways.*— In 

1806 there were about 20 miles of double track elevated railways 
in Brooklyn, and the average weight of steel was 6,780,000 lbs. per 
mile, or nearly 1,300 lbs. per lin. ft. This weight was about 20% 
in excess of what would have been necessary if the columns could 
have been placed in the roadway ; but, due to the narrow streets, 
fully 4% of the columns were placed at the edge of the sidewalks, 
necessitating transverse girders 35 to 45 ft. long. The average 
length of the longitudinal girders was 50 ft. The following is 
typical of the distribution of the steel in more modern sections 
(built in 1893), which averaged 7,840,000 lbs. per mile, or nearly 
1,500 lbs. per lin. ft., the transverse girders being 45 ft. long: 

Per cent. 

Columns 11.5 

Transverse girders 20.5 

Longitudinal girders (two tracks) 57.0 

Station platforms 5.0 

Bracing 6.0 

Total 100.0 

This work cost nearly 3 cts. per lb. erected, at which rate the 
steel work cost nearly ?45 per lin. ft., or less than $240,000 per mile. 
Ties 7x8 ins., spaced 15 ins. c. to c, were used ; guard rails, 6x8 
ins. The earlier lines were built with 60-lb. rails, but in 1893 rails 
weighing 85 lbs. were adopted. Stations average 1,800 ft. apart. 
The locomotives weighed 45,000 to 56,000 lbs., the wheel base 
being 16 ft. 

Cost of the Early Elevated Railways in New York City.* — The 

cost of a mile of double track elevated railway on Manhattan 
Island, New York City, up to 1880, when there were 35 miles, is 
given by Mr. R. E. Johnston as follows: 

Foundations, columns, super str. and track. .. $288,400 

Stations 60,000 

5 locomotives at $4,000 20,000 

12 cars at $3,300 39,600 

Total $408,000 

The foundation pit is 7 ft. square and 7 ft. deep. 

* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



RAILWAYS. 1377 

The foundation of each column is of brick 4x4 ft. on top and 
6x6 ft. at the base, 4 ft. high, resting on two 6-in. flagstones, 
3x7 ft. each, which in turn rest on 4 ins. of concrete. 

The cast-iron base of the column weighs 3,000 lbs. and is secured 
by four 2-in. bolts that pass through the foundation. 

The longitudinal girders are 44 ft. long. 

Nothing was paid for damage to property. 

Labor Cost of Track Laying on Elevated Railways In New York 
City, Also Some Costs of Erecting Steel.* — The following costs relate 
to track-laying on elevated roads on Manhattan Island, and, although 
the work was done 2 8 years ago, the records are given by Mr. G. 
Thomas Hall in sucli detail as to be applicable to-day, provided 
proper substitutions are made for wages. 

The Second Avenue line was double track, and about 7.4 miles 
long, of which about 2% was curved. 

The contractors found the following organization the most 
effective for track-laying: 

15 carpenters. 

10 skilled laborers assisting carpenters on the guard timbers. 

10 men laying steel rails. 

10 men clipping cross-ties. 

10 men spacing, marking and edging cross-ties. 

10 unskilled laborers for derrick, distributing materials, etc. 

2 horses with drivers. 

3 foremen. 

The clippers were kept 500 ft. ahead of the spikers, and the 
spikers 750 ft. ahead of the carpenters on the guard timbers. 
Horsepower was found to be cheaper than steam in hoisting track 
material from the street. The cross-ties were first hoisted, dis- 
tributed and spaced ; then marked for camber by means of T 
sights, adzed and clipped. Then the steel rails were in turn dis- 
tributed, lined up and spiked ; then the guard timbers were dis- 
tributed, ends jointed, gaged and bolted down ; the inside guard 
being put in place and finished with strap iron before the outside 
one was laid. A space of about 250 ft. intervened between the gangs 
employed on the two ranges of guard timbers. Everything work- 
ing smoothly, the above force laid about 260 ft. of double track per 
10-hr. day on tangent work. 

The following was the cost to the contractor of laying complete 
1,000 lin. ft. of straight single track: 

Hoisting and distributing materials $ 40.00 

Laying cross-ties 65.00 

Laying steel rails 30.00 

Laying guard timbers 100.00 

Strap ironing guard timbers 20.00 

Incidentals, loss of time, repairing, tools, etc.... 25.00 

Superintendence 20.00 

Total for 1,000 ft ?300.00 

The contract prices were 35 cts. to 43 cts. per lin. ft. of single, 
straight track. 



*Engineering-Contracti7ig, .Tune 2, 1909. 



1378 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Wages of common laborers were 15 cts. per hr. The above crew 
of 70 men and 2 horses received about $145 a day, or practically 
20 cts. per hr. per man. 

The amount of materials in 1,000 ft. of single track was as 
follows : 

250 cross-ties, 6"x6"xl2', 9,000 ft. B. M. 

500 cross-ties, 6" x 6" x 8', 12,000 ft. B. M. 

3,000 wrought-iron clips, y2" x 21/2" x 5%". 

1,500 log screws. %"x6". 

67 steel rails (30'), 63 lbs. per yd. 

67 fish plates, %"x2y2"x20". 

268 fish plates bolts, %" X 4". 

3,000 spikes. 

7,000 lin. ft. guard timber, 6' x 8", 28,000 ft. B. M. 

1,500 guard rail bolts, %"x 141/2". 

150 log screws, %"xl2". 

2,000 lin. ft. strar) iron, %" X 21/2". 

300 strap iron bolts, 1/2" X 6y2". 

300 blunt bolts for strap iron, 1^" x 5". 

% bbl. Portland cement. 

It will be noted that laying the cross-ties cost about $3 per 1,000 
ft. B. M., and that laying the guard rail cost about $3.60 per 
1,000 ft. B. M. 

The cost of 30 cts. per lin. ft. of single track is equivalent to 
$1,584 per mile for tracklaying. 

To lay one "typical crossing" consisting of two cross-over tracks 
(one from each main track to a center track), comprising 218 lin. 
ft. of single track, with 5 frogs, from switches and outside guard 
timbers, with inside steel guard rails, cost as follows : 

Hoisting, adzing and clipping cross-ties $18.25 

Laying rails, frogs and switches 40.00 

Laying guard timbers 12.50 

Laying steel guard rails 4.25 

Total $75.00 

This is equivalent to 35 cts. per lin. ft. of the single track. 
The iron superstructure of this elevated road consisted of Warren 
longitudinal girders, whose upper chords rest upon the top of 
Warren transverse girders, supported by six-segment Phoenix 
columns. The weights were as follows : 

Lbs. per lin. ft. 

Transverse girders 200 

Longitudinal girders 130 

Bracing 8 

"A" caliber columns 117 

"B" caliber columns 140 

The columns were erected by a gang of 7 men and a team of 
horses, using a derrick wagon. This gang averaged 39 columns, of 
20 ft. each, erected per day, or about 4% tons. 

The same gang averaged 10 columns of 50 ft. each, or zy^ tons 
per day. 

The columns were held temporarily in place by inserting iron 
wedges inside the rim of the base casting. 



RAILWAYS. 1379 

The cost of placing a 3,200-lb. base casting, on wliich the column 
rests, was as follows : 

Per casting. 

Uncovering pier (15 cts. per hr.) $0.35 

Moving casting from sidewalk to pier (15 cts. per hr. ) .... 0.40 

Erecting derrick and setting casting (15 cts. per hr. ) 0.60 

Repaving, 25 sq. ft. (25 cts. per hr. ) 0.50 

Washing, tarring and bricking (25 cts. per hr.) 0.35 

Refilling (15 cts. per hr.) 0.15 

Preparing cement mortar (20 cts. per hr. ) 0.10 

Foreman and night watchman 0.50 



Total labor $2.95 

Vi bbl. cement, at $1 0.25 

V4 bbl. sand, at $1.25 per cu. yd 0.05 

32 brick, at $10 0.32 

V2 cu. yd. refuse carted away 0.38 

2% cu. ft. sand for paving 0.11 

Coal tar, cement work, etc 0.11 

Oil for lamps, etc 0.05 

Grand total $4.21 

The above is for company work. Later on contracts were let for 
$3.75 per 3,200-lb. base casting, and the contractor put in 15 cast- 
ings a day, as compared with 10 placed by the company's forces. 

The girders were erected by a traveler on the structure, with a 
crew of 12 men and one engineman for the 15-lip. engine, which 
consumed % ton coal per day. This crew raised 66 girders per 
10-hr. day, or 200 tons. 

The iron girders all being in place, the lateral bracing was then 
adjusted and riveted, and the columns very carefully plumbed with 
heavy iron plumb-bobs. Long columns were plumbed with a transit. 

Two coats of paint were applied, the first being an iron ore paint 
and second being white lead. The painting cost $1.50 per lin. ft. of 
double track road (not including station buildings), of which 36.8% 
was for labor. 

First Cost and Cost of Operation of Elevated Railways in Brook- 
lyn and New York.* — The following table gives costs of building 
double track elevated railways ' in Brooklyn during three different 
periods : 

1885 to 

Year. 1888. 

Miles of structure built 5.6 

Nuinber of stations 14 

Total net tons iron 19,488 

Average net tons per mile 3,473 

Maximum net tons per mile 3,578 

Minimum net tons per mile 2,907 

Cost of iron per ton $ 79.00 

Cost of each foundation 187.70 

Total cost per mile 542,441 

In explanation of the high cost of foundations it should be stated 
that, from 1885 to 1888, a brick foundation pier with a bluestone cap 



1S8S to 


1892 to 


1891. 


1903. 


5.4 


3.22 


19 


9 


16,203 


10,980*% 


3,001 


3,055 ■ 


3,566 


3,287 


2,842 


2,824 


$ 68.68 


$ 61.00 


140.00 


93.50 


332,352 


297,599 



''Engineering-Contracting, May 5, 1909. 



1380 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and cast-iron base was used under each post or column. During 
1888 to 1891 concrete was substituted for the brick, but the cast- 
iron base (below the street level) was retained. In 1892 and 1893, 
the cast-iron base was abandoned, and the columns were designed 
to rest directljL on the concrete at the street level. 

The 3.22 miles of structure built in 1892-1893 included 2,800 ft. 
of third and cross-over tracks, and the following were the average 
unit prices: 

Excavation (per cu. yd.) % 0.50 

Concrete (per cu. yd. ) 7.00 

Steel in structure (per net ton) 61.00 

Timber (per M) 21.00 

Steel rails per gross ton (85 lbs. per yd.) 31.00 

Labor, laying single track (per ft.) 0.35 ^ 

The following gives the detailed costs per mile of structure : 

Per mile of 
double track. 
200 foundations (1,900 cu. yds. concrete) in- 
cluding bolts , ? 18,649 

3,055 net tons iron in place 184,423 

Double track, materials and labor 43,248 

Stations 38,819 

Engineering 9,934 

Miscellaneous 2,526 

Total $297,599 

There are 683,670 ft. B. M. timber per mile, in ties, guard rails, 
etc., which, at $21 per M, is equivalent to $14,357 per mile for 
timber. 

It will be noted that engineering cost 3.35% of the total, and that 
the average weight of steel in the structure is 1,157 lbs. per lin. ft., 
and that the average span length of the plate girders is about 53 ft. 
Considering merely the cost of materials and labor, a span of 30 ft. 
would have been the most economical, and would have resulted in a 
saving of 5%, considering only the foundations and superstructure, 
but the longer span (53 ft.) was adopted to reduce damage to 
abutting property. 

The maximum work of erection in 10 hrs. was 12 spans of 52 ft. 
each, weighing 315 tons; an average of 8 spans per day was easily 
maintained. 

In the track laid prior to 1888, the ties were 6x8 ins., spaced 22 
ins. c. to c, and the rails were 60-lb. A 6 x 8-in. guard timber was 
bolted each side of each rail. In 1888, the ties were made 7x8 ins., 
spaced 16 ins. c. to c, and the rails were still 60-lb. In 1892 an 
85-lb. rail was adopted, to secure a longer life of the rail and to 
reduce the cutting of the rails into the ties, and the ties were 
spaced 15 ins. c. to c. 



RAILWAYS. 1381 

The contract prices for stations were about as follows in 1893: 

One stair- Two stair- 
way, ways. 

Carpenter work $3,095 $3,578 

Sheet metal work 1,432 926 

Painting and decorating- 409 540 

'Plumbing work 225 296 

Heating apparatus 225 295 

Architectural work 2,100 2,200 

Total $7,467 $7,835 

These were ordinary inter-track stations. It is a serious economic 
mistake to build two stations outside of the tracks, instead of one 
between, as it doubles not only the first cost but the cost of station 
service and maintenance. Station service and maintenance cost 
$2,400 a year per station. 

Terminal stations, containing trainmen's rooms, etc., cost about 
double the above. 

The cost of operating 16.9 miles of double track road, by steam 
locomotives, in Brooklyn in 1893 was as follows: 

Maintenance of Way and Structures: 

Repairs of track and structures $ 38,316.59 

Repairs of stations, shops, etc 13,032.29 

Other expenses 425.30 

Total $ 51,774.18 

Maintenance of Equipment: 

Repairs of locomotives $ 40,317.29 

Repairs of cars 53,039.53 

Repairs of machinery and tools 1,730.76 

Other expenses 11,847.72 

Total $ 106,935.30 

Conducting Transportation: 

Wages of conductors and guards $ 99,343.85 

Wages of engineers and firemen 205,180.83 

Fuel for locomotives 246,131.53 

Oil and waste 6,085.92 

Water supply 12,661.38 

Other train expenses and supplies 16,585.73 

Wages of station agents, gatemen, etc. . . . 158,331.71 

Station supplies 7,893.11 

Wages of flagmen, switchmen, etc 25,600.48 

Other expenses 67,225.84 

Total $ 845,040.38 

General Expenses: 

Salaries of officers and clerks $ 32,247.55 

General office expenses and supplies 809.30 

Stationery and printing 6,746.94 

Advertising 444.80 

Legal expenses 16,574.05 

Damage to property 915.08 

Damage to persons 14,434.74 

Telegraph maintenance and operation.... 1,195.69 

Other expenses 14,595.55 

Total $ 87,963.70 

Grand total operating expenses $1,091,713.56 



1382 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The operating expenses were 56.82% of the gross receipts. 

There were 38,110,376 passengers carried. 

There were 50 stations in the 16.91 miles. 

There were 76 locomotives and 230 cars to operate the 16.91 
miles of elevated road. This is equivalent to about 4.5 locomotives 
and 13.6 cars per mile of road, there being about 3 cars to eacli 
locomotive. 

In Engineering-Contracting , Oct. 7, 1908, the cost of 35 miles of 
double track elevated railway built on Manhattan Island prior to 
1880, was given as follows per mile: 

Foundations, columns, superstructure and 

track $288,400 

Stations 60,000 

5 locomotives, at $4,000 20,000 

12 cars, at $3,300 39,600 

Total $408,000 

It will be noted that the equipment cost nearly $60,000 per mile. 
If the locomotives and cars cost the same for the Brooklyn lines. 
It will be seen that the cost of locomotive repairs was 13% of the 
first cost, for that item amounted to $530 per locomotive during 
the year 1893. The cost of car repairs amounted to $230 per car 
for 1893, which Is about 7% of the first cost. 

Our Oct. 7, 1908, issue gives the distribution of steel in the vari- 
ous parts of the Brooklyn elevated railways built in 1893, as 
follows : 

Per cent. 

Columns 11.5 

Transverse girders 20.5 

Longitudinal girders (two tracks) 57.0 

Station platforms 5.0 

Bracing 6.0 

Total 100.0 

It is also stated that the locomotives weighed 45,000 to 56,000 lbs., 
the wheel base being 16 ft. 

Cost of Foundations of the Boston Elevated Railway. — Mr. George 
A. Kimball gives the following relative to foundations for the Bos- 
ton Elevated Ry., built in 1899. In general the foundations extend 
10 to 12 ft. below the ground surface, to provide against being 
undermined by subsequent excavations for sewers, building founda- 
tions, etc. They are built of concrete in courses 2 ft. thick, stepped 
up with 6-in. offsets. The top course is 4 x 4 ft., and supports a 
cast-iron pedestal 12 ins. high to receive the steel post. Most of the 
foundations were built on the "cost plus a percentage plan." There 
were 1,133 foundations built, half n,t a cost of $260 each, and half 
at a cost of $700 each due to soft ground and interference with 
■underground structures. This includes cost of pedestal castings, 
anchor castings and anchor bolts, which cost $22 per foundation ; 
it also includes cost of moving underground structures which aver- 
aged $18 per foundation pier. The average foundation cost $480, 



R.UUJ'.IYS. 1383 

which is equivalent to flT.nO per lin. ft. of double track structure, 
or $91,000 per mile. 

It will be noted that these foundations cost five times as much 
per mile of double track road as those in Brooklyn and New York, 
indicating extravagant design. 

Cost of Elevated Railway and Subway, Berlin, Germany. — In 19(n 
an electric, double track elevated and subway i-ailway was com- 
pleted in Berlin, Germany. The motor cars each have two 4-wheel 
trucks, with axle loads of 61/0 tons, axles being spaced 5.9, 15.0, 
5.9 and 11.2 ft., in sequence. The weights of steel in different por- 
tions of the double track elevated road were : 

Span, ft. Lbs. per lin. ft. 

39.4 810 

49.2 (at stations, but 'iot incl. stations) 1,145 

54.1 940 

68.9 1,210 

There are 5.13 miles of double track elevated line and 1.22 miles 
of subway. There are 10 stations on the elevated portion and 3 
In the subway. 

The main power plant building is 73 x 132 ft., and houses 3 com- 
pound engines, each developing 900 hp. normally, or 1,200 hp. maxi- 
mum. Trains are run on 2 % to 5 min. headway, at a maximum 
speed of 30 miles per hour. Each train consists of 3 cars (each 
40 ft long), two of which are motor cars. 

The cost was : 

Construction .$4,400,000 

1 Power house, rolling stock, equipment 950,000 

• Extras 800,000 

' Interest during construction 500,000 

Total $6,650,000 

The construction cost of $4,400,000 was distributed thus: 

1.221 miles double track subway, at $860.000 .... $1,050,000 
t 5,154 miles double track elevated, at $650,000... 3,350.000 
i 

6,375 miles total $4,400,000 

There were about 18,000 tons of steel used in the elevated (in- 
cluding stations), which is eauivalent to about 1,320 lbs. per lin. ft. 
of double track elevated. The contract orice on this work ranged 
from 3 to 414 cts. per lb. erected. 

There were 2,200 tons of steel used in the subway. 
Some of the other contract prices were : 

Per cu. yd. 

Concrete in subway $4.60 

Brick foundation masonry 5.25 

Arch masonry 7.85 

It will be noted that the power house and equipment cost about 
15% of the total cost, and amount to about $150,000 per mile of 
double track railway. 



1384 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of New York Subway Rock Work.* — By observation and 
through the aid of an assistant I have secured reliable data relat- 
ing to every item of cost on several typical sections of the New 
York Rapid Transit Ry., including excavation, concrete, steel con- 
struction, etc. ; and it is astonishing to find how high the labor cost i 
of the work has been. The high cost may be attributed to several ; 
causes. In the first place, the contractors were compelled to employ ■ 
union labor, much of which was inefficient. In the second place the' 
foremen on this work were, as a rule, paid such small salaries that 
the best class of foremen were not kept. In the third place excava- 
tion and other work in crowded city streets is obviously made diffl- 
cult ; the supporting of pipes, tracks, etc., adding greatly to the 
cost in certain parts of the city. In fact, in the lower part of New 
York, where the material is all sand, I have found that 50 cts. per 
cu. yd. has been expended in shoring, bracing, etc. In the fourth 
place the light blasts required by city rules leave the tough mica 
schist in large chunks upon which much labor must be expended in 
gadding and sledging ; for practically all the rock was broken to 
one or two-man size so that it could be hauled away in dump 
wagons. 

The work that I am about to describe involved the excavation of 
about 125,000 cu. yds. of tough mica schist in the upper part of the 
city, where the streets are not crowded and where there were very 
few pipes to be supported. The width of the excavation was 41 ft., 
and the depth averaged about 30 ft. One trolley track ran along the 
center of the street and had to be supported the entire distance. 
This track supporting was accomplished at comparatively slight ex- 
pense by using some ten second-hand railroad bridge trusses of 
66 ft. span, which were moved forward as the work progressed. 
Five cableways, each having an average span of 400 ft., were used 
for hoisting the rock in self-righting buckets, which were dumped 
into patent dump wagons. 

The average daily force employed was as follows : 

Rate per day. Total. 

4 foremen $3.50 $ 14.00 

80 laborers 1.50 120.00 

10 drill runners 2.75 27.50 

10 drill helpers 1.50 15.00 

2 blacksmiths 2.75 5.50 

2 blacksmiths' helpers 1.50 3.00 

5 holsters 3.00 , 15.00 

1 compressor man 4.00 4.00 

1 fireman 2.00 2.00 

2 timbermen 2.00 4.00 

3 waterboj^s 75 2.25 

20 teams 4.50 90.00 

Total per S-hr. day $302.25 



♦Gillette's "Rock Excavation," p. 2 71 



R.iiuwivs. las-T 

The average output of this force was only 150 eu. yds. of lock 
ptr day. 

— Cost per cu. yd.-- 

Wages per Average of Best 

8-hr. shift. 30 months. montli. 

Drill runners $2.75 .$0,174 .$0,150 

Drill helpers 1.50 .100 .082 

Blacksmiths 2.75 ,0.32 .025 

Blacksmiths' helpers 1.50 .018 .012 

Compressor man 4.00 .016 .014 

Firemen 2.00 .012 .014 

Hoist enginemen ' 3.00 .100 .051 

Carpenters 3.50 .008 • .000 

Timbermen 2.00 .024 .000 

Waterboys 0.75 .012 .010 

Laborers 1.50 .785 .745 

Foremen 3.50 .102 .0fl5 

Teams (with drivers) 4.50 .G20 .581 

Total wages $2,002 $1,779 

Cu. yds. excavated 125,000 7,600 

To the foregoing must be added the cost of fuel, explosives, main- 
tenance, interest and depreciation of plant, etc., as follows : 

Cost per cu. yd. 

1/30 ton coke, at $4-50 $0,150 

0.6 lb. 40% dynamite, at 121/2 cts 0.075 

% exploder, at 4 cts 0.020 

Drill repairs (est'd at 50 cts. a day per drill) . . . .034 

Installing boiler and compressor 014 

Interest and depreciation (50%) of $7,000 

boiler and compressor plant 028 

Ditto for $3,500 drilling plant 014 

Total supplies, etc $0,335 

Add total wages 2.002 

Total $2,337 

To this sum should be added 3 or 4% to cover general expenses, 
such as office rent, bookkeeping, night watchmen, insurance on la- 
borers, etc., which would bring the grand total to nearly $2.40 per 
cu. yd. of rock excavated. It will be seen by the description of the 
work and by the comparatively low cost of timberwork that the 
expense of supporting pipes and tracks was unusually low for such 
a city as New York. On the other hand, the cost of drilling was 
exceedingly high, being 2 8 cts. per cu. yd. for wages alone, if we 
include the blacksmiths' wages and half the wages of the com- 
pressor man and his fireman. The drills should be charged with 
about half the cost of the fuel, which adds 7% cts. more per cu. yd., 
making 35 14 cts. per cu. yd. for drilling, not including some 3% cts. 
for drill repairs (estimated) and I'^/y cts. for interest and depre- 
ciation. Adding these two items we have a total of 40 cts. per cu. 
yd. chargeable to drilling alone, which is exceedingly high for an 
open cut of this width and depth. It is a striking fact that each 
drill broke less than 15 cu. yds. of rock per 8-hr. day. The ineffi- 
ciency of the laborers is also well shown by their output of less 
than 2 cu. yds. per man per 8-hr. day. It is true that they had to 



1386 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

do a great deal of gadding, sledging and hand drilling to break tho 
rocli ready to load into buckets ; but anyone who saw the men at 
work must have been impressed with tlieir slowness. Tlie output 
of only 30 c-u. yds. per day per cableway sliows how the cableway 
output was limited by tlie drilling. The higli cost of hauling is also 
noteworthy, for the average haul was but little more than one mile. 
While it was difficult to get union laborers to do a fair day's 
work, I think that if the contractors along the subway had in all 
cases employed civil or mining engineers of known experience in 
rock excavation, a great deal of money would have been saved. 

Cost of New York Subway Earthwork.* — This is a class of work 
exceedingly expensive, not only on account of the work of sup- 
porting of pipes, buildings and car tracks, but because of the com- 
paratively small gangs that must be worked. This not only runs up 
the cost of superintendence, but due to the great number of fore- 
men employed, many bosses are exceedingly inefTicient. AVliile the 
laborers receive high wages (1.50 for 8 hrs. ), it will be noted that 
the foremen are paid altogether too low salaries to secure the best 
of their class. A good superintendent of railway excavation fre- 
quently receives $250 a month, and if he is worth anything, he is 
worth that. On extensive excavation, cheap foremen inean dear 
work, as the following illustrates quite clearly : 

Case I. Uptown, where the streets were not congested. Soft 
earth, ploughed, loaded witli shovels into patent dump wagons, 
hauled half a mile and dumped ; 1.9 cu. yds. place measure per 
wagon load. Excavation 55 ft. wide, in the street, and ultimately 
20 ft. deep. Snatch teams and hoisting engine used to pull loaded 
wagons out of the pit. Delays in hauling due to street blockades. 
Numerous pipes and conduits to be supported, necessitating car- 
penters, plumbers, etc. Tlie following gives the cost for one month's 
work, including tearing up pavement ; 

Laborers 1,130 days at $1.50 $1,695.00 

Teams, hauling and plowing 520 days at 4.50 2,340.00 

Snatch teams 30 days at 5.00 150.00 

Carpenters ISOdaysat 2.50 450.00 

Engineman 22 days at 2.75 60.00 

Fireman 22 days af 2.00 44.00 

Engineman (night) 22 days at 2.00 44.00 

Superintendent 100.00 

Foremen 59 days at 3.00 177.00 

Two timekeepers and load clieckers 135.00 

Three watchmen 78 days at 1.50 117.00 

Plumbers, caulkers, etc 300.00 

'L " Total for 6,400 cu. yds. at 88 cts $b,612.00 

The foregoing cost was at the beginning of the work, and under 
what might be regarded as favorable conditions. The following 
gives the general average of several jobs at a later period, and may 
be taken as being under, rather than over the actual cost, because 
all timber work and incidentals are probably not included : 



*Gillette's "Earthwork and Its Cost," p. 176. 



RAILWAYS. 138/ 

Case II. Conditions same as in Case I, except tliul excavation, 
?ar tracks, etc., required more support. 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor excavating and superintendence $0.50 

Teaming 0.4 

Materials and supplies O.Oii 

Labor on bracing and sheeting. .- 0.06 

Materiids for bracing and sheeting 0.07 

Labor on Ijridges and barricades 0.01 

Materials for bridges and barricades 0.01 

Taking up pavement 0.01 

Labor for pumping and draining 0.02 

Materials for pumping and draining 0.01 

Labor on engines 0.0 4 

Fuel for engines 0.01 

Total $1.2.3 

Hauling away in scows 0.32 

Grand total $ 1 . .", r. 

A charge of 60 cts. per wagon load, which was equivalent to 
3i! cts. per cu. yd. (as above recorded), was made for removing the 
earth from the water front on scows. 

The subcontractor's prices for this earthwoi'k averaged about %'2 
pei- cu. yd. On some sections as high as $2.50 per cu. yd. was paid, 
and in those sections the contractors found that it cost them $2.5 
per lin. ft. of street to keep the car tracks in shape, due largely, 
however, to poor methods of management. 

On downtown work, where the streets were not entirely torn up, 
but were kept planked over so as not to interfere with traffic, the 
cost of earth excavation was $3.65 per cu. yd. (See the following 
paragraphs. ) 

Itemized Cost to the Contractors of the New York Subway for 
Earth and Rock Excavation, Bracing, Concrete, Waterproofing and 
Steel Work.* — In view of the fact that the City of New York will 
doubtless construct scores of miles of subways for rapid transit, any 
data of actual cost of consti-uction will be of great value to con- 
tractors and subcontractors who may bid upon subway work in the 
future. Then, too, other large cities will surely be forced to build 
subways similar to those in New York and Boston. 

"We have secured complete itemized records of the actual cost of 
labor and inaterials required to build several sections of the subway 
in New York City, and these records are now published for the 
first time. 

We shall first give the methods and costs of building a half-mile 
section from the Post Office to the Battery. The excavation 
<vork was not done by the "cut and cover method" ; that is 
to say, a trench was not dug in the street and left entirely open, as 
was the practice on nearly all subway work between the years 1902 
and 1904. So much of a hue and cry had been raised against the 
open-cut method that when the contract for the Brooklyn Extension 
was drawn, the contractors were required to keep the streets con- 
tinuously open for trafflc, except at night time. 

* Engineering-Contracting, Feb., 1906. 



1388 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



To meet this requirement the contractors devised the following 
method of operation : In the night time a short section of the 
street pavement was removed, stringers were laid down, and a plank 
roadway was laid upon the stringers. Then the excavation was 
proceeded with, underneath this plank roadway. In order to make 
the excavation, small shafts were sunk through the sidewalk at in- 
tervals of about a quarter of a mile. Through these shafts all 
excavated materials were removed and all construction materials 
were taken in. 



X ^-,Of f fi'ne eifJaerl E^aacrHo^ 




Fig. 10. — Excavation, New York Subway. 



At each shaft a temporary bridge was built (Fig.' 10) spanning 
the street, and upon this bridge were mounted the derricks and 
hoisting engines. Each overhead bridge consisted of a 52 X 60 ft. 
wooden platform carried by I beams, the whole supported by well- 
braced timber trestles set upon each curb line, as shown below. 
Each platform carried two stiff-leg derricks set opposite each other, 
also a hoisting engine and a spoil-bin with chutes. The derricks 
were operated during the daytime by compressed air, but at night 
the necessary power was supplied by a vertical boiler on one plat- 
form and an electric motor on the other. 

The work of substituting timber platforms for street pavement 
was begun at the overhead bridges. Small strips of pavement 



RAiLiJ'.ivs. insn 

were removed at each end of the platform and shallow excavations 
made in which trenches were dug. Longitudinal 24-in. I beams 
were placed in each trench and blocked up on the trench bottom. 
The paving between the trenches was then taken up and a layer of 
earth removed to make room for the timber platform. This was 
composed of S-in. I beams, spread 7^^ ft. apart, with their ends 
resting on the girders. On this was placed 6-in. roadway planking. 
All this work was done at night and in such short sections that 
the street could be restored before daylight. 

After the first section of platform had been built, a shaft S ft. 
square was sunk through the west sidewalk to a depth of 10 ft. 
From this shaft the upper part of the excavation was tunneled 
under the platform, the longitudinal girders being supported by 
posting down as the work progressed Similar posts and blocking 
were placed under the street railway. When sufficient headway 
had been secured, shafts 5 ft. square were sunk to the subgrade 
of the subway. A portion of the concrete floor of the subway was 
built in the bottoms of these shafts and a post erected to carry the 
girders. The temporary blocking under the railway conduits was 
then removed and replaced by saddle beams strung from the 
girders. 

An alternative method for carrying the tracks and street sui-face 
was used where the excavation was obstructed by pipes and con- 
duits. Surface platforms were built on each side of the street be- 
tween the curb and the nearest street railway conduit. A lateral 
drift was then carried under the conduit and a needle beam in- 
serted. These beams, which were blocked up against the conduit, 
carried on their outer ends longitudinal I beams which supported 
the inner edges of the surface platforms. The other edge of these 
platforms rested on the T beam girders supported by the blocking in 
the trenches at the curbs. After the earth between the drifts was 
removed, the needle beam shores were reinforced by jacks resting 
on continuous longitudinal sills. The posts were then set in shafts 
and replaced the jackscrews and blocking. 

All of the excavated material was taken to the shafts and hoisted 
by the derricks to the overhead platform, where it remained until 
discharged through the chutes into wagons on the street below. The 
excavation was done by pick and shovel, cars being used to trans- 
port the material to the nearest shaft. These cars were either 
pushed by the laborers or drawn by a mule. The excavated ma- 
terial was sand, for the most part, very easy to dig. Indeed, much 
of the sand was used for concrete. 

In the following tabulation is given the actual unit cost to the 
contractor of the construction of a section about one-half mile long 
of the Brooklyn Extension of the Rapid Transit subway of New 
York City. The period covered by these costs extends over six'een 
months : 



1390 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Earth Excavation. 

(112,288 cu. yds.) 

Per cu. yd. Total. 

Labor $1.60 ?179,998 

Materials and plant 0.32 35,590 

Power 0.02 2,676 

Dump charges (60 cts. per load) 0.25 27,934 

Total unit cost .$2.19 

Grand total cost $246,198 

Bracing and Sheeting: 

Labor $0.78 $ 87,466 

Materials and plant 0.37 41,216 

Total unit cost $1.15 

Grand total cost $128,682 

Pumping and Drainage: 

Labor $0.01 $ 8,878 

Materials and plant 0.01 1,271 

Power 0.01 1,05!) 

Total unit cost $0.03 

Grand total cost $ 3,208 

Bridges and Barricades: 

Labor $0.10 $ 11.588 

Materials and plant 0.14 15,423 

Total unit cost $0.24 

Grand total cost $ 27,011 

BacTcfilling: 
Labor $0.01 $ 1,279 

Grand total, earth excavation $3.62 $406,379 

Rock Excavation. 
(760 cu. yds.) 

Labor $2.35 $ 1,783 

Materials and plant 2.96 2.254 

Power 0.40 301 

Total unit cost $5.71 

Grand total cost $ 40,741 

Concrete. 

(Foundation Concrete, 8,827 cu. yds.) 

Labor, mixing $0.53 $ 4,669 

Labor, placing 0.58 5,142 

Materials and plant 0.02 211 

Cement, sand, stone, etc 3.48 30,719 

Total unit cost $4.61 

Grand total cost $ 40,741 



RAILWAYS. 1391 

Eoof Arches, Side Arches, and Protection Concrete: 
(6,6G-1 yds.) 

Labor, mixing $0.S2 $ 5.444 

Labor, placing 0.84 5,623 

Labor, setting forms 2.21 14,746 

Labor, plastering arclies 0.06 431 

Materials and plant 0.18 1,176 

Cement, sand, stone, etc 3.58 23,888 

Total unit cost ?7.69 

Grand total cost ? 51,308 

Grand total unit cost concrete (15,491 
cu. yds.) ?5.94 

Steel Work. 

(Steel, 1,533 tons; cast-iron, 171 tons.) 

Labor, trucking $0.80 $ 1,364 

Labor, placing 8.14 13,872 

Labor, riveting 2.76 4,697 

Labor, painting 0.70 1,197 

Materials and plant 2.32 3,958 

Materials, painting 0.24 415 

Power 0.19 317 

Grand total unit cost $15.15 

Grand total cost $ 25,823 

Brick Backing. 

(1.014 cu. yds.) 

Labor $8.56 $ 8,687 

Materials and plant 2.03 2,063 

Grand total unit cost $10.59 

Grand total cost $ 10,750 

Laying Ducts. 

(123,483 lin. ft. single duct.) 

Labor $0.01 $ 1,435 

Materials and plant 0.05 6,321 

Grand total unit cost $0.06 

Grand total cost $ 7,756 

Waterproofing. 

(98,074 sq. yds. single ply.) 

Labor $0.05 $ 5,563 

Materials and plant 0.10 9,702 

Grand total unit cost $0.15 

Grand total $ 15,265 

Waterproofing. 
(Brick in asphalt 1,337 cu. yds.) 

Labor $ 6.32 $ 8,457 

Materials and plant 11.48 15,351 

Grand total unit cost $17.80 

Grand total cost $ 23,808 



1392 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following table gives a summary of the total costs from 
August, 1903, to January 1, 1905, of constructing this section. Ir 
the preceding table no unit costs are given on the work of under- 
pinning buildings, blocking, moving and relaying mains, supporting 
tracks, paving, station work, track work in tunnel and construction 
of a cross passage in Dey street. The net totals of these, however, 
are figured in with the other totals in the summary : 

Summary. 

Labor 1443,268.13 

Materials and plants 232,723.30 

Dump charges (46,556 loads at 60 cts.) 27,933.60 

Power (coal and electricity) 4,373.95 

Labor charged to sewers. . 2,803.60 

Total cost (not incl. cost of steel and iron) . ?711,102.58 

This is for half a mile of double track line. 

During the excavation the contractor sold 12,924 cu. yds. of sand 
at 50 cts. per cu. yd., and 1,620 cu. yds. rubble stone at $1.00 per 
cu. yd. Deducting this total of $8,082 from the total cost of the 
work we have $703,020.58 as the net cost of the work, exclusive of 
the cost of the steel in posts and beams. The cost of track and 
ballast is not included, but that is readily estimated. 

It will be noticed that in the tables giving the unit costs of the 
subway construction one of the main items is for materials and 
plant. In the following tabulation are shown the principal items 
and their cost which composed materials and plants : 

Materials and Plants. 

Earth Excavation: 

Total. 

Small tools, etc $ 529 

Illumination, etc 3,119 

Boilers, total 210 hp 2,600 

37 1 cu. yd. buckets 2,200 

11 stiff leg derricks 2,750 

20 flat ca:rs 400 

4,600 lin. ft. rail tram 306 

2 Rand drills 600 

2 Dake engines 700 

3 Lidgerwood engines 1,680 

3 electric hoists, "Maine" , 3,750 

1 electric hoist, "Lidgerwood" 1,500 

166 M. ft. yellow pine lumber at .$25 4,155 

209 tons steel beams, in working platforms. . . . 10,470 

Miscellaneous 550 

Total $35,590 

RocTc Excavation: 

4 Rand rock drills $ 1,200 

1 Lidgerwood engine 560 

1 stiff-leg derrick 250 

760 lbs. dynamite 114 

Small tools, etc 130 

Total $ 2,254 



R.uuF.ivs. r,m 

Bracing and Sheeting: 

2 Rand drills (without at.) for driving sheeting.$ 500 

24 hydraulic jacks, 1,264 tons capacity 4,049 

1,436 M. ft. yellow pine lumber at $25 35,!)00 

Small tools, etc 76? 

Total $11,216 

Pumping and Drainage: 

5 Worthington pumps $ 770 

1 Lawrence pump ;;50 

2 Edison draphragm No. 3 pumps 45 

5 pump.s. steam syphons 100 

Small tools 6 

Total .$ 1,271 

Bridges and Barricades. 

607 M. ft. yellow pine lumber $15,187 

Small tools, etc 236 

Total $15,423 

Underpinning Buildings and Vaults: 

1,323 cu. yds. rubble stone .$ 1,323 

225 cu. yds. sand 112 

872 bbls. Portland cement 1,378 

165 gallons asphalt 19 

442 sq. vds. asphalt felt 19 

16 M. brick 115 

124 gallons paint 124 

Small tools, etc 37 

Total $ 3,132 

Roof and Side Arch and Protection Concrete: 

3,248 cu. yds. sand $ 1,624 

4,296 cu. yds. gravel 6.874 

8,095 bbls. Portland cement 12,790 

36 M. ft. yellow pine lumber at $25 900 

371 M. brick 2,599 

Small tools, etc 276 

Total $25,064 

Brick Backing: 

34 cu. vds. sand $ 17 

130 bbls. Portland cement. 205 

81 M. hollow tile brick 1,785 

Small tools, etc 56 

Total $ 2,063 

Duct Laying: 

6,000 sq. yds. burlap $ 270 

123,483 lin. ft. single ducts 5,556 

275 bbls. Portland cement 435 

6S cu. yds. sand 34 

13 sets mandrels 26 

Total $ 6,321 . 

Waterproofing, Brick Laid in Asphalt: 

869 M. brick % 6,083 

401 tons mastic asphaltum 9,025 

Small tools, etc 243 

Total $15,351 



1394 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Waterproofing: 

112,785 sq. yds. asphalt felt % 5,075 

36,582 gallons asphalt 4,389 

Small tools, etc 237 

Total ? 9,702 

Placing and Riveting Steel Work: 

2 "Lidgerwood" engines ? 1,120 

2 air compressors and receivers 1,400 

1 hand power derrick 50 

1 pneumatic drill 125 

4 riveting guns 500 

Small tools, etc 763 

Total $ 3,958 

Painting Steel: 

376 gallons cerion paint $ 376 

Brushes and scrapers 39 

Total • $ 415 

Supporting Tracks: 

Sand, stone and cement $ 301 

68 M. brick 474 

20 hj'draulic jacks, 1,050 tons capacity 3,412 

Total $4,184 

Blocks Moving and Relaying Mains: 

199 M. ft. yellow pine lumber at $25 $ 4,985 

2 hand derricks 100 

1 portable derrick, with boiler and engine- 1,000 

Pipe 26,186 

Gates, valves and lead 1,871 

Small tools, etc 1,699 

Total $35,841 

Grand total for plant and materials... ?232,723 

We note that the cost of placing and riveting steel is given. 
but nothing is said as to tlie cost of the steel itself. The price 
of steel delivered in New York, ready for erection, may be 
estimated at 2% cts. per lb., or $50 per ton. As there were 1,533 
tons of steel, the total cost of the steel was $76,650. In additionj 
there were 171 tons of castings, which, at $40 per ton would amount 
to $6,840 ; and there were 1,014 cu. yds. of brick backing, the 
bricks for which would cost about $14 per cu. yd., or $14,200. The 
sum of these three items is $97,690 to be added to the $711,102 
above given, making a total of nearly $810,000 for the section 
under consideration — half a mile of double track subway. 

It will be seen that the full first-cost of the plant has been 
charged up against the various items. The cost of renewals of 
wornout parts was not obtainable, so that the only satisfactory 
method of estimating plant charges consisted in including the full 
cost of the plant. 

In some items, as in Rock Excavation, the cost of plant is 
altogether too high, due to the fact that an expensive plant is 
charged up against a small amount of work. 



RAILWAYS. 13!).". 

It will be noted that the pumping item was very small ; so also 
is "backfilling," because most of the excavated matei'ial was hauled 
away. The backfill was 6 ft. deep over the subway roof. All the 
excavated material not used for concrete or masonry, was hauled 
away in wagons to the docks, the haul being very short (about 
1^ mile) to the docks where the material was dumped into scows 
and hauled to sea. The charge made for hauling to sea in scows 
("dump charges") was 60 cts. per wagon load, and about I73 cu. 
yds. of earth constituted a load. 

The total cost of earth excavation was $3.62 per cu. yd., which 
seems very high. However, the conditions must be considered, and 
among other things it must be remembered that the cost of sup- 
porting numerous water pipes and gas pipes is included. The 
excavation was 26 ft. deep, and 34 ft. wide along the line between 
stations. 

The cost of power charged to the various items includes only 
the fuel and electricity consumed. Electricity was paid for at 4 
cts. per kw.-hour. 

All steel was painted with one coat of carbon paint ; and all 
steel not imbedded in concrete received, in addition, a coat of wliile 
lead paint. 

The cost of waterproofing is reduced to cents per square foot 
of single ply ; but the waterproofing was actually laid 2 to 3 ply 
thick. 

For the sake of comparison, we shall next give a summary of 
the costs of earth excavation on two sections in the lower part of 
New York City, where the open cut method of excavation was 
used. The rates of wages were practically the same as in the 
table on page 33 ; but the work was done between the years 1902 
and 1904. The excavation was wider, being for a four track road. 
and cableways were largely used for delivering the materials from 
the trench into wagons. Some derricks were also used for this 
purpose. The streets were not always opened their full width, 
which necessitated a good deal of inining under the pavements and 
car tracks. The costs of excavation by this open-cut method were 
as follows on two sections which are designated as Contract A and 
Contract B. 

Contract Contract 

A. B. 

Cu. yds. excavation 105.070 252,870 

Labor and teaming $1.15 $1.20 

Plant (all of first cost) 0.17 0.14 

Power 0.12 0.09 

Dump charges, at 60 cts. per load of 

1% cu. yds 0.19 0.18 

Labor and bracing and sheeting 0.34 0.18 

Lumber for bracing and sheeting 0.21 0.11 

Pumping and draining 0.00 0.06 

Labor on bridges and barricades 0.03 0.02 

Lumber for bridges and barricades. ... 0.03 0.04 

Labor, backfilling 0.06 0.04 

Total per cu. yd $2.30 $2.06 



1396 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The contractor, in each case, sold enough sand from the ex- 
cavation to reduce the cost of excavation, about 18 cts. per cu. yd., 
leaving a net cost of $2.12 for Contract A, and $1.88 for Con- 
tract B. The sale of this sand also reduced the dump charges, which 
Would otherwise have been 36 cts. per cu. yd., instead of 18 to 19 
cts. Had ail the material been hauled to sea, the dump charges 
would have added about 18 cts. per cu. yd., making a cost of $2.48 
for Contract A, and $2.24 for Contract B. It should be noted, how- 
ever, that the full amount of the first-cost of the plant was charged 
against the excavation. The item of backfilling is not large because 
so small an amount of excavated material was replaced. 

The lumber for bracing and sheeting was about half spruce, 
at $20 per M., and half yellow pine, at $25 per M. 

The labor and teaming includes all wages and salaries. 

The cost of erecting, riveting and painting the steel work was 
$16 per ton on Contract A, and $16.75 on Contract B. 

The cost of labor in making the concrete was as follows : 

Concrete foundations : 

Contract Contract 
A. B. 

Labor, mixing $0.97 $0.94 

Labor, placing 0.96 0.95 

Power 0.14 0.16 

Total $2.07 $2.05 

Concrete, Roof and Sides : 

Labor, mixing $0.79 $0.91 

Labor, placing 0.85 0.94 

Labor, setting forms 2.01 1.20 

Labor, plastering arches 0.16 0.23 

Power 0.28 0.15 

Total $4.09 $3.43 

It will be noted that these concrete labor costs are very high, 
and indicate poor management. 

As to the cost of rock excavation, we may say that it should not 
exceed the cost of earth excavation by more than $1 per cu. yd. 
at the outside. Indeed, on one section of the subway involving 
the excavation of 125,000 cu. yds., the rock excavation cost $2.40 
per cu. yd., but this did not include the first cost of the plant. 
In Gillette's "Rock Excavation," page 273 et seq., the actual cost 
of this rock work is given in great detail. (See page 1384.) 

With the unit costs now available, any contractor can make a 
safe estimate of the cost of any future subway work in New York 
City. If the subway is built wider or narrower, the yardage will be 
altered, but the cost per cubic yard will not vary much. We are 
confident that few contractors or engineers would have looked for 
such high unit costs as are above given, and we are equally confident 
that with better management the costs could have been materially 
reduced. However, it is a fact and not a theory that confronts 
us, and we have given the facts to the best of our ability. 

In the summary given above, the total cost of the labor from 
August, 1903, to January 1, 1905, is given as $446,071.73. It will 



RAIUVAYS. V.VM 

be of interest to show how this cost was distributed, and accord- 
ingly a table giving the rate of wages per eight-hour day. the time 
in days, and the total amount of wages is appended in Table XXV. 

Table XXV. — Rate of Wages and Time. 

Rate. Time. Amount. 

Civil engineers $12.00 359 $ 4,308.00 

Assistant civil engineer. . . 6.40 526 3,366.4 

Superintendents 5.28 780 4,118.40 

Draughtsmen 4.00 354 1,416.00 

Timekeepers 3.85 447 1,720.95 

Clerks 2.88 1,080 3,110.40 

Machinists 3.50 241 843.50 

Engineers 3.50 291 1,018.50 

Firemen 2.00 560 1,120.00 

Watchmen 1.50 2,247 3,370.50 

Night Watchmen 1.50 2,316 3,474.00 

Laborer foremen 3.00 8,130 24,390.00 

Laborers 1.50 106,023 159,034.50 

Engine hoistmen 2.50 3,199 7,997.50 

Steam drillers 3.00 278 834.00 

Steam drillers' helpers 2.00 277 554.00 

Nippers 75 126 94.50 

Blacksmiths 3.00 322 966.00 

Blacksmiths' helpers 2.00 322 644.00 

Rigger foremen 3.00 11 33.00 

Riggers 2.00 702 1,404.00 

Carpenter foremen 3.50 643 2,250.50 

Carpenters 3.00 3,733 11,199.00 

Bracers 2.00 32,918 65,836.00 

Pipe foremen 4.00 1,495 5,980.00 

Pipemen 2.00 10,433 20,866.00 

Caulkers 3.00 3,139 9,417.00 

Iron foremen 5.00 331 1,655.00 

Ironworkers 4.50 3,725 16,762.50 

Bricklayers 5.20 2,047 10,644.40 

i Mason foremen 4.50 225 1,012.50 

i Masons 4.00 1,077 4,308.00 

' Watei-proofer foremen 3.00 245 735.00 

Waterproofers 1.50 852 1,278.00 

Paver foremen 5.00 13 65.00 

Pavers 4.50 87 391.50 

Rammers 3.00 36 108.00 

Carts 3.00 12 36.00 

Trucks and teams 4.50 11,900 53,550.00 

Pipe superintendents 7.69 234 2,491.56 

Tow horses and mules ... . 1.00 2,441 2,441.00 

Plumbers 4.00 100 396.12 

Plumbers' helpers 2.50 30 67.50 

Electricians 4.00 1,252 5,008.00 

Splicers 3.00 463 1,389.00 

Splicers' helpers 2.00 441 882.00 

Painters 2.00 6 12.00 

Track foremen 3.00 136 408.00 

Trackmen 2.00 1,532 3,064.00 

Total labor $446,071.73 

The prices of tools, machines and supplies will be found in the 

next paragraph. 

prices of Contractors' Tools, Machines and Supplies^ New York.* 

— In estimating the cost of contractors' plants on the New York 



*Engineering-Contracting, July 18, 1906. 



1398 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

subway construction, the engineers carefully obtpined quotations 
on every kind of tool, machine, etc., in use. Although these quota- 
tions were secured in 1902, they are tolerably close to present prices 
in New York City, and may prove useful to contractors and 
engineers. 

Rate. 

Adze $ 1.10 

Air compressor and receiver 700.00 

Air hose, lin. ft 0.80 

Anvil, 200 lbs. at Sy. cts 17.00 

Asphalt, gallon 0.12 

AsDhalt felt, sq. yd 0.04 1/2 

Asphalt heating kettle 30.00 

Asphaltum, ton 22.50 

Auger 0.90 

Ax 1.10 

Bar, claw 0.75 

Bar, crow, 16 lbs 1.30 

Bar, pinch 0.75 

Bar, tamping 1.00 

Blasting batterv 25.00 

Block and fall outfit 16.00 

Block, double wooden 4.00 

Boiler, 60 hp 750.00 

Boiler, 50 hp 575.00 

Boiler, 25 hp 350.00 

Box, tool 12.00 

Brick, M 7.00 

Brick buckets 0.50 

Brick hammers'. 0.75 

Brick, hollow tile, M 22.00 

Brick tongs 0.50 

Brush, paint 0.75 

Brush, wire 0.50 

Bucket, 1 yard, dumping 60.00 

Bullpoint 0.50 

Burlap, sq. yd 0.04% 

Canthook 2.25 

Cap, sheeting 2.50 

Car, flat 20.00 

Car, steel dump 40.00 

Cement, Portland, bbl 1.60 

Chain, lb O-OSVa 

Chisel 0.40 

Derrick, hand power 50.00 

Derrick, portable, with boiler and engine 1,000.00 

Derrick, stiff-leg 250.00 

Dipper 0.75 

Drift pin 0.50 

Drill, hand 0.50 

Drill, pneumatic 125.00 

Drill, Rand rock 300.00 

Drill, Rand, without attachments 250.00 

Drill, twist 1.25 

Duct, single, lin. ft 0.04% 

Dynamite, lb., 40 per cent 0.15 

Electric hoist, "Maine" double drum and 20 

hp, motor and controller 1,250.00 

Electric hoist, Lidgerwood double drum and 20 

hp. motor and controller 1,500.00 

Engine, "Duke" 350.00 

Engine, Lidgerwood, double drum 560.00 

. Forge, blacksmith's 25.00 



R.u/.ir.ivs. 



1309 



Forge, rivet !,'!>. 00 

Furnace, with pots and ladles 35.00 

Felt, asphalt, sq. yd 0.04 >/• 

Gouge 0.50 

Grindstone 20.00 

Hacksaw frame 0.85 

Hammer, hand 0.50 

Hammer, sledge 1.30 

Hammer, striking 0.65 

Hod, mortar 0.75 

Hose, air, lin. ft 0.80 

Hose, rubber, 1 in., lin. ft 0.15 

Hooks, center 0.05 

Jack, hydraulic. 7 ton 58.50 

Jack, hydraulic, 45 ton 162.50 

Jack, hydraulic, 60 ton 178.75 

Jack, hydraulic, 100 ton 260.00 

Lantern 0.50 

Lead, lb 0.05 

Level, hand spirit 0.75 

Mandrels, set 2.00 

Mop 0.60 

Oiled suits 2.50 

Pails, galvanized iron 0.50 

Paint, cerion, gal 1.00 

Pick 0.75 

Pump, Lawrence 4-in., with Crocker-Wheeler 

7i/> hp. motor and starter 350.00 

Pump. Worthington, 6 in. x 8% In. x 6 in 170.00 

Pump, Worthington, 6 in. x 5% in. x 6 in 150.00 

Pump, No. 3 Edison diaphragm 22.50 

Pump, steam syphon 20.00 

Rail, tram, ton 15.33 

Rammer, concrete 1.00 

Ratchet 10.00 

Reamer 1.00 

Riveting dollies 5.00 

Riveting "g-uns," pneumatic 125.00 

Rope, Manila, lb 0.09 

Rope, steel, 1 M in., lin. ft 0.24 

RoDe, with hooks „ 0.50 

Rubber boots 2.50 

Sand screen 8.50 

Saw, cross cut 3.00 

Scraper (waterproofing) 0.50 

Shovel 0.60 

Smoothing iron 1.50 

Steel beams, ton 50.00 

Stocks and dies, set 8.00 

Timber carrier 2.25 

Timber dollies 2.50 

Timber truck 25.00 

Torches, banjo 2.00 

Turnbuckles 1.25 

Vise, pipe 7.20 

Wheelbarrows, steel 7.00 

Wrench 1.00 

Wrench, chain 24.00 

Wrench, monkev 1.00 

Wrench, Stillson 3.00 

Tarn, lb 0.05 

Cost of Excavating and Bracing a Subway, Long Island R. R., 
Brooklyn.* — The work covered by ovn- cost records was a section on 



*Engineering-Coyitractmg, July 11, 1906. 



1400 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Division 1, Atlantic avenue, about 2,500 ft. long, and occupied the 
year 1903, January to - December inclusive. The work was an 
open cut, and the material encountered was sand' and gravel con- 
taining a considerable number of small boulders. The digging was 
not difficult and was all done with picks and shovels. 

Two tracks of the Long Island R. R. occupied the center of 
Atlantic avenue. One of these tracks was shifted to the side of 
the street, but the other was left in place as a service track for 
the dirt trains. Trains of flat cars were run onto the service track, 
and the earth was shoveled from both sides into the cars until a 
level about 3 ft. below the rails was reached. The service track 
was then shifted into one of the side cuts, and the center core was 
shoveled in. The excavation was then carried down on the other 
side of the track to 3 ft. below the rails, as before. The track was 
next shifted to the opposite side of the cut, and a third cut of 3 
ft. was taken out. This method was pursued until the track had 




£_N6.-(2>NTi^. 



Fig. 11. 



reached a depth of 16% ft, as shown in Pig. 11, the shape of the 
cut then being ABCD (Fig. 11). 

The next step was to drive 2-in. sheeting to depths F and G 
(Fig. 11). The two braces X and T were then set, leaving a 
clearance of 9 ft., which was not sufficient to pass locomotives. 
A cable was therefore used to haul the cars ahead to the. locomotive. 

The next step was to excavate the two side cuts, ABEP and 
CDGH, by shoveling into the cars. After these side cuts were 
made, the track was shifted, first to one side, then to the other, 
and the section FKJH was excavated. The sheeting was then 
driven by pile drivers to the points M and N, and the brace Z 
was placed. In like manner the excavation proceeded until the 
full section of the subway was obtained, about 35 ft. wide and 27 ft. 
deep. 

The 8 X 10 braces shown in Fig. 12 were spaced 15 ft. apart 
longitudinally, and, in view of the great length of the braces, angle 
sway bracing was uSed, consisting of short timbers laid horizontally 



\ 



J 



RAILWAYS. 



1401 



and diagonally from the side of eacli cross brace to the middle of 
tlie ranger. These angle braces were about 14 ft. long. 

The railroad company provided the cars and hauled the earth 
about 12 miles away, furnishing train crews. The contractor main- 
tained and shifted the tracks, loaded the earth onto the cars, and 
~did all the bracing. The following costs were the costs to the 
contractor, and do not include the cost of hauling the material away. 
The contractor complained of the poor train service iurnished by 
the company, and the high cost of excavating bears out his claim 
of poor service. On the other hand, the railroad company is 
credited by outsiders with having given a "fair service." In any 
case, work done in this manner is nearly always subject to more or 
less delay in getting empty cars fast enough. 

As above stated, the length of subway covered by cur cost 
records was about 2,500 ft., averaging about 30 cu. yds. per lineal 
foot, A total of 75,000 cu. yds. were excavated in the year 1903, 



h- 



m. 



n'e" >H -ir'e"- 



\^/iW- 



c6xlt 



%\ s'^io" 



^1 



e'k/ip" 



ey.lQ-. 




;».-■:? \ Base of Rail r /;• ''•■ "'1 



I7'g--——-M 17'0"—--^ 



4^ 



^1 

3a 



Fig. 12. 



requiring 20.900 days' labor, or 3.6 cu. yds. per man per 10-hour day. 
Wages averaged $1.50 per day, making the average cost 42 cts. per 
cu. yd. for loading the cars. This does not include the cost of 
sheeting and bracing, which will be given later. The cost of the 
excavation by months was as follows : 



Excavation. 
Amount Labor in 



cu. yd. 

January 4,818 

February 4,089 

March 11,005 

April 5,381 

May 4,230 

June 3,035 

July 4,002 

August 5.383 

September 8.118 

October 10,327 

November 8.550 

December 5,953 



Total 74,891 



days. 
1,637 
1,433 
2,554 
1,508 
1,321 
1,127 
990 
1,664 
2.450 
2,392 
1,930 
1,898 

20,905 



Pay-roll. 

$ 2,278 
1,992 
3,552 
2,132 
1,844 
1,573 
1,379 
2,617 
4,307 
3,658 
3.023 
3,083 

$31,438 



Cost per 
cu. yd. 
$0.47 
0.49 
0.33 
0.40 
0.44 
0.52 
0.35 
0.49 
0.54 
0.35 
0.35 
0.52 



$0.42 



1402 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of labor sheeting and bracing was as follows: 

Sheeting and Bracing. 

Labor Goct per 

days. Pay-roll, cu. yd. 

January 507 $ 1,093 |0.23 

February 482 1,091 0.27 

March 827 1,766 0.16 

April 874 1,859 0.35 

May 782 1,859 0.42 

June 860 1,999 0.66 

July 1,005 2,363 0.59 

August 812 1,894 0.35 

September 700 1,613 0.20 

October 800 1,831 0.18 

November 644 1,510 0.18 

December 1,316 1,742 0.29 

Total 9,609 $20,548 $0,271/2 

It will be seen that the average wages paid for sheeting and 
bracing were $2.13 per day. As above given, the labor cost of 
excavating was 42 cts. per cu. yd., to which must be added the 
27 Vi cts. per cu. yd. spent for labor on sheeting and bracing, making 
a total of 69% cts. 

The amount of timber used in sheeting and bracing the work done 
in 1902 and 1903 was as follows: 

Rangers, 
braces. 
Ft. B. M. angles and 
Between stations. sheeting. uprights. 

143 and 115 248,320 498,440 

115 and 112.; 14,740 24,030 

101 and 92 57,320 115,520 

87 and 91 17,820 9,620 

Total 338,200 647,610 

This makes a grand total of 985,810 ft. B. M., or 7.94 ft. B. M. 
per cu. yd. of excavation, or 263 ft. B. M. per lin. ft. of finished 
subway, 3,700 ft. long. 

From these data it is apparent that practically all the timber was 
left in place until the coinpletion of this section of the subway. 
It is also apparent that the yardage of earth excavated in 1902 and 
1903 was about 124,300 cu. yds. It should be borne in mind, 
however, that the labor costs above given for excavation and 
bracing include only the work done in 1903. The labor of sheeting 
and bracing for the two years was as follows : 

Year. Labor days. Pay-roll. 

1903 9,609 $20,548 

1902 4,290 9,870 

Total 13,899 $30,418 

From this it appears that the labor costs of framing and placing 
the 985,810 ft. B. M. was $30.80 per M., and that each man averaged 
only 71 ft. B. M. per day. This is a very high cost for such work. 



RAILWAYS. urn 

Since the timber itself must liave cost appioximately $30 per M. 

delivered on the work, we liave the following estimate of the total 

cost of excavating: 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor loading cars $0.42 

Labor sheeting and bracing 0.27 14 

7.94 ft. B. M. timber at 3 cts 0.24 

Total $0.93 Vi 

Of course, much of the timber would posses.s some .salvage value 
after completing the work. 

The cost of hauling the material away in cars and dumping is 
not available. 

The cost of the concrete work was as follows : 

Bbls. cement 

Proportions by parts. per cu. yd. 

Cement. Sand. Gravel. Broken stone. concrete. 

1 3 21/3 21/2 0.75 

13 5 1.07 to 1.14 
1 4 11/0 2% 1.12 

14 2 2 1.16 
14 4 0.98 
14 13 1.07 
1 2V> SVa 1.26 
13 3 1.20 
1 21/2 1% 2% 1.46 
13 12 1.30 
1 3 1% 1% 1.04 

It is interesting to note that in mixing many thousand yards 
of 1:3:5 concrete, it took 1.07 bbls. cement when mixed in the 
gravity mixer, as compared with 1.14 bbls. for the batch mixer, 
indicatiiig a less perfect mixture in the gravity mixer. 

Of the "1 to 8" concrete, about 13,880 cu. yds. were placed during 
the year of 1903, months of January to November inclusive, and 9 
per cent of this was mixed with gravity mixers. 

Of the "1 to 6" concrete, 5,320 cu. yds. were placed, of which 
85 per cent was mixed with gravity mixers. The remainder, in 
both cases, was mixed in a "batch mixer." 

The average size of a batch in a gravity mixer was 0.46 cu. yd., 
and the size of batch in the "batch mixer" averaged about 0.57 
cu. yd. 

There were 16,940 cu. yds. mixed in gravity mixers, requiring 
2,860 days' labor mixing and 4,000 days placing the concrete. 
Wages were $1.50 a day, and the cost was 26 cts. per cu. yd. for 
mixing and 33 cts. for placing, making a total of 59 cts. per 
cu. yd. 

During the month of August, when 2,800 cu. yds. were mixed, 
the cost was as low as 24 cts. for mixing plus 22 cts. for placing, 
making a total of 46 cts. per cu. yd. for mixing and placing. The 
gravity mixer averaged about 113 cu. yds. per day, wnth a gang of 
19 men mixing and 26 men placing concrete. 

With the "batch mixer," which averaged about 0.57 cu. yd. of 
concrete per batch, there were mixed 2,360 cu. yds. This required 



1404 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

970 days of laborers mixing and 740 days placing, at a cost of 59 
cts. per cu. yd. for mixing plus 45 cts. for placing, making a total 
of ?1.04 per cu. yd. for mixing and placing. 

During the month of June the cost was as low as 40 cts. for 
mixing and 30 cts. for placing, or a total of 70 cts. per cu. yd.. 
wages being ?1.50 per day. The average gang was 14 men mixing 
and 11 men placing the concrete, and the average output was only 
35 cu. yds. per day actually worked. 

Even during tlie month of June, when the best record was made, 
the output was only 52 cu. yds. per day actually worked. This 
indicates very poor management. We refrain, therefore, from giving 
the name of the •'batch mixer," to which an injustice would be done 
if its efficiency were rated according to this particularly poor 
record. 

Of course, in the preceding discussion of the itemized labor cost 
of mixing and placing, the item of "mixing" includes all the 
work involved in delivering the materials to the mixer; while 
"placing" includes hauling the concrete away from the mixer. 

In delivering tlie materials to the gravity mixer a Robins belt 
conveyor was used, whicli accounts in large measure for the lower 
cost of mixing with tlie gravity mixer. 

The concrete was hauled away from the mixers in dump cars 
pushed along a track by men. The track was laid on top of the 
braces that supported the sides of the excavation. We are unable 
to find out why the conveying of the concrete from the batch mixer 
cost so much more than from the gravity mixer. -,_^ 

The foregoing costs relate to work done in 1903. During the 
year 1904, 20,000 cu. yds. were mixed in the 190 days worked by 
the gravitj- mixer gangs; the average number of men mixing being 
15, and the number of men placing being 25. 

The cost was as follows : 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

2,950 days labor mixing, $4,870 24 

4,760 days labor placing, $7,300 36 

Total 60 

During the best month, the labor cost was 16 cts. for mixing 
and 29 cts. for placing, or a total of 45 cts. per cu. yd. 

During the same year of 1904, tlie batcli mixer worked 153 days, 
averaging 4b cu. yds. per day. The average size of each batch 
was 0.44 cu. yd. The labor cost of 7,000 cu. j-ds. was as follows; 

Cts. per cu. yd. 

1,910 days mixing, $3,175 -. . . 45 

1,740 days placing, $2,660 3S 

Total 83 

It will be noted that in 1904 the cost of placing was practically 
the same as with the gravity mixer, and that the average gang on 
the batch mixer was 13 men mi.xing and 11 men placing. 

Thus far we have not considered tlie cost of the labor on the 
forms, which was a large item. For the total 19,300 cu. yds. of 



RAILWAYS. 140.J 

concrete placed in 1903 there were expended $16,800 for labor on 
the forms, which is equivalent to S7 els. per cu. yd. of concrete. 
The total number of days' labor on the forms was 6,340, at an 
average of $2.70 per day. If we add this 87 cts. per cu. yd. for 
labor on forms to the 59 cts. for mixing and placing, we 
have a total of $1.4G per cu. yd. chargeable to labor on the con- 
crete in this subway, where a gravity mixer was used. This is 
considerablj- below the cost of similar work on the New York 
subway. 

As to the amount of lumber in the forms and the interest and 
depreciation of the plant, we have no record. Nor have we a record 
ot the fuel consuined. 

Cost of Cable Railways in Cities. — In Fairchild's "Street Rail- 
ways" (1892), the following is given as an estimate of the cost of a 
double track cable line, based upon actual cost of some six lines. 
The line is 3 miles long. 

Per mile 
of double 

Power House and Plant: Total. track. 

Real estate ? 10,000 $ 3,333 

House, 100x17.5 25,000 8,333 

Two engines and foundation 23.000 7,667 

Boilers and settings 14,000 4,667 

Brick smokestack (5 ft. diam. x 100 ft.) 5,000 1,667 

Tension cars and tracks 2,500 833 

Heaters, pumps, fittings, etc 3,000 1,000 

Total power house and plant $ 82,500 $ 27,500 

General Street Construction: 

19.800 cu. vds. trench excavation at $0.75 ? 14,850 $ 4,950 

2,755,000 lbs. cast yokes (350 lbs. ea.) at ?0.015. . 41.580 13,860 

880 carrying sheaves at $3.75 3,300 1,100 

1,056.000 lbs. slot rails (50-lb.) at $0.025 26,400 8,800 

1,185.000 lbs. track rails (60-lb.) at $0.0225 28,512 9,504 

154,000 lbs. cast iron manhole covers and frames 

at $0.0175 2.695 898 

10.000 cu. yds. concrete at .'ii8.50 85.000 28.333 

15,840 lin. ft. of double track laving at $1.00 15.840 5,280 

22,200 sq. vds. granite block paving at $3.00 66.600 22.200 

Sewer connections 9.000 3.000 

32,180 ft. wire cable at $0.33 10,619 3,540 

Total general street construction $304,396 $101,465 

Special Street Construction: 

Main vault at engine house and fixtures $ 8,000 $ 2.667 

Two end vaults with fixtures 5.000 1.667 

Special street sheaves for summits of grades 1,500 50O 

Two grip switches 2,500 833 

Two coach switches 1,000 333 

One crossing 1,500 500 

180 degs. of double tracked curve 9,000 3.000 

Total special street construction $ 28,500 $ 9,500 

Rolling Stoch: 

15 grip cars and grip at $1.000 $15,000 $ 5.00(> 

15 coaches at $1,200 18,000 6.000 

Total rolling stock $ 33.000 $ 11.000 

Grand total 448,396 149,465 



1406 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

With a cable speed of 8 miles per hr. for 19% hrs., and trains 
on 4 mins. headway, each train would malie 110 miles per day; and 
15 trains would make 1,650 train miles, or 3,300 car miles per day. 

The daily opei^ating expense would be : 

Total per day. 

Depreciation of cable $ 35.00 

Repairs, track and buildings 6.00 

Repairs, engines and line machinery 2.00 

Repairs, grip and cars 7.00 

House, track and cable expenses 6.00 

Track service 8.00 

Power and car house service 28.00 

66 grip men and conductors at $2.00 132.00 

51/2 tons (2,240 lbs.) coal at $2.50 13.75 

Water, oil and grease 3.25 

Injury to persons and property 7.00 

Licenses and taxes 7.00 

General and miscellaneous expense 23.00 

Total $275.00 

It is clear that Mr. Fairchild's data on repairs of track, buildings, 
and engines are founded on too brief a term of years to be of any 
value, for they total only $8 per day on an investment of $82,000 
for power plant and $55,000 of rails alone. This expense of $2,920 
per year ($8 per day) is not 21/2% on the buildings, power plant 
and rails — a manifest absurdity. 

It will be noted that the $35 daily depreciation of the cable is 
$12,775 per year on a cable whose first cost is $10,619. This is 
equivalent to a life of about 10 months. Mr. Fairchild states that 
the usual diameter of cables is 1% to 1% ins. A 114-in. rope 
has a tensile strength of 80 tons, and weighs 2% lbs. per ft. The 
average life of ropes of the best design, he says, has been 12% 
mos., witli an avei-age service of 88,400 miles. The general average 
for the country has been about 8 mos., with mileage ranging from 
40,000 to 150,008. 

Cost of Constructing and Operating Cable Rys., Kansas City.— 
Mr. D. Bontecou gives the following relative to the cost of con- 
struction and operation of a cable railway in Kansas City. The 
road was finislied in 1889. It comprises 8.54 miles of double track 
line, which is equivalent to 17.08 miles of single track. It was 
operated as four distinct lines, with cables 14,200, 29,500 and 
31,000 ft. long respectively, driven from one power house, and a 
fourth cable 18,900 ft. long driven from a second power house. 
The cable speeds were 7.8, 9.9, 9.9 and 10.3 miles per hr. No 
grades exceeded 10%. The rope was 1%-in. diam., carried on 
12-in. pulleys, in a conduit 36 ins. deep. 



K.uLir.iys. 1401 

The cost of construction was as follows : Per mile 

of double 

Total. track. 

I.Real estate § 11G,7.36 $13,664 

2. Underground obstructions 20,285 2,377 

3. Substructure 542,820 63,562 

4. Track and line machinery 276,075 32,331 

5. Paving 159,092 18,631 

6. Buildings 184,392 21,593 

7. Machinery 1 30,003 15,223 

8. Equipment 202,926 23,760 

9. Ropes and splicing tools 30,760 3,607 

10. Patents 12,951 1,522 

11. Engineering and miscellaneous exp. 83,017 9,719 

12. Discount and interest 146,931 17,201 

Total ?1,905,989 ?223,190 

The equipment comprised 99 combination cars, of which 61 
were in constant service. The combination car contained the. grip, 
seats for 40 people, and weighed 11,000 lbs. It ran on two 4-wheeI 
trucks, witli 22-in. wheels. 

Tlie machinery in the main power house consisted of three 200 
hp. boilers and simple non-condensing engines. The machinery in 
the branch power house consisted of two 175 hp. boilers and 
engines. The total engine friction was 64 hp., the total resistance 
of all cables when no cars were on the line was 345 hp., and car 
resistance 166 hp. due to 61 loaded cars, or 2.72 hp. per car. 
About 30 hp. was used to supply electric light, etc. Total 541 hp., 
to which add, say 34 hp. for banking fires, etc.. giving a grand total 
average of 575 hp. developed by two engines (one 38 x 4 8-in. and 
one 32 X 48-in. simple non-condensing) at the main power house. 
The coal (soft) contained 18% ash, and its cost was .^2 per ton 
(2,000 lbs.). The consumption was 11.86 lb.=. per car mile (com- 
bination car), or 2.1 per ton-mile. 

For the fiscal year of 1892, the operating expense was as follows: 

Total. 

1. Car service and expense $ 73,315 

2. Injuries to persons and property 5,087 

3. Secret service 529 

4. Repairs, cars 4,862 

5. Car house service and expense 9,620 

6. Maintenance, track and building 8,429 

7. Motive power : 

Fuel $17,407 

Water 1.157 

Oil and grease 1.041 

Engine house service 7,786 

Repairs, machinery 268 

Engine house expense 299 ! 

Ropes 29.381 

Rope service 3,066 

Repairs of grips 1.789 

Total motive power $ 62,194 

8. Taxes 4,596 

9. General and miscellaneous 26.610 

Grand total (13.8 cts. per car mile) $195,242 

Total car ("combination") mileage 1.415.366 

Passengers carried 5.318,410 

Average number cars run daily 61 



1408 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The ropes lasted from 6 mos. on the short main line to 24 mos. 
on the branch line ; the life of the four ropes averaging as follows : 
20,000 ; 55,000 ; 68,000, and 130,000 miles respectively. 

Since the line had been in operation only 4 years, the cost of 
car repairs, machinery repairs and track maintenance was ob- 
viously far below what a normal long period cost would be. 

The operating cost was 13.8 cts. per car mile. 

Cost of a Cable Railway in an Eastern City. — Mr. D. Bontecou 
gives the cost of a double track cable line in an Eastern city, as 
follows: The line was 3.05 miles long, almost straight, with 33,000 
ft. of cable, and driven by a 300-hp. compound, condensing engine. 

Per mile 
of double 
Total. track. 

1. Real estate $ 67,065 ? 22,027 

2. Underground obstructions 46,500 15,264 

Z. Substructure and track 222,386 73,010 

4. Paving 83,000 26.946 

5. Power liouse and vault 103,032 33,811 

6. Machinery and plant 65,563 21,533 

7. Equipment (88 cars) 85,950 28,231 

8. Rope 10,394 3,413 

9. Patents 8,000 2,626 

10. Interest during construction 22,136 7,254 

11. Engineering, legal and miscellaneous 16,846 5,515 

Total $730,872 $239,630 

Life of Cables and Cost of Operating Cable Railways, Chicago. — 
During the year 1898, the average life of 9 different cables, used on 
Cliicago street cable railways, was 76,000 miles; but the life ranged 
from 44,000 miles to 120,000 miles per cable. The roads were level 
and with few curves, which accounts for the long life. Cables aver- 
aged 22,000 ft. long. 

The cost of operation of cable and of electric lines in Chicago 
in 1S9S was as follows: 

Cts. Per Car Mile. 
Cable. Electric. 

Transportation 4.537 5.731 

Maintenance of way and bldgs. .. 1.563 1.889 

Power 1.092 1.005 

General expenses 2.508 2.493 

Maintenance equipment 1.115 1.811 

Total, cts. per car mile... 10.815 12.929 

Car miles 11,678,020 12,563,380 

Use of trail cars on the cable accounts for lower transportation 
cost. 

Labor Cost of Brickwork in Vaults of a Cable Railway.* — This 
work was done in 1892 in connection with the Third Avenue cable 
construction in New Yorlv City. The work was done by a sub- 
contractor. \^ho furnished the masons only, all the other labor and 



"Engmcering-Contracthiij, Sept. 5, 1906. 



R.IILIJ'.IVS. ]{,)(} 

materials being furnished by the general contractor for the Third 
Avenue cable construction. The laborers assigned to the sub- 
contractor were directly under the charge of the masons, althougli 
the general contractor's foremen on adjacent worl< gave some at- 
tention to them. 

The sub-contractor was paid at the rate of $5 per 1,000 brick laid 
on all work except pulley vaults. For these lie received $8 per 
1,000 brick laid for single vaults and $10 for 1,000 brick laid for 
double vaults, these prices including cost of setting iron covers on 
the vaults. Twenty-one bricks were figured as making one cubic 
foot. 

The masons were paid at the rate of 50 cts. per hour and they 
worked 8 hours per day. The foreman received 62 1^ cts. per hour 
and worked the same length of time as the masons. Laborers were 
paid $1.65 per 10-hour day, the extra 2 hours being spent in getting 
the materials ready, screening sand, mixing mortar, etc.' During 
July and August there was no regular foreman, the work being 
looked after by the sub-contractor. The latter, however, did not 
perform the usual duties of a foreman, an the work was spread 
over a stretch of two miles, with additional work at 65th street and 
Harlem. In the summaries, where the sub-contractor really acted 
as foreman on the different works, these works are charged fore- 
man hours for the time actually spent upon them by the sub- 
contractor. 

Several causes tended somewhat to increase the cost of the brick- 
laying, the main causes being as follows : An unnecessarily exacting 
inspection ; a frequent scarcity of brick, or such as the inspector 
would allow to be used, this scarcity of brick being primarily due 
to a brickmakers' strike ; the fluctuating quantities of work on 
hand, due mainly to the slow arrival of iron for the cable railway, 
and to interferences by the surface cars. Then, too, the cost of 
common labor was high for that time (1892), due partly to the fact 
that the work was located in the most crowded part of New York 
City. The extra labor was required for rehandling materials. 

The force account was carefully kept and the amount done each 
day was carefully measured by one of the engineers in the employ 
of the general contractor. The masons' time in the force account 
is the actual time paid for by the sub-contractor and includes the 
time spent in moving from one piece of work to another, but does not 
include time spent in waiting for brick or lost during showers. The 
laborer time includes all labor connected with bricklaying after the 
brick were dumped by the brick companies and the cement (in 
barrels) delivered by the general contractor near the mixing box. 
There were, however, occasional transfers by the laborers of brick, 
cement and sand from one part of the work to another, this transfer 
being caused by a local scarcity of materials. 

The bricks used were mostly "Up River" bricks, measuring 8 in. x 
SI/' in. X 2% in.; the sand was Cow Bay sand from Long Island, 
and the cement was White's English Portland. An average of 447 
bricks were used per barrel of cement. 



1410 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Pulley Vaults. 

Pulley vaults were placed for every 35 ft. of track. These vaults 
were to permit the oiling and repairing of the pulleys of the cable 
road. The single pulley vaults were placed outside of the track, but 
the double pulley vaults were placed between tracks wherever the 
tracks were the standard distance (10 ft. % in.), center to center. 
The single pulley vaults were constructed principally in the upper 
part of the Bowery, where a double vault could not be put in. The 
average height of both types of vaults was 4% ft. The single 
vaults each contained about 40.1 cu. ft. of brick work, or 841 bricks, 
and the double vaults each contained about 47.7 cu. ft. of brick work, 
or 1,002 bricks. About % of the vaults had extra brick work for 
sewer connections. In building the vaults the cost of the mason 
work was necessarily large owing to cramped space in which to 
work, and owing to the fact that considerable time was lost in mov- 
ing from one vault to another. There were generally three laborers 
to one mason. It will be remembered that the contract price for 
single pulley vaults was $8 for the mason work and $10 for the 
mason work for the double pulley vaults, the general contractor 
furnishing the materials. These prices include setting the iron 
cover. To do this last piece of work took one mason and three labor- 
ers one hour each, making the cost $1 per cover. The average 
labor cost of the brick work was $7.77 per cu. yd., divided up as 
follows. Masons, $4.02 ; laborers, $3.75. 

During July to December, 96 days were worked, and 6,343 cu. ft. 
of brick work laid, at the following cost for labor : 

Per cu. ft. Per M brick. 

Mason $0.15 $7.08 

Laborers (mixers, helpers, tenders) 0.14 6.63 



Total $0.29 $13.71 

The average number of bricks laid per mason per hour was 88, 
but during the best month the average was 96, and on the best day 
it was 106. The average number of brick per laborer hour was 25. 

Special Pullet Vaults. 

These vaults were constructed near the lower terminus of the line 
and were designed for the special iron work and pulleys required to 
operate the change from fast to slow cables. The average height 
of the vaults was 5 ft., their length was 10 ft, and all walls were 
11/3 ft. thick. 

The work was done in December, 10 days being required for its 
completion. In that time 1,070 cu. ft. of brick work were built, 
taking 22,485 brick. The wages of the masons amounted to $112.31 
and the laborers' cost was $82.42. The average number of brick 
laid per mason hour was 122 ; the average number per laborer 
hour was 45. 



R.Ul.ir.D'S. Mil 

The cost per cubic foot of l)iick aiul per M nf I)iitk was as 
follows : 

Per LU. ft. Per M. 

Masons ^O.lOr. $5.01 

Laborers 0.077 3.67 

Total $0,182 $8.68 

The labor cost per cubic yard of brick work was $4.91. 

Third Cable Vaults. 

These vaults were for manholes to give access to the pulley scar- 
rying tlie third cable around tlie special iron work on Park Row. 
The vaults had an inside length of 4% ft., and a width of 2V.. ft. 
All of the walls were 1 ft. thick. 

The work on these vaults was done in December, 7 days being 
required to complete the brick work. In that time 418 cu. ft. of 
brick work was built, requiring the placing of 8,776 bricks. The 
total cost of the masons was $43.25, and the laborers cost $42.65. 
The average number of brick laid per mason hour was 128 ; the 
average per laborer hour was 34. 

The cost per cubic foot of brick work and per M brick was as 
follows : 

Per cu. ft. Per M. 

Masons $0,103 $4.93 

Laborers 0.102 4.89 

Total $0,205 $9.82 

The labor cost of the brick work per cubic yard was $5.53. 

PosTOFFiCB Wheel Vault. 

This vault was constructed at the lower terminus of the line and 
was designed for the sheaves around which the cables pass. The 
work on the vault was done entirely under ground, the top being 
covered with 6-in. x 12-in. yellow pine timber to accommodate the 
street traffic. Kerosene lamps furnished the light to work by, extra 
labor being required to attend to the lamps. Two blowers, operated 
by two laborers, were used to keep the air fresh. However, exces- 
sively hot weather with insufficient ventilation had a serious effect 
upon the cost of the work. As there was no regular foreman in 
charge of the masons considerable loafing resulted, and the cost was 
consequently increased. In the construction of the arches of the 
vaults, the space between them and the roofing was so small that 
the masons were almost compelled to assume a prostrate position. 

The height of the vault was 8 ft. ; the inside dimensions were 19 ft. 
X 46 ft. The walls of the main vault were 1% ft. thick. In addition, 
another vault 29 ft. long by 4% ft. wide was built against the wall 
of the main vault. This vault had walls 1 ft. thick. The arches 
across the main vault were 19% ft. long, were 1 ft. thick, and had 
a 3-ft. span and a 3-in. rise. 



1412 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

There were 2,812 cu. ft. of main walls tuilt in 27 days (July and 
August), and the cost was; 

Per cu. ft. Per M. 

Mason ifO.136 $6.48 

Laborer 0.180 8.56 

Total $0,316 $15.04 

The masons averaged 86 bricks per hr., but the maximum was 146 
bricks. 

There were 745 cu. ft. of arches built in 7 days, and the cost 
was: 

Per cu. ft. Per M. 

Mason $0,109 $ 5.18 

Laborer 0.182 8.66^ 

Total $0,291 $13.84 

The masons averaged 112 bricks per hr., but the maximum was 
147. Laborers averaged 19 bricks per hr. 

Cost of a Cable. Railway for Freight Cars.— Mr. Edward Flad 
gives the following cost of a short inclined cable railway built in 
1891 in St. Louis, for the purpose of taking freight cars (2 at a 
time) up a 6% grade to a brewery, 2,000 ft. distant from the main 
steam railway track. The rise is 95 ft. Switch tracks at both ends 
were of 63-lb. rails, but the cable railway track had 85-lb. rails. 
The rails rested on cast-iron yokes, 500 lbs. each, 3% ft. c. to c. 
The slot rail was a Z-rail, weighing 53 lbs. per yd. The conduit was 
made of 1 : 2 14 : 5 Portland cement concrete. 

Cost of Conduit Cable Track. 
(1,872 lin. ft.) 
Grading and Track: Total. Per lin. ft. 

3,850 cu. yds. excav., at $0.58 $ 2,219 $ 1.19 

942 cu. yds. concrete mtls. and labor, at $5.55.. 5,231 2.80 

51 tons T rails (85-lb.), at $36.00 1,840 0.98 

Freight on rails 179 0.09 

32V, tons slot rail (53-Ib.), at $50.00 1,627 0.85 

Bolts, shims, etc , 497 0.27 

Labor, tracklaying (except on concrete, which 

was $896) 947 0.51 

Castings for street crossing 1,100 0.59 

273,174 lbs. cast yokes, at $0.0155 4,234 2.26 

53,338 lbs. manholes and covers, at $0.0175 933 0.50 

16,276 lbs. sheaves and frames, at $0.067 1,085 0.58 

29,053 lbs. rack castings, at $0.035 1,017 0.55 

Extra castings, depression sheaves, etc 661 0.35 

Total grading and track $21,570 $11.52 

Paving for Conduit TracTc: 

80 squares granite blocks, at $18.75 $ 1,500 

Sand 250 

Labor 408 

Total paving for conduit track $ 2,158 $ 1.16 



RAILWAYS. 14i:i 

Repairs to Pavement: 

300 squares macadam, at $3.75 $ 1,127 

50 squares gravel 212 

Total repairs to pavement $ 1,339 $ 0.72 

Cable $ 704 $0.38 

Total track, paving and cable $25,771 $13.78 

Orip Car $ 2,470 $ 1.32 

Hoisting Engine (not incl. foundation) •$ 7,100 $ 3.80 

Total track, paving, equipment, etc $35,341 $18.90 

Switch Tracks in Upper and Lower Yards. 
(7,700 lin. ft.) 

Track: Total. 

85 tons T rails (63-lb.), at $33.00 $ 2,805 

Freight on same 298 

Track fastenings 816 

Switches, frogs, etc 2,518 

Stringers, ties, etc 2,139 

Plank 746 

Total track materials $ 9,323 

Laying track, 7,700 ft 6,474 

Total track in place $15,797 

Paving: 

563 i/L' squares macadam, at $3.50 $ 1,972 

8.5 squares spalls 22 

227 squares macadam, at $3.75 851 

15,000 granite blocks, at $0.05 750 

Granite pavers' wages 188 

2,675 cu. yds. excav., at. $0.30 803 

Total paving $ 4,586 

Sewerage $ 909 

Tools $ 830 

Total track, paving, etc $22,120 

Crossing gate, house, etc 397 

Miscellaneous 481 

Grand total, 7,700 lin. ft., at $3.00 $22,978 

The foregoing does not include engineering. 

The work was done by a contractor, who received 15% on the cost 
of all labor, which 15% is included. 

The engine hoists at the rate of 5 ft. per sec. when the grip car. 
pushing two loaded freight cars, is ascending. The grip car is 
permanently fastened to the lower end of the cable. The cable track 
is straight, except for a curve at the lower end. Sixty to 80 freight 
cars handled daily. 

The entire cost of this plant, cable road and side tracks, was 
$58,319. 

Cost of a Rack Railway, Pike's Peak. — Mr. Thomas F. Richardson 
gives the following relative to the Manitou and Pike's Peak Rail- 
way, built in 1890. It is a rack railway (Abt rack), 8.9 miles long. 



1414 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

with maximum grades of 25%, total rise 7,517 ft., 16° max. curve, 
total curvature 210° per mile. . The gage is 4 ft. 8% ins. ; 40-lb. 
T-rails on hewn red spruce ties 7x8 ins. x 9 ft. The grading was 
done by contract, at 15 cts. for earth, 32 cts. for loose rock and 
90 cts. for solid rock. These prices were much too low, and should 
have been 30% higher to yield a fair profit, although the grading 
was "paid for both ways" ; i. e., if the contractor succeeded in 
moving a cubic yard of loose rock from cut to fill, he got 32 cts. 
for excavation and 32 cts. again in embankment. 

The total cost of grading was $150,900, or $16,950 per mile, in- 
cluding log culverts and masonry abutments for 4 small bridges (20 
to 30 ft. span). Laborers received $2 per day. 

The following was the weight of iron and steel per mile of 
track : 

Libs, per mile. 

1,584 rack bars, at 87. S lbs 139,080 

1,584 chairs, at 23.25 lbs 36,830 

3,168 rack-rail bolts, at 1.97 lbs 6,240 

3,168 wood screws, at 1.64 lbs 5,200 

1,584 cover plates, at 1.89 lbs 2,990 

3,168 spring washers, at 0.146 lbs 460 

352 T rails, at 400 lbs 140,800 

352 pairs angle bars (38-in.), at 32.75 lbs 11,530 

2,112 bolts (%x3-in.), at 0.48 lbs 1,010 

12,672 spikes (5y2-in.), at 0.55 lbs 6,970 

Total iron and steel per mile 351,110 

3,168 spruce cross-ties. 

The tracklaying cost $4,275 per mile, including the cost of planing 
the ties (9 cts. each), engine service and everything except engi- 
neering. Had the material been more simply designed, this cost 
would have been much less. 

There were 7 switches costing $450 each complete with ties. 

There were 4 locomotives, each weighing 26 tons when loaded with 
fuel and water. The round trip is made in 2 hrs. with a coal con- 
sumption of less than a ton. 

The cars weigh 14,000 lbs., are 41 ft. long, seat 50 passengers. 
The train crew is one conductor and one brakeman ; only one car 
in a train. 

Cost of Conduit Electric Street Railways.* — Mr. A. N. Connett 
gives the following costs of a conduit electric street railway in- 
stalled by him in 1895 at Washington, D. C. There .were 21 miles 
of single track built. The following prices were paid for rails and 
splice bars : 

Per tin. 

Wheel rails $28.05 

Slot rails 31.28 

Guard rails for curves 46.25 

Conductor rails 40.88 

Joints complete, each $1.20 



^Engineering-Contracting, July 14, 1909. 



RAILIJ'AVS. 141G 

The cost per mile of single track was : 

Rails of all kinds, at above prices $ 9,031.51 

215.5 tons cast iron (yokes, incubator frames, covers, etc.), 

at $28.1i>.; 6,054.75 

Bolts, tie bars, clips, etc 1,518.82 

Bonds for conductor rails 476.00 

Tracklaying (all labor and hauling) 2,804.97 

Temporary track 162.04 

2,507 cu. yds. all excavation (except cable ducts), at $0.95 2,373.34 

Sewer pipes and brick work for duct manholes 483.01 

Cable ducts 1,032.65 

Excavation for cable ducts 355.14 

765 cu. yds. concrete for conduit, at $7.09 5,422.02 

514 cu. yds. concrete for paving base, etc., at $4.52 2,258.74 

6,375 sq. yds. paving (not including base) 7,996.20 

Special track work and curves 3,805.04 

Extra bills of street contractor 1,163.20 

Removal of sub-surface obstructions 3,240.09 

Total per mile of single track $48,336.47 

The item of "cable ducts" covered the following totals for the 
21 miles of track: 

10,616 ft. of 12 way duct at $1.20 

41 ft. of 8-v/ay duct at 0.88 

21,354 ft. of 4-way duct at 0.55 

133 ft. of 2-way duct at 0.35 

There were 9,207 cu. yds. of excavation for these ducts at 83 cts. 
per cu. yd. 

The concrete for the conduit was 1 bbl. Portland cement, 12 cu. ft. 
sand and 22% cu. ft. stone. The concrete for the paving base was 
1 bbl. Cumberland cement, 10 cu. ft. sand and 20 cu. ft. stone. 

The paving on the 21 miles of track was: 

42,126 sq. yds. old stone block at $0.80 

91,716 sq. yds. asphalt at 1.50 

The temporary track is a very low item, the authorities having 
permitted a flat strap-rail to be laid on the pavement by means of 
flat tie bars with special seats at their extremities. The streets of 
Washington are exceptionally favorable for the construction of con- 
duit roads, being wide and having little traffic. 

For comparison study the following New York City figures by 
Mr. William C. Gottschall, engineer in charge of construction of the 
Second Avenue Railroad Co. of New York : 

Per mile of 
Single track. 

Labor, at $7.59 per lin. ft $39,720.90 

Insulators, at $1.40 each 696.53 

Iron work, e.Kcluding yokes, at $1.83 per lin. ft 6,684.25 

224.7 tons cast-iron yokes, at $25.30 5,678.68 

Concrete 3,929.38 

Hauling j'okes and iron work 569.03 

Total, without paving $57,551.53 

This does not include paving, special track work, feeder ducts, 
bonds, sewer connections nor temporary track. Tlie item of labor, 
which is exceedingly high, includes digging trough, removing old 
track, repairing concrete, removing excess of earth, hauling all 
track material, and track laying. 



1416 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Mr. Connett estimates the excess in cost of a conduit line over a 
trolley line as follows per mile of single track : 

105 tons sheet rails, at $31.30 $ 3,287 

40 tons conductor rails, at $41-00 • 1,640 

210 tons cast iron, at $28.20 5,922 

Bolts 600 

Porcelain insulators 175 

1,400 cu. yds. excess excavation, at $1.00 1,400 

1,200 cu. yds. excess concrete, at $7.00 8,400 

Sewer connections 2,000 

Excess labor track laying 3,000 

Special track work, excess 2,500 

Total $28,924 

Removing sub-surface obstructions, say 8,476 

Total excess cost conduit $37,500 

Deduct overhead trolley construction 2,500 

Total difference in cost $35,000 

The removing of sub-surface obstjuctions is merely a rough esti- 
mate. 

The data on cable railways, on the preceding pages, may be con- 
sulted with advantage. 

Cost of Electric Railway, Denver, Colo. — Mr. John P. Brooks gives 
the following as tlie cost of a single track line built (1899) in 
Denver, Colo. : 

Per mile. 
94^ long tons of 60-lb. T-rails, at $23.50 $2,220.75 

360 pairs of 60-lb. angles, at 40 cts. (too low) 144.00 

1,080 lbs. track bolts, at 2% cts 29.70 

32 kegs railway spikes, at $4.50 144.00 

360 copper or plate bonds, at 25 cts 90.00 

2,000 ft. B. M. plank for culverts 42.00 

2,640 Texas ties, at 50 cts 1,320.00 

ISO ft. of curve and guard rails, at $1 180.00 

Hauling ties and rails 130.00 

Laying 1 mile of track 550.00 

1 mile No. trolley wire 325.00 

88 cedar poles in place and painted, at $4.25 374.00 

Overhead work incidentals, including hangers, insulators 

and ratchets ($60), span wire ($40), and labor ($50).. 150.00 
2,000 cu. yds. excavation for track trench, at 25 cts 500.00 

$6,199.45 
Add 5 % for engineering 300.55 

$6,500.00 
Add 2 switclies, at $250 500.00 

Total per mile $7,000.00 

It is apparent that this line was not laid in a paved street. It 
will be noticed also that the price of rails, etc., was lower then 
than now. The cost of power plant and buildings is not included, 
but may be estimated at $15,000 for a suburban line 5 miles long. 

Where paving of streets must be done, use the data given in the 
section on Roads and Pavements. 

Cost of Electric Railway, Third Rail Line. — Mr. Ernest Gozen- 
bach gives the following relative to a first-class, third-rail suburban 



R.iiLir.ns. 1417 

line, 621^. miles long. IncKulint; t^witclies and sidings, the number 
of miles of single track is actually tiG. Of the 02 '4 miles, 6'/i miles 
are laid in city streets. 

Per mile 

Total. of line. 

1. Excavation and embankment .? 96,000 $ 1,536 

2. Bridges, abutments and culverts 91,050 1,457 

3. Two overhead railway crossings 64,000 1,024 

4. Ties, 2,640 per mile, at 55 cts 96,250 1,540 

5. Ballast, 2,200 cu. yds., per mile, at SO cts.. 116,000 1,856 

6. Rails, 70-lb. per yd., at |31 per ton delivered 225,000 3,600 

7. Joints, spikes and bolts for 60-ft. rails.... 29,500 472 

Labor on track, 56 miles, at $600 33,600 538 

Labor in street track, 6V. miles, at $1,800. . 11,700 187 

Farm and highway crossings 9,500 152 

Wire fences, 24,000 rods, at 73 cts 17,500 280 

Switches, special work, etc 21,000 336 

Bonds, 24,000, at 61 cts. in place 14,050 234 

Cross bonds and special bonding, at 

switches 2,000 32 

15. Third rail, 70-lb. per yd., 56 miles, at $36 

ton 131,000 2,096 

16. Insulators, spikes and bolts, at 62 cts. in 

place 18,000 288 

17. Joint plates, bolts and labor laying rail... 9,800 157 

18. Bonds, 15,000, at 73 cts. in place 10,950 175 

19. Crossings and crossing cables 13,500 216 

20. Trolley in streets, single-track span con- 

struction 24,000 384 

21. Power station, 150 kw., at $120 per kw 180,000 2,880 

22. Power station building, at $11 per kw 16,500 264 

23. Transmission line, 55 miles, at $1,400 77,000 1,232 

24. Sub-station, fi-eight and depot buildings. . 24,500 392 

25. Sub-station, railway apparatus 65,000 1,040 

26. Batteries 80,000 1,280 

27. Telephone line 9,000 144 

28. Block-signal system 35,000 560 

Stations and platforms 4,250 84 

Switch and platform-lighting circuit 4,000 64 

General office building 8.000 128 

Car shops, shop tools, etc 24,000 384 

Car bodies and locomotive body 49,000 784 

Trucks and air brakes 27,500 440 

Electric car equipment 76,000 1,216 

Lighting and power apparatus and sup- 
ply systems 70,000 1,120 

37. Accidents, contingencies and insurance, 5% 89,000 ' 1,424 

38. Administration, superintendence, office ex- 

penses, engineering, etc., 5% 89,000 1,424 

Total $1,963,750 $31,420 

This estimate does not include allowance for right of way, station 
ground and legal expense. 

To reduce above costs per "mile of line" (62% miles) to cost per 
"mile of track" (66 miles), deduct 5.3%. 

Items 33, 34 and 35 must be added together to get the total cost 
of rolling stock, making $2,440 per mile of line. 



1418 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of an Electric Street Railway, Chicago. — The following was 
the cost of a mile of double-track street railway in Chicago in 
1895: 

Per mile 
dbl. tr. 

283 tons (90-lb.) rails, at $33.00 $ 9,339 

4,224 oak ties (5 x 8-in. x 7-ft.), at $0.38 1,605 

352 cast welded joints, at $3.50 1,232 

1,760 tie rods, at $0.15 " 264 

33,792 spikes (y2X 1/2x41/2), at $0.01 338 

42,240 ft. wood filler 2,112 

Labor at $1 per lin. ft. of double track 5,280 

Total, exclusive of pavement materials. .. .$20,170 

10,560 sq. yds. cedar blocks, at $0.30 3,168 

146 cu. yds. sand, at $1.25 183 

435 cu. yds. broken stone, at $1.50 668 

10,560 sq. yds. gravel and dressing, at $0.08 845 

10,560 sq. yds. 2-in. hemlock boards, at $0.08.. 845 

Total : $25,879 

The above does not include the overhead system. 

Cost of an Interurban Trolley Line. — Mr. Gilbert Hodges gives the 
following estimate of cost of an interurban electric trolley railway, 
based upon experience in New England in 1902 : 

Per mile 
Roadhedj Land, Etc.: single track. 

14,300 cu. yds. earthwork, at $0.45 $ 6,435.00 

I 325 cu. yds. rock, at $1.75- 568.75 

3 acres clearing and grubbing, at $75.00. 225.00 

3,000 cu. yds. gravel ballast, at $0.50 1,500.00 

640 rods wire fence, at $1.00 640.00 

Pipe culverts 50.00 

Masonry for bridges and culverts 1,000.00 

Wooden and steel bridges 1,300.00 

Land for private right of way. 1,000.00 

Total roadbed, land, etc $12,718.75 

Track: 

110 tons T -rails (70-lb.), at $31.50 $ 3,465.00 

360 continuous rail joints, at $1.54 554.40 

2,640 chestnut ties (6 x 6 in.s. x 8 ft.), at $0.54 1,425.60 

6,870 lbs. spikes, at $0.0225 132.07 

720 bonds in place, at $0.615 442.80 

17 cross bonds, at $0.50 8.50 

Teaming material 270.00 

Labor laying track 1,056.00 

Total track $ 7,354.37 

Overhead System: 
Poles (35 ft.), brackets, cross-arms, etc., in 

place 650.00 

Trolley wire and overhead material in place. 1,100.00 
Direct and alternating current feeders in 

place 1,750.00 

Block signal and telephone systems 2,000.00 

Total overhead system $ 5,500.00 

Engineering and Superintendence $ 600.00 

Grand total $26,173.12 



RAILWAYS. 14 in 

This does not include buildings, power, equipment, interest during 
construction, etc. 

Cost of Third Rail and Trolley Lines Compared.— "Electric Rail- 
ways" (1907), by Sydney W Ashe, contains the following costs 
of third-rail and of trolley lines, as estimated by Thomas Con- 
way, Jr. 

The estimated cost of a third-rail line is as follows per mile of 
single track: 

Item. Ter mile. 

1. 2,640 ties, at $0.75, delivered % 1,980.00 

2. 2,200 cu. yds. ballast, at $0.80 1,760.00 

3. 123.2 tons rails, at $31.00 3,819.20 

4. Joints, spikes and bolts 500.00 

5. Labor on tiack • 600.00 

6. Farm and liighway crossings 150.00 

7. 640 rods wire fence, at $0.75 467.20 

8. Switches, special work, etc 300.00 

9. Bonding 400.00 

10. 61.1 tons third-rail, at $36.00 2,199.60 

11. Insulators, spikes and bolts, at $0.62 109.12 

12. Joint plates, bolts and labor laying rail 175.00 

13. Power station 3,000.00 

14. Power station building 275.00 

15. 7,000 lbs. transmission line copper (500 pr. triple- 

strand), at $0.2005 1,403.50 

16. Pole brackets and insulators for transmission line.... 450.00 

17. Sub-station, freight and depot buildings 2,000.00 

18. Sub-station railway apparatus 1,000.00 

19. Telephone line 150.00 

20. Block signal systems 500.00 

21. Platforms 100.00 

22. Switch and platform lighting circuit 70.00 

23. Genei-al office building 125.00 

24. Cars 5,500.00 

25. Accidents, contingencies, etc., 5% 1,500.00 

"26. Administration, engineering, etc., 5% 1,500.00 

Total $30,033.62 

The estimate for a trolley line is essentially the same, except for 
the following items: 
Item. 

4. Joints, spikes and bolts $1,000.00 

9. Bonding, 35.2 bonds, at $0.75 in place 264.00 

10. Trolley wire (4/0), 3,382 lbs., at $0.198 669.63 

11. Brackets for trolley poles, 52, at $1.50 78.00 

12. Constructing overhead work 600.00 

16. Trolley poles, 52, at $7.50 390.00 

Total $3,001.63 

The total of the corresponding items (4, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 16) for 

third rail is $3,659, an excess of only $657 over the trolley line. 
Mr. W. C. Gottschall gives the following estimates made by Mr. 

Maurice Hoopes of the difference in cost between a third rail and a 

trolle.v line : 



1420 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Third Rail Line. 

Per mile 

Extra length (15 ins.) of 500 ties, at $0.075 $ 37.50 

500 insulators and fastenings, at $0.50 250.00 

62.86 tons (80-lb.) low carbon rail, at $35 + $2 frt 2,325.82 

176 rail joints, at $0.60 105.60 

352 bonds (425,000 cir. mil.) in place, at $1.00 352.00 

200 ft. cable for crossings (1,000,000 cir. mil), etc.. at $1.20 240.00 
Laying rail 100.00 

Total $3,410.92 

Trolley Line. 

(Span construction, and assuming one line of poles chargeable to 

transmission line.) 

22,774 lbs. copper (equiv. to 80-lb. rail), at $0.17 $3,871.58 

50 chestnut poles (8-in. x 30-ft.), at $5.00 250.00 

Labor and materials for erecting 300.00 

Total $4,421.58 

Mr. W. B. Potter's estimate of the cost of a protected third rail 
is as follows : 

Per mile. 

66 tons (75-lb.) third rail, at $43.00 $2,840.00 

528 reconstructed granite insulators, etc., at $0.40 211.00 

352 bonds (No. 0000 G. E. 9" Form B), at $0.38 134.00 

21.71 tons channel iron (6-in., 3iy2-lb.) guard, at $45.00.. 1,248.00 

792 milleable iron supports for channel, at $0.36 286.00 

176 malleable iron fish plates and bolts for channel, at 

$0.25 44.00 

Labor of installation, including drilling rails and channel.. 900.00 

Total $5,663.00 

Cost of Labor and Materials in Building Two Electric Railways.* — 
Mr. Daniel J. Hauer gives the following : 

It is difficult to keep accurate records of costs of all details, owing 
to the methods generally pursued in carrying on the construction 
of electric roads. The majority of lines are built within city limits, 
thus allowing only a short section of the street to be torn up at a 
time, and this necessitates one gang doing several different kinds 
of work in a single day. Consequently we find the "common labor" 
item covering a number of details ; instead of the cost of each 
being listed by itself. 

This reason still holds good and the writer regrets that this is the 
case in the data he will give in this article. Even though this is 
so, several valuable lessons can be learned from the records and 
they may serve to guide some engineers and contractors on future 
work. 

The two examples given are descriptive of construction done in a 
Southern city, during a year when labor was being paid a com- 
paratively high wage, out-of-door work being plentiful, and a job 
obtained easily. This, of course, added to the cost of the work. 



^Engineering-Contracting, Februarj^ 1906. 



RAILWAYS. 1421 

Example I. — Example I was clone under a contractor on "force ac- 
count," that is, at cost for labor plus a percentage. The work con- 
sisted of tearing up and partially destroying an old cable track and 
relaying the new electric roadbed. The old cable track rails and slot 
rails were taken out, and part of the concrete conduit and cast-iron 
yokes destroyed and filled in, then new ties and rails were laid and 
the street paved. The overhead work was not disturbed, so we 
present only the cost of track work. Unfortunately the cost of the 
various details was not kept separate, so we cannot give the cost 
of tearing up track, but can only show the total cost of common 
labor. 

The working day was 10 hours and the following rates of wages 
were paid per day : 

Superintendent $12.00 

Paymaster and assistant superintendent 5.00 

Material man 4.00 

Assistant material man 2.00 

Timekeeper 3.00 

Foremen 4.50 

Assistant foremen 2.50 

Laborer 1.50 

Water boy , 1.00 

Laborers in the iron gang 1.65 

Watchmen 1.50 

Bonders and blacksmith 3.00 

Helpers 1.75 

Block pavers 5.30 

Rammers 3.90 

Stonecutter 6.00 

Cart and driver 2.75 

2-horse team 5.00 

4-horse team 10.00 

The pavers, stonecutter and rammers were union men, hence the 
two first named worked but 8 hours and the rammers 9 hours. 

About a mile and one-half of track was laid, the total costs of 
labor and materials being : 

Labor $20,518.64 

Paving 817.44 

Paving materials 762.07 

Gutters 341.26 

Hauling 452.47 

Permits from city 199.88 

Engineering department 201.34 

Rails, ties, angles, plates, bolts, etc 12,532.97 

Miscellaneous supplies 95.32 

Total $35,921.39 

The rail laid was of the girder type weighing 107 lbs. to the 
yard, or 168.14 gross tons per mile. The height of the rail was 9 
Ins., while the base was 5% ins. ; the length of the rail section was 
60 ft. The angle plates were 32 ins. long with 12 holes ; the tie 
rods were l^^ ins. by 14 in., spaced every 6 ft. The two were 
spaced 2-ft. centers, while the spikes were 5%-ln. by 9/16-in. The 
bonds were 10 ins. concealed. 



1422 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the material was : 

Per lin. ft. 
Rail, tie rods, spikes, plates, nut locks, bolts. ,$1.3894 

Bonds 0244 

Tie 2425 

Handling from cars 0020 

$1.6583 

The cost of labor for tearing up the old track, excavating, laying 
and bonding for new and filling in ready for the pavers was $2,581 
per lin. ft. of track. 

The cost per lineal foot of track for paving materials was $0.10 
and for labor was $0,108, making a total cost of $0,208. 

The cost per lineal foot of track for the miscellaneous items, 
enumerated above, was $0.17 ; this makes a total cost per lineal 
foot as follows : 

Material $1,658 

Labor (common) 2.581 

Paving, including labor 208 

Miscellaneous 170 

Total $4,617 

The paving was granite block paving with large flag stone laid at 
street crossing for foot pavement. The majority of the blocks 
taken up from the old track were used, only about 10% of new 
blocks being substituted. The blocks were laid in sand, and cinders 
in wet places. The cost per .sQuare yard of paving was $0.19, being 
10 cts. for labor and 9 cts. for materials. 

Example II. — This work was identically the same, replacing a 
cable roadbed with girder rails for electric track. The cable road 
was of similar construction, but the work was done by the railroad 
company's own forces, except the paving, which was let to contract, 
the company furnishing materials. The amount of work done was 
a little more than a mile of single track, yet in both cases the work 
was for double track in the heart of the city, where street traffic 
was heavy. 

The prices paid labor in this case were as follows : 

Superintendent $3.33 

Foremen 2.50 

Assistant foremen 2.25 

Sub-foremen 2.00 

Pavers '. . . 4.75 

Rammers 3.50 

Blacksmiths 1.90 

Bonders 1.70 

Surfacers and leaders 1.75 

Laborers in iron gang 1.60 

Laborers, including helpers, watchmen, etc 1.40 

Water boys 75 

Cart and driver 2.50 

One-horse team and driver 3.00 

Two-horse team and driver 5.00 

Team and driver for dragging rails 3.75 

Four-horse team and driver 8.00 

Team for hauling rails 9.00 



RAILWAYS. 1423 

The total cost for labor and all materials was as follows : 

Labor $ 8.235.77 

Paving 2,652.47 

Paving materials 1,791.58 

Gutters 106.21 

Hauling 796.16 

Permits from city 120.75 

Engineei-ing department 133.53 

Rails, ties, angle plates, bolts, etc 9,946.80 

Miscellaneous supplies 105.7!) 

$23,889.06 

The paving was done by contract, the railroad company furnish- 
ing all the materials, the contractor simply doing the labor of laying 
the Belgian blocks. There was 5,894.3 sq. yds. of paving, the con- 
tract price being 45 cts. per sq. yd. The cost of new materials per 
square yard was 31.4 cts., making a total cost per square yard of 
76.4 cts. The paving in all cases ran 2 ft. outside of rail. This 
makes a cost per lineal foot of track for paving of 74 cts., being 
divided as follows: 44.2 cts. for the labor of laying and 29.8 cts. for 
materials. All the blocks were laid in sand, there being no other 
foundation. 

The cost per lineal foot of track for track materials was the same 
as in Example I, namely $1,658. 

The miscellaneous cost, such as hauling, permits, gutters, etc., 
per lineal foot of track was 21 cts. 

In this case the labor cost of the work can be divided under sev- 
eral heads, but still such division as should be made, cannot be 
given, as the records Avere not kept with such an idea. The labor 
costs per lineal foot of track were : 

Superintendence $0,005 

Foi'emen 095 

Laying and surfacing rails 195 

Labor of tearing up cable track, excavation, re- 
filling, spacing ties, etc 1.030 

Watchmen 010 

Water boys 016 

Blacksmith work 012 

Bonding 009 

$1,372 

This makes a total cost per lineal foot of single track as follows, 
and allows of comparison with similar cost in Example I : 

Material $1,658 

Labor (common) 1.372 

Paving, including labor 740 

Miscellaneous 210 

$3,980 

It would seem from these figrures that the company forces tore up 
the old cable road bed and laid the electric road for 63.7 cts. ' 
per lineal foot of single track, or a difference of $3,363.36 per 
This, at a glance, seems like an extraordinary difference, • 
that reason it would be well to analyze these records. 



1424 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The first thing to be noted is the great difference in the wages 
of various men, the contractors paying the larger wage. The dif- 
ference in the compensation of laborers was 10 cts. This was made 
up by the railroad company giving each man two car tickets daily, 
one for use in the morning and the other for evening use. The cost 
of these tickets was not included in the company's records. It was 
considered that there was no direct cost to the company, but such 
an idea is certainly erroneous. It would seem that at least 5 cts. 
should be charged for these two rides, making a total charge of 
about $300. The other differences in wages are very hard to esti- 
mate, as the details of time on the two jobs could not be obtained. 

The contractor has, in some cases, charged very high prices for 
some of his men, such as superintendent, foremen and some others. 
Some of these high rates were made necessary, as the men were paid 
full time, whether the weather' permitted work or not, and as 
wages could only be charged the company when work was actually 
done, a higher rate than was paid was billed. , Then, too, some of 
the wages paid by the company were very low, as foremen, black- 
smith, bonders and a few others. The company failed to make a 
charge against their work for a pay master, material man and time- 
keeper. The roadmaster of the railroad and one or two other offi- 
cials spent the greater part of their time in supervision of this 
work, yet no charge was made for this. All of these things would 
add materially to tlie cost. 

Another matter, worthy of note, is that the contractors were only 
doing one stretcli of work at a time, while the railroad company had 
as many as six jobs going on simultaneously. This reduced the cost 
of superintendence, blacksmithing and a few other items for the 
company, while the contractors were compelled to charge full time. 

Another consideration was the class of work done. The con- 
tractor had no object but to give the best of work, the more it cost 
the greater his profits; but this was not so with the company's 
forces. Specifications were not lived up to, but rather ignored, and 
wiien difficulties were encountered, specifications were changed to 
suit the conditions. One foreman expressed the situation tersely 
when he said : "Anything goes with the company." Repairs to the 
work were necessary within a few months. As is always the case, 
cheap foremen do indifferent work, and foremen's salaries were 
small. 

The percentage paid the contractor in Example I was 10%, hence 
his profit per lineal foot of track was 45.6 cts. Deducting this from 
his cost to the company we have $4,161. 

Taking into consideration all of these facts, and it is more than 
doubtful if the cost of the work by the company's forces was less 
than that of the contractor. It will also be noticed that there was 
no charges for plant, and also for clerical hire, although clerks 
''■om several departments did extra work on account of the recon- 
"tion. 

writer believes that this is another lesson against such work 

^ne by company's forces instead of by contract. He would 

"•erstood as advocating having the work done by a con- 



RAILWAYS. 142.J 

tract on the percentage basis, as both the costs of these examples 
are high, but it would be mucli more economical to let the work 
at contract. There would no doubt have been a number of re- 
sponsible contracting firms only too glad to do these jobs for less 
money than they cost the railroad company. If the work was too 
irregular to let it upon a unit basis, or too uncertain to make it a 
lump sum job, it could liave been contracted for, at cost plus a fixed 
sum. Then there would be no object for the contractor to "^3alt" 
the job, or even prolong the time or skimp the work. There is cer- 
tainly mucli food for thought in the above figures. 

The bonding of tlie rails on electric track is an important detail of 
the work. Tlie labor necessary consists of reaming the hole out in 
order to make the contact good and in placing and tightening up tlie 
bond. The cost of labor and material per lineal foot of track for 
bonding has been given, but it may be of interest to consider the cost 
per joint or bond. The bond used, was a 10-in. concealed bond, that 
is a bond entirely covered up by the angle plate. The cost of the 
bonds, apiece, was 73.2 cts. In Example I, witli bonders' wages at 
30 cts. per hour, the cost of lalior per bond was 41.7 cts., making a 
total cost of $1,149. In Example II, with wages at 17 cts. per hour, 
the labor cost per bond was 24.!) cts. giving a total cost of 97.7 cts. 
This does not include the expense of putting on the angle plate 
and tightening up the bolts, as that is listed in the records of laying 
iron. 

Botli jobs were done in good summer weather. Traffic was main- 
tained over one track wliile the other track was being rebulit. No 
record was kept of the cost of laying these cross overs, consequently 
they were not charged against the work. 

The management and organization of the forces was not up to the 
standard of our best contracting firms. A large per cent of the 
laborers were foreigners and they worked under sub-foremen or 
assistant foremen of tlieir own nationality. This made it possible 
for the men to lose and waste time. Frequently instructions were 
misunderstood, so work was done wrong only to be changed. 
Some foremen were kept at work, not from their ability to handle 
men and obtain good results, but because they could furnish new 
laborers when they were needed. It was also possible for dis- 
charged men to go from the job at which they were laid off to 
another piece of work being done by the company and obtain em- 
ployment. Any contractor knows the cost of such proceedings. 
They cannot be calculated but they show up on the wrong side of 
the ledger at the end of a season's work. 

Cost of Street Railway Track with Rubble Concrete Base, Ft. 
Wayne, Ind.* — The track was single track in paved street, with 
sidings and turnouts, and the work consisted in excavating some 8 ft. 
wide and from 1 to 3% ft. deep, placing the concrete, laying track, ' 
and repaving. The construction is shown by Fig. 13. The costs as 
given by Mr. H. L. Weber, chief engineer, Ft. Wayne & Wabash 
Valley Traction Co., were as follows : 



"Engineering-Contracting, March 11, 1908. 



1426 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

There were 5,022 lin. ft. of single track made up as follows: 

Main line, lin. ft 4,481 

Sidings, lin. ft 476 

Two left-hand turnouts, lin. ft 65 

Total track, lin ft 5,022 

There were 3,970 sq. yds. of repaying made up as follows: 

In gage of main track, sq. yds 3,399.1 

On sidings, sq. yds 453.9 

1-ft. strip outside of rails, sq. yds 1,117.0 

Total paving, sq. yds 3,970.0 

The excavation consisted of a trench some 8 ft. wide and from 
1 to 3% ft. deep. All excavated material was hauled away, teams 
costing 40 cts. per hour and common labor IGi^ cts. per hour. The 
cost of excavation was as follows: 

Excavating and hauling away $3,378.03 

1 new road plow 25.00 

Total cost $3,403.03 



KSMorf-ar Specia/No se BJocH j:3Q/x>uf Asphalt S-'/z 



^- ^f?a)'J^ ^oool T,e5. 3"x&"x 7'0"-30"C.toC. 




BowJaers-^ ^S^^fj^ Carneqie 5f-eel T/e Unoter 

OJo/ Rail Cr055 tie to replace Wooa fie 5opppr/-evf M/(pi9, Joint- 



*77,_5 

Old 5 WRal/ ffsia/Pf-First iPr/b/ id92. 



EnqrContr. p. ^ Wooel Cross Tie 

Fig. 13. — Street Railway Track. 

This gives a cost for excavation of 67.7 cts. per lin. ft. of track. 

The track was laid with old 5% -in. rails, which were reversed 
end for end. The ties were spaced 30 ins. on centers. Altogether 
4,957 ft. of track were laid, costing as follows: 

Item. Total. Per lin. ft. 

Labor $ 784.81 $0,158 

Ties 1,204.80 0.242 

18 kegs spikes at $5 90.00 0.018 

8 kegs bolts at $5.85 46.85 0.009 

350 bonds at 60 cts 210.00 0.041 

Totals $2,336.46 $0,468 



R.IILll\l)'S. MJ7 

The concrete work compriseil the making and laying of 1,2G0 
cu. ytls. of concrete at the following cost : 

Item. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Stone at $1.25 per cu. yd .| 973.55 $0,772 

688 cu. yds. gravel and suiui at .fl 688.00 0.546 

759% bbls. cement at $2 1,519.00 1.20.5 

Labor 527. 6S 0.41S 

Totals $3,708.23 .$2,941 

This low cost of concrete per cubic yard was made possible by the 
use of cobble stones from the old cobble pavement in the concrete. 
It was estimated by the engineer tliat had broken stone concrete 
been used throughout the cost would have been $5.50 per cu. yd., 
so that a saving of nearly one-half was affected by using the 
rubble concrete. The cost of the concrete per lineal foot of track 
wa.s $3,708.23 -f- 4,957 ft. = 74.8 cts. 

There were 3,970 sq. yds. of repaving wliich cost a.s follows: 

Item. Total. Per sq. yd. 

Gravel and sand $ 344.20 $0,086 

90V. bbls. cement at $2 181.00 0.046 

33,145 new brick at $22.50 per M. . . 746.86 0.188 

123,618 blocks at $18.25 per M 2.256.86 0.568 

Unloading and hauling brick 250.00 0.063 

1 road roller 200.00 0.050 

Labor 425.70 0.107 

Totals $4,404.62 $1,108 

The cost cf paving per lineal foot of ti'ack was SS.S cts. and the 
total cost of the woi'k per lineal foot of track was; 

Per lin. ft. 

Excavation $0,677 

Track laying 0.468 

Concrete 0.74 8 

Paving 0.888 

Total $2,781 

This does not include the cost of the rails. 

Comparative Cost of Street Railway Track Built with Steel and 
with Wood Ties.* — A steel tie laid in concrete is cheaper tlian a 
wood tie laid in concrete or broken stone in street railway track 
construction, according to figures by Mr. C. H. Clark, Cleveland 
Electric Ry., Cleveland, O. Comparison is made between the 
standard construction with Carnegie steel ties on the Cleveland 
Electric Ry., and various standard forms of construction with wood 
ties. 

The Carnegie tie is a steel I-beam 5 % ins. deep with a top 
flange 4% ins. wide and a bottom flange 8 ins. wide. The ties are 
spaced 6 ft. apart on centers. A strip of 1:3:6 concrete about 
2 ft. wide and 5% ins. thick is placed under each tie and the 
spa;-e between ties is filled with a S^A-in. layer of concrete. The 



* Engineering -Contracting, Nov. 7, 1906. 



1428 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

rods connecting the rails come over eacli tie. The actual cost of 

this construction per 100 ft. is given as follows: 

Per 100 ft. 

16% ties at $2.50 ? 41.66 

17 eu. yds. concrete at $5 85.00 

Total $126.66 

Total per foot of track 1.27 

Using oak ties costing 80 cts. each and spaced 2 ft. on centers 
the cost of the several standard constructions per foot are given 
as follows : 

No. 1. — Tamping with material taken out ; no extra excavation : 

Per ft. 

Tamping .♦ $0.04 

Tie 40 

Total per ft 50.44 

No. 2. — Seven inches brokan stone under ties and concrete be- 
tween the ties : 

0.18 cu. yds. crushed stone, at $1.50 $0.27 

1 cu. yd. concrete, at $5 . . '. 50 

Tamping crushed stone 08 

Extra excavation and removing the same 07 

Tie , 40 

Total per ft $1.32 

No. 3. — Seven inches broken stone under ties and broken stone 
between the ties : 

0.28 cu. yd. of stone, at $1.50 $0.42 

Tamping the same 08 

Extra excavation and removing the same 08 

Tie 40 

Total per ft $0.98 

No. 4. — All concrete ; 5 in. below and filled to the top of the tie : 

0.218 cu. yd. of concrete, at $5 $1.19 

Extra excavation and removing the same 07 

Tie 40 

Total per ft $1.56 

No. 5. — Four inches concrete ; 1 in. sand under tie and concrete 
between the ties : 

0.208 cu. yd. concrete, at $5 $1.04 

Extra excavation and removing the same 07 

Tie 40 

Total per ft '.$1.51 

It will be seen that the steel tie construction is cheaper in first 
cost tlian any of the concrete constructions with wood ties. Re- 
ferring to this comparison Mr. Clark says : 

"This is on the assumption that white oak ties cost 80 cts. apiece. 
This price, of course, varies in different localities, and the difference 
In price can readily be applied for comparison. The life of the 
steel tie can readily be placed at 20 years', and the white oak at 
about 12 years. 



RAILWAYS. 142!) 

Cost of Welding Rails by tine Thermit Process.' — Tlie following 
account of the methods and cost of welding a large number of 
rail joints by the thermit process has been obtained fiom Mr. M. J. 
French, Engineer Maintenance of Way of the Utica & Mohawk 
Valley Electric Railway. A part of this information appeared 
originally in a paper by Mr. French, read before the Street Railway 
Association of the State of New York, and the remainder, covering 
practically all of the matter on costs, was obtained from the author 
by the editors of Engineering-Contracting. Both the methods 
described and the costs given refer to work on the railway named 
above during 1905-6. 

Thermit Process. — The process of welding consists in pouring 
molten mild steel from a melting crucible into -sand and flour molds 
placed around the rails at the joint. It is in detail as follows : 

The rails having first been lined and surfaced, the joint is 
thoroughly cleaned with a sand blast or wire brush. Then the 
rails are heated by a gasoline or oil blow-torch to expel all 
moisture, and by heating the rails to a dull red better results are 
secured as the temperature of the molten steel is not reduced as 
much when coming into contact with the rails. After the joint is 
cleaned and heated a pair of molds made of an equal mixture of 
common clay and sand, or, preferably, of sand and 10 per cent of 
cheap rye flour, is clamped firmly to the rails. The molds are 
held by a wrought iron frame-work provided with handles to 
facilitate carrying. The molds being in place, the rail head is 
painted with a watery solution of red clay which the heated metal 
immediately dries up to a thin coating, the purpose of which is to 
prevent the molten slag or steel from uniting with or burning the 
rail head. After thoroughly luting all joints of the molds with 
clay of the consistency of putty, earth is packed around the outside 
of the molds. The molds and the rails are then given a final 
warming with the blow-torch, the flame being directed inside the 
molds to expel any remaining moisture. The crucible on its tripod 
is then set over the mold with its pouring hole directly over and 
about 2 ins. above the gate in the mold. After placing the tapping 
pin, iron disc, asbestos disc and refractory sand in the bottoin of 
the crucible to act as a plug for the opening the thermit compound 
is poured in and in the center of the top is placed about one-third 
teaspoonful of ignition powder. A storm match starts the chemical 
process. 

The thermit compound is composed of aluminum and iron oxide 
both in granular or flake form ; the ignition powder is composed of 
aluminum and barium peroxide in much finer form. When the 
match is applied the barium peroxide ignites and releases its 
oxygen to the aluminum very quickly. The heat produced is so 
intense that it causes the iron oxide to release its oxygen, which 
in turn is seized by the aluminum and almost instantly the entire 
contents of the crucible are a boiling and seething mass. By this 
reaction the pure steel is liberated and settles immediately to the 



^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 13, 1907. 



1430 HAND/OOK OF COST DATA. 

bottom of the mo'J- The crucible is then tapped by striking the 
tapping pin with a special iron spade and the molten steel runs into 
the mold foUoi^^'ed by the aluminum oxide and corundum slag. The 
chemical reaction described is completed in about 30 seconds, and 
in five minutes the molds can be removed. 

ilfoZds.— The molds are made by baking a mixture of sand and 
rye flour shaped on models. At first a mixture of one part clay and 
one part sand was used, but it resulted unsatisfactorily. The 
molds shrunk and checked badly in baking and required a great 
amount of careful luting to close the joints. Also the clay was 
baked like a brick by the great heat of the welded joint and was 
quite difficult to remove, adding somewhat to the expense. At the 
suggestion of an old foundryman trial was made of a mixture of 
clean, sharp sand, with 10 per cent of coarse rye flour; the mixture 
was moistened just enough to retain its form when pressed in 
the hand. This mixture proved satisfactory. It came away from 
the model without adhering, baked without shrinking and was hard 
enough to stand ordinary handling. By adding a teaspoonful of 
linseed oil to the mixture for a pair of molds it baked as hard as 
concrete — unnecessarily hard for ordinary purposes, but most 
desirable for special molds for broken or combination joints. 

The molds are baked in a brick oven having a flat iron plate 
above the firebox to baffle the heat and above this two racks 
capable of holding twelve sets of molds. For baking a modera;te 
heat, about the temperature required for making bread — has proved 
the most satisfactory ; a higher temperature burned the rye flour 
and destroyed its cementing properties. One man receiving 15 
cts. per hour makes and takes the molds and he can turn out 12 
sets every five hours, or 24 sets per day. This gives a cost for labor 
of about 6% cts. per set. The molds actually cost about 10 cts. 
a set, counting in materials and lost time due to the full output of 
the oven not being required each day. 

Crucibles. — The crucibles furnished by the Goldschmidt Thermit 
Co. cost $7.25 each, but since using up the first six bought the 
railway company has made its own, buying magnesia tar from the 
Goldschmidt Thermit Co. at 2% cts. per pound. The tar is 
mixed with 25 per cent of old crucible material finely powdered. 
These crucibles last on an average for about 30 joints. They are 
baked in the oven previously described with a higher temperature 
than that required for the molds. The cost of the crucibles is 
$2.40 each, made up of the following items : 

48 lbs. magnesia tin at 2% cts $1.20 

12 lbs. old crucible powder, labor 0.15 

6 hrs.' labor at 15 cts., molding and baking 0.90 

Fuel 0.15 

Total $2.40 

Cost of Welding. — The welding was done by a gang of 1 foreman 
and 3 laborers. This gang has never exceeded 20 welds per 
10-hour day. The wages paid were: Foreman, $2.50 per day, and 
laborers, $1.50 per day. The welding portion consists of 16 lbs. 



R.ULJVAVS. 14:11 

thermit and 2 lbs. iron punchings, or 13 lbs. thermit and 3 lbs. 
iron punchings, if a lower temperature seems desirable. The 
total cost of the welding portion, including igniting powder, tapping 
pin, and plugging materials for crucible, consisting of asbestos 
washer, iron disc and refractory sand, is ?4.25. The cost of 
welding 100 joints on T-rail 7 ins. high, 6 ins. base and 3 ins. 
head during 1906 was per joint as follows: 

Cost of mold $0.10 

Cost of crucible 0.10 

Cost of casting materials 0.20 

Foreman 0.25 

Laborers 0.91 

Thermit portion 4.25 

Total $5.81 

To this is to be added $1.63, which is about the average cost 
of removing and replacing brick pavement at each joint for labor 
and materials, using old broken stone for concrete and cleaning 
old paving blocks. This addition brings the total up to $7.44 per 
joint welded. The cost of welding 600 joints in 1905 on 9-in. 
tram head rail, including all labor, materials, tools and patterns 
Incident to the work, experimenting with mold materials and cost 
of oven, was $5.S6. The cost of the original outfit for welding was: 

1 automatic crucible $ 7.25 

1 set mold models 12.00 

1 set mold clamps 6.00 

1 tapping spade 1.00 

1 tripod for crucible 4.00 

1 set mold boxes 2.50 

Total $32.75 

Precautions. — Certain precautions are necessary to get the best 
results by the thermit process, and some of these we quote from 
Mr. French's paper as follows : 

"When we began welding this 7-in. rail we found that we could 
sledge off the welds and that the iron from the thermit compound 
had not united with the rail ; also that tlie iron came up to the 
top of the rail head. We subsequently found that the mold models 
had become mixed, and we had used one of too small horizontal 
cross-section, and consequently the rail chilled the small volume of 
molten iron coming in contact with it. Upon enlarging the mold 
model so that the thermit portion furnished only enough iron to 
come up under the rail head, we obtained welds that resisted the 
most vigorous sledging that could be given with a 10-pound hammer. 
We were able to batter the weld out of shape, but could not sepa- 
rate it from the rail. This sledging test is now applied to all 
welds. 

"We found when welding in the morning with rising temperature 
that tightly-closed joints often humped up when welded. This 
proved to be due to the latent compression in the rails that did 
not manifest itself until the rail ends became soft. These humped 
joints were ground down with an emery wheel grinder. We had 



1432 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

only a few of these joints when we realized the cause, and readily 
prevented such action by welding on cooler days or when the 
temperature was falling. We obtained the best results with joints 
open about 1/16 to 1/32 in., the expansion in welding closing 
tightly such an opening. We have made excellent combination 
welds between 80-lb. T-rail, 7-in. 70-lb. and 95-lb. T-rails and 
9-in. girder rails. In making combination welds we found that it 
was essential to get a good body of metal between the upper side 
of tlie base of the deeper rail and the under side of the shallower 
section in order to secure the strongest type of weld. 

"Thus far there has been no appreciable excess wear in the 
head of the rails at the welds and tlie heated portion seems to 
take the original temper, as it cools down slowly in about the 
same way as when coming from the rolls. 

"A few portions of thermit, not over six, have been lost through 
failure of the workman to tap the crucible properly, or lack of 
luting around the joints of the molds. We have had but one 
explosion during our entire experience. That occurred after using 
the process 18 months, and was caused through carelessness in 
wekhng on a rainy day and in not thoroughly luting the molds 
near the top. The slag came in contact with the wet eartli around 
tlie mold, but aside from the scare occasioned by the report and a 
slight bu\'n on the foreman's arm from flying slag no hann was 
done, and the weld turned out to be a good one." 

Cost of Electrically Welding 3,087 Rail Joints.*— Mr. P. Ney Wil- 
son gives the following: 

There are many miles of perfectly welded track in existence, 
and this fact seems sufficient to prove that the process is not a 
failure ; for the successfully welded track, aside from the question 
of theoretical points in the process, furnishes abundant proof that 
with proper attention the weld is efficient and the nearest approach 
to the perfect joint that track engineers liave yet seen. 

The one important and serious drawback to the use of the weld 
was the inclination towards undue crystallization, caused by the 
sudden application of severe heat. This condition developed during 
the experimental stage and seems to have been obviated by the 
more scientific application of tlie process. 

In the case of old track with more or less battered joints, prices 
should be obtained upon a step joint for raising the receiving rail 
sufficiently to surface the lowest spot on the dish with the abutting 
rail. To this figure should be added the cost of the bonds (loose and 
battered joints are usually accompanied with inefficient bonding) ; 
then add labor cost and incidental material and make a total. This 
total should be compared with the cost of welding, and, after 
considering the increased life due to welding, a decision based upon 
facts can be made. 

To illustrate the point just made an example is chosen from 
work done at Camden, N. J., in the fall of 1905 on the lines of the 
South Jersey Division of the Public Service Corporation. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 20, 1907. 



RAILWAYS. U-X\ 

Organization of the Work. 

The organization of tlie gang doing tlie work, as shown in tlie 
detailed statL'ment. consisted of about 100 men, 75 of wliom worlcfd 
on tlie day shift and tlie balance of 25 on the night shift. It was 
found that it was not necessary to have more than 25 men working 
at night, as the day gang could keep ahead of the welding machine 
with very satisfactory results. The figures showing the average 
number of men in gang per day are based upon a ten-hour day at 
15 cts. per hour, assuming that all the men received the same rate. 
This figure is shown in this way so that it can be applied in any 
locality wlit^re a higher or lower rate of wages is paid ; for instance, 
the average number of men per day required on the entire operation 
was 97.6. This figure being arrived at, assuming that all of the 
men and teams worked at the same rate per hour, would effect, of 
course, the cost per joint labor for opening, closing, shimming and 
aligning, etc., in other localities ; this latter cost being increased 
or decreased in proportion to the increase or decrease in the rate 
per hour, as the case may be. 

The operation in Camden was handled by four foremen, two 
sub-foremen and on an average of three teams per day. The rate 
paid the foremen was 25 cts. per hour; rate for teams, 45 cts. pei- 
hour, and rate of men in the gang, 15 cts. per hour. , It might be 
added that in the gang doing the work there was about 50 per cent 
of flrst-class track laborers at the 15-ct. rate. These men were 
experienced trackmen and the low cost per joint bears evidence 
of their capability. 

The actual welding of the joints was done hy the Lorain Steel 
Co. on contract at $5.25 per joint. This price is governed, of course, 
by the number of joints covered by contract. They agree to pay 
to the railway company $10 to $12 per joint for every joint that 
breaks within one j^ear from date of welding. The breakage for 
the first year was 1 per cent, the cost of cutting in new rails being 
covered by the rebate from the contractor. The track having been 
already subjected to all seasons of the year, we now assume that 
the breakage will be materially decreased until the rail is worn to 
a point where it should be relaid. Very little new material was 
used by the railway company, it consisting of iron shims, sand, 
oil for red lights, hacksaw blades and other inexpensive misceb 
laneous track material. It was not necessary to mix concrete for 
filling in holes fcr paving foundation, for in the above case the city 
was under contract with a paving company, who followed up tht 
welding machines and replaced asphalt on Broadway and on Kaighri 
Ave. The paving on all other streets was placed by the railway 
company, using the men in the gang at the rate mentioned. The 
aligning, surfacing and shimming of the joints was done by six 
skilled trackmen under a foreman. These men were trainea 
esoecially for joint repairs with the idea in view that too much 
care cannot be taken in bringing the joint to proper alignment and 
surface. 



1434 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

An important feature in the maintenance of way man is the 
obtaining of proper credit for old material, wliich has been re- 
tui-ned to scrap or to stores, it being manifest that in case of 
welding rails that the bonds and the joints taken off should be 
credited to the operation. 

Cost of Work. 

Hacldonfield Pike. — The work on this street comprised the welding 
of the joints in both tracks of a double track line. Altogether 989 
joints were welded in 7-in. girder rail of Pennsylvania Steel Co.'s 
section No. 238 and Cambria section No. 824. The rails were 60 ft. 
long. The pavement was Belgian blocks on sand. The work was 
started on Sept. 23, 1905, and was finished on Oct. 6, 1905, making 
14 days' work. The average number of men in the gang per day, 
based upon a 10-hour day at 15 cts. per hour, inclusive of Sundays 
and rainy days, was 103.7. The price received for scrap fish plates 
was ?15.60 per gross ton and for copper bonds was 15% cts. per lb. 
The cost of the work was as follows : 

Cost of Fitting Joints for Welding: Total. Per joint. 

103.7 men 14 days at $1.50 $2,177.55 $2,201 

Cost of material 140.85 0.142 

Total $2,318.40 $2,343 

Credit for scrap 900.00 0.910 

Cost after deducting credit $1,418.40 $1,433 

We have, then, the cost of welding per joint as follows : 

Cost of fitting joint for welding $1,433 

Conti-act price for welding 5.25 

Total $6,683 

This figure gives a cost per mile as follows : 

For 30-ft. lengths $2,352.76 

For 60-ft. lengths 1,176.38 

State Street. — The work on this street comprised the welding of 
191 joints on 7-in. girder rail Cambria section No. 834. For 115 
joints the rails were 30 ft. long, and for 76 joints they were 60 ft. 
long. The pavement was Belgian blocks on sand. For the scrapped 
fish plates the company received $15.60 per gross ton, and for the 
copper bonds 15% cts. per lb. The average number of men in the 
gang per day, based upon a 10-hour day and 15 ets. per hour, 
was 84.6. Work was started on Oct. 13, and finished on Oct. 16. 
1895, and occupied three working days, making the average number 
of joints finished per day 63.6. The cost of the work was as follows: 

Cost of Fitting Joints for Welding: Total. Per joint. 

84.6 men 3 days at $1.50 $280.56 $1,993 

Cost of material 57.61 0.201 

Total $458.17 $2,294 

Credit for scrap 174.26 0.912 

Cost after deducting credit $283.91 $1,382 



RAILWAYS. ll.T, 

"We have, then, the cost of welding per joint as follows: 

Cost of fitting joint for welding $l.oS2 

Contract price for welding 5.25 

Total if 6.632 

These figures give a cost per mile as follows : 

For :^0-ft. lengths $2,334.4 6 

For 60-ft. lengths 1,167.23 

Broadway and Kaign Avenue. — This job comprised the welding 
of 715 joints on double-track line on Broadway, and of 64 joints 
on one-track on Kaign Ave., making a total of 779 joints. The rail 
m both cases was 7-in. girder Pennsylvania Steel Co., section No. 
238. The pavement on Broadwaj^ was asphalt between rails, and 
part of shoulder and Belgian blocks along rails, on 6 ins. of con- 
crete. On Kaign Ave. the pavement was bricks between rails and on 
shoulder and asphalt, both on 6 ins. of concrete. The rails In both 
cases were 30 ft. long. For the scrapped fish plates the company 
got $15.60 per gross ton, and for the old copper rail bonds 15i/4 
cts. per lb. The average number of men worked per day, based 
upon a 10-hour day at 15 cts. per hour, inclusive of Sundays and 
rainy days, was 99.7. The work was done in September and October. 
1905, and lasted 13 days, so that the average number of joints 
finished per day was 60. The cost of the work was as follows: 

Cost of Fitting Joints for Welding: Total. Per joint. 

99.7 men 13 days at $1.50 $1,944.94 $2,496 

Cost of materials 239. 7S 0.307 

Total $2,184.72 $2,803 

Credit for scrap 712.14 0.914 

Cost after deducting credit $1,472.58 $1,889 

The work required replacing 1016.6 sq. yds. of asphalt at a total 
cost of $2,569.65, or $2,527 per sq. yd. As there were 779 joints the 
repairs amounted to 1.305 sq. yds. per joint, and cost $3,298 per 
joint. We then have the total cost of welding per joint as follows : 

Fitting joint for welding $1,889 

Contract price for welding 5.25 

Repairs to pavement 3.298 

Total $10,437 

These figures give a cost per mile as follows : 

For 30-ft. lengths $8,131.97 

For 60-ft. lengths 1,837.08 

Moorestown PiJce. — The work on this job comprised the welding 
of 1,128 joints on double track laid with 60-ft. 9-in. and 7-in. girder 
rail Pennsylvania Steel Co.'s sections No. 238 and No. 200. The 
pavement was Belgian blocks on sand. Scrap fish plates fetched 
$15.60 per gross ton, and scrap bands 15% cts. per lb. Work was 
started Oct. 16 and was finished Nov. 5, 1905, thus lasting IS days. 
The average number of men worked per day, based on a 10-hour 



1436 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

day at 15 cts. per hour, inclusive of Sundays, and rainy days, was 
93.6. The average number of joints welded per day was 62.6. The 
cost of tlie work was as follows : 

Cost of Fitting Joints for Welding: Total. Per joint. 

93.6 men 18 days at $1-50 $2,528.19 $2,241 

Cost of material 142.85 0.127 

Total $2,671.04 $2,368 

Credit for scrap 1,030.19 0.913 

Cost after deducting credit $1,640.85 $1,455 . 

"We then have the total cost of welding per joint as follows: 

Fitting joints for welding $1,455 

Contract price for welding 5.25 

Total $6,705 

These figures give a cost per mile as follows : 

For 30-ft^ lengths $2,359.80 

For 60-ft. lengths 1,179.90 

Total Work. — Summarizing the above figures we have a record of 
which gives us the following : 

Number of days worked 48 

Number of joints welded 8,087 

Number of joints welded per day 64.3 

Average number men worked 97.6 

Cost of Work: Total. Per joint. 

Labor preparing joints $ 7,031.24 $2,277 

Materials preparing joints 581.09 0.188 

Total $ 7,612.33 $2,465 

Credit for scrap 2,816.59 0.912 

Cost after deducting credit $ 4,795.74 $1,533 

Cost replac. 1,016.6 sq. vds. asphalt 2,589.65 0.832 

Contract price for welding 16,206.75 5.25 

Totals $23,572.14 $7,635 

These figiares give us a cost per inile as follows : 

For 30-ft. rails $2,687.52 

For 60-ft. rails 1,343.75 

Discussion of Results. 

The first cost per joint, represents cost in labor and material 
to the railway company exclusive of the contract price for doing 
the welding. Tlie average number of finished joints per day on the 
above operation was 64. It should be understood that this figure is 
arrived at by dividing the total number of joints by the total 
days, inclusive of Sundays and rainy days and loss of time, due to 
the moving of the machine from one street to the other. Under 
favorable conditions 80 joints per day of 24 hours can be opened, 
welded, repaved and left in finished condition. 

In paved streets the question of expansion and contraction need 
not be the cause of any worry on the part of the engineer, as. 



R.IILIJ-.IVS. 1437 

there being little change in the temperature of the earth, there is 
correspondingly very slight expansion and contraction. Slip joints 
in closed streets are not satisfactory, and after practical experience 
are not being advocated, for the reason that it is practically Im- 
possible to calculate where the contraction strain will take place. 

It was assumed that the rail welded would have to be relaid in 
four years, owing to battered joints, and from the fact that Broad- 
way and Kaign Ave. was laid in concrete with asphalt paving and 
would cost for relaying $5 per foot for paving alone, figures showed 
conclusively that a saving could be effected and the life of the 
rail increased from 75 to 100 per cent. On Haddonfield and Moors- 
town Pike the cost per joint per year for keeping them in a fair 
condition was 90 cts. This included opening and closing joint, 
placing new plates and shimming. 

Taking into consideration the above figures and excessive cost of 
re-construction on Kaign Ave. and Broadway, it was evident that 
saving could be made by welding joints. One per cent of breakage 
was a small matter in comparison to the increasing bad condition 
of all of the joints. On Broadway and on Kaign Ave. with a total 
of 779 welded joints there were none broken. These two streets 
were paved with asphalt on concrete. The entire number of broken 
joints occurred on Haddonfield Pike and Moorstown Pike, where 
the track was laid on sand and paved roughly with rubblestone. To 
the condition of the paving was attributed the breakage, as in the 
winter months the snow and ice had an opportunity to get around 
the rail, reducing the temperature of the rail to such an extent 
that breakage followed. 

The Lorain Steel Co. has recently successfully applied the process 
to T-rail track on interurban lines, having welded a stretch of about 
six miles from Providence, R. I., to River Point. In this track they 
used expansion joints every 1,000 ft. 

Cost of Erecting Trolley Poles. — A gang of 4 men digging holes 
and 6 men raising poles averaged 36 poles set per 10-hr. day, or 
50 cts. per pole at this rate, and with wages at $1.80 per day, a man 
digs 9 holes per day at a cost of 20 cts. per hole, and a man raises 
6 poles per da5^ at a cost of 30 cts. per pole. 

In digging holes 24 ins. diam. and 5 ft. deep for telegraph poles, 
using a crowbar and "spoon" shovel, a man will dig only 3 holes a 
day in stiff clay, and 7 holes in avei'age earth. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Trolley and Transmission Line 
Poles.* — The Fort Wayne and Wabash Valley Traction Co. has 
made reinforced concrete trolley poles and transm.ission line poles, 
the cost of which was as follows in 1906 : 

The trolley poles are 32 ft. long, 8 ft. of which is below the 
ground level. The pole is 10 ins. square at the ground level and 6 
ins. at the top, and is reinforced with 8 twisted steel rods, "s in. 
It contains 22% cu. ft. of 1 -^- 3 -^ 3 gi-avel concrete, and 122 lbs. 
of steel, weighs 3,300 lbs., and costs $7.50 at the gravel pit. The 
transmission pole is 42 ft. long, 8 ft. being underground. It is 12 



*Engmeering-Contracting , July 14, 1909. 



1438 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



ins. square at the ground level, and 6 ins. at the top, and is rein- 
forced with 8 twisted steel bars ( Va in.), 4 of which are 32 ft. 
long and 4 are 42 ft. long. It contains 29 cu. ft. concrete, 242 lbs. 
reinforcing bars and 21 lbs. of steps, weighs 4,400 lbs. and costs $13. 

First Cost and Cost of Operating a Trolley Line — "Street Rail- 
ways," by C. B. Fairchild, contains the following estimate, made in 
1892, of the cost of constructing, equipping and operating 3 miles 
of double track electric trolley line, with power station near the 
center of the line. 

Per mile 
of single 

Road Bed: Total. track. 

15,840 lin. ft. stone ballast (6 ins. below ties and 

between ties), including excavation for same, at 

$0.90 $ 14,256 $ 2,376 

15,136 ties (5 x 7-in.) at $0.45 6,811 1,135 

1,056 double joint ties at $0.75 792 132 

31,680 ft. rails (78-lb.), including all other iron 

and steel at $1.42 44,986 7,498 

6 miles electrical construction, including copper 

return wire, at $500.00 3,000 500 

31,680 ft. track laying (labor, teaming and supt.) 

at $0.30 9,504 1,584 

28,158 sq. yds. granite pavement at $3.00 84,474 14,079 

Total road bed $163,823 $27,304 

Special Street Construction: 

2 cross-over switches at $525.00 $ 1,050 $ 175 

1 double track crossing 270 45 

180 degs. double track curve 492 82 

Total special street construction $ 1,812 $ 302 

Overhead Street Construction: 

270 iron pipe poles (6x5x4 ins. x 28 ft.) and 

fittings at $26.00 $ 7,020 $1,170 

8 iron terminal and curve poles at $50.00 400 67 

278 poles set with concrete foundations at $7.00. . . 1,946 324 

278 poles painted at $1.00 278 46 

10,224 lbs. (No. 0) trolley wire at $0.15 1,534 256 

2,200 lbs. (5/16, 7 strand) galvanized steel wire 

(50 ft. street) at $0.055 121 20 

15,600 lbs. feed wire (4 miles) at $0.17 2,652 442 

270 lbs. strain and anchor wire at $0.04 11 2 

3 miles line and insulating appliances, lighting 

arresters, etc., at $300.00 900 150 

3 miles labor stretching trolley and feed wire and 

attaching insulating appliances, at $500.00 1,500 250 

Total overhead construction $ 16,361 $ 2,727 

Special Overhead Construction: 

6 trolley switches at $3.00 $ 18 $ 3 

2 double track curves (90 deg.) at $75.00 150 25 

Guard wire and guard span half the line, with 

connections 250 42 

Total special oveiiiead construction $ 418 $ 70 



RAILWAYS. 1439 

Power House and Plant: 

Real estate $ 10,000 $ 1,667 

House, 100 X 175 ft 25,000 4,166 

Steam plant, 1,050 hp. (35 hp. per car) (2 slow 

speed engines, boilers, etc.), at $65.00 68,250 11,375 

Electrical equipment (including generators, switch- 
board, etc.), 900 hp. (30 hp. per car) at $35.00.. 31,500 5,250 

Total power house and plant $134,750 $22, -158 

Rolling Stock and Equipment: 

15 motorcar bodies (16-ft.) at $1,000.00 $ 15,000 $ 2,500 

15 motor trucks at $275.00 4,125 687 

30 motors (20 hp. ) and electrical appliances, at 

$1,250.00 37,500 6,250 

15 coaches (trailers) with trucks at $1,200.00... 18,000 3,000 

Total rolling stock $ 74,625 $12,437 

Car Barn and Repair Shop: 

Real estate % 2,500 $ 416 

Car house, fireproof 25,000 4,167 

Pits, tracks and switches 4,000 667 

Repair shop equipment 8,500 1,417 

Total car barn and repair shop $ 40,000 $ 6,667 

Auxiliary Appliances: 

1 electric snow plow and sweeper $ 5,000 $ 833 

Other snow appliances 1,000 167 

1 wrecking wagon, tools and team 800 133 

1 high wagon, tools and horse 600 100 

1 express wagon and horse 350 58 

1 heavy wagon and team 500 83 

2 carts 100 17 

Track tools, etc 300 50 

Total auxiliary appliance $ 8,650 $ 1,442 

Grand total 455,439 75,906 

I give the foregoing estimate principally as an illustration of an 
extravagantly expensive line, and one to which the estimator has 
applied the highest possible unit prices in nearly every Item. It Is 
by no means typical. 

Mr. Fairchild gives the following estimate of cost of operating 15 
trains (motor and trail car), running on 4 mins. headway, including 
an allowance for "depreciation." He figures the life of the 
destructible part of the plant at 20 years, and provides a sinking 
fund that at 3% compound interest will redeem the plant in 20 
years. This amounts to $13,870 per year, or $38 per day, which 
shows that he figured this depreciation on a plant of about $365,000. 



1440 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Per day. 

Depreciation of plant and rolling stock $ 38.00 

Repairs, engines, boilers, generators, etc 13.00 

Repairs, cars (including motors) 78.00 

Repairs, track, overhead construction and bldgs. 47.00 

Track cleaning, train and shop expense 14.00 

Track service 8.00 

Power and car house expenses 6.00 

Car house service, inclusive of cleaning, inspec- 
tion, etc 20.00 

Engineers, fireman and dynamo tenders 25.00 

66 motormen and conductors at $2.00 132.00 

12 tons (2,240 lbs.) coal at $2.50 30.00 

Water, oil and grease 10.00 

Injury to persons and property 10.00 

Legal, secret service and insurance 8.00 

Licenses and taxes 7.00 

General and miscellaneous expense 32.50 

Total operating expense $478.50 

Bach of the 15 trains will make 110 miles per day, or 1,650 train 
miles, or 3,300 car miles per day for the line. Hence, dividing 
?478.50 by 3,300 gives 141/2 cts. per car mile. 

The repairs to the power plant machinery, $13 daily, amount to 
$4,745 per year, or less than 5% on the first cost, which is altogether 
too low. 

The repairs to cars, $78 daily, amount to '^"28,470 per year, or 
more than 38% of the first cost, which is ridiculously high. 

The repairs to track, overhead construction and buildings, $47 
daily, amount to $17,155 per year. Excluding the ballast and pave- 
ment, the track materials and labor cost about $65,000, the over- 
head construction cost $16,000 ; the buildings cost $50,000 ; total 
$131,000. Hence, the $17,155 repairs is more than 13% ; but iron 
poles, fireproof buildings and durable construction are provided 
throughout (except the ties). Hence, this item is inordinately high. 
In brief, not a single item of repairs is correctly figured, and the 
most important items are wide of the truth. Errors of the kind 
made by Mr. Fairchild are best detected by expressing the annual 
costs of repairs as a percentage of the first cost. 

Estimated First Cost and Cost of Operating a 4-Track Electric 
Railway.— "Electric Railway Economics" (1903), by W. C. Gott- 
schall, contains the following estimate of the maximum cost Of 
suburban electric railwaj-. Per mile 

single track. 
Rails (80-lb.), $33 per ton deliv., and fastenings$ 5,100 

Labor laying track 900 

Track bonding 750 

2,640 white oak ties (6x8 ins. x 8 ft.) at $0.70 1,848 

2,750 cu. yds. rock ballast at $1.50 - 4,125 

20,000 cu. yds. grading at $0.30 6,000 

Third rail 7,000 

Copper and installation thereof 2,500 

Bridges and culverts 12,000 

Labor and incidentals 400 

Power stations at $100 per kw. ; sub-stations at 

$40 per kw 18,000 

Rolling stock (5 min. headway) 8,000 

Real estate and right of way 20,000 

Incidentals, including block-signals, telephones, 

fencing, etc 4,000 

Total $90,623 



R.UUVAYS. Mil 

Mr. Gottschall gives an estimate of the probable cost of operating 
n 4-track inteiurban road, 24 miles long tNew York & Port 
Chester), as follows: 

96 miles of main single track. 

124 daily local trains each way, trains of 1 oar. 

74 daily express trains each way, trains of 2 cars. 

4,500,000 car miles per annum. 

248 daily local trains both ways, 49 mins. each. 

148 daily express trains both ways, lU niins. each. 

Hence : 

248 X 49 4- 60 = 202.5 car hours per day of local train service. 

I'er car hr. 

1 motorman at ? 0. 3 

1 conductor at 0.25 

Total $0.55 

202.5 car iirs. X $0.55 X 365 days = ?40,752 per year. 

In like manner for express trains : 

2 X 148 X 31 -h 60 = 152.8 car hrs. per day. td * • , 

Per tram hr. 
1 motorman at $0.30 

1 conductor at 0.25 

Total $0.80 

This is equivalent to $0.40 per car hr. 132. § car hrs. X $0.40 X 

365 = $22,309 per yeai. 

Train Crews: Per year. 

Train crews, local trains $40,752 

Ti-ain crews, express trains 22,309 

Total $63,061 

Add 1/3 for extra man 21,020 

Grand total train crews ?S4,0S1 

Station Creivs: 
22 stations using 5 men = 110 men. 
110 men X $2.00 X 365 days = $80,300 yearly. 

Maintenance of Equipment: 
4,169,760 car miles plus allowance for extra occasions = 4,500,000 
car miles. 

4,500,000 at $0.02 = $90,000 yearly. 

Maintenance of Roadway and Structures: Per mile 

per yr. 

5% of $5,092, first cost of rails and fastenings $ 254 

6% of $1,848, first cost of oak ties (at $0.70 ea.) ... 108 

5% of $2,700, first cost of rock ballast 135 

Labor of section and line men : 

5 trackmen at $1.80 $ 9.00 

2 linemen at $2.50 5.00 

Total per day for 12 miles $14.00 

$14 -i- 12 X 312 days = 364 

Kepairs and renewals of fences 25 

Total $ 886 

Add for contingencies, etc ■ . • 114 

Grand total maintenance roadway $ 1.000 

96 miles at $1,000 yearly 96,000 



1442 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Electric Power: 
Weight of loaded motor car is estimated to be: 

Tons. 

Car and trucks 25 

Electric equipment 17 

Total 42 

Passengers 10 

Total when loaded 52 

With 5,208 local car miles daily, at 52 tons per car, we have 
270,816 ton miles. At 160 watt hours per ton mile (see Table XXVa) 
we have: 160 X 270,816 = 43,330,560 watt hours per day for local 
service. In similar manner we get 42,020,160 watt hours per day for 
express service ; total 85,350,720 watt hours per 24 hr. day, or 
85,351 kw. hours. 

Add : Per cent. 

Transmission loss from main station to 3d rail. ... 18 

Heating cars 5 

Lighting cars, etc 2 

Total to be added 25 

We have 85,351 + 21,338 = 106,689 kw. hrs. per 24-hr. day, or 
a plant of 4,445 kw. 

The cost per kw. hr. was estimated thus : 

Power Station Labor: Per day. 

1 chief engineer $ 10.00 

3 assistant engineers at $5.00 15,00 

30 oilers at $2.50 75.00 

3 switchboard men at $3.50 10.50 

3 electric helpers at $2.50 7.50 

6 cleaners at $1.50 9.00 

6 condenser men at $2.50 15.00 

1 machinist and 2 helpers 9.00 

24 boiler men at $2.50 60.00 

1 boiler cleaner and 2 helpers 6.00 

4 laborers at $1.50 6.00 

Total labor per day $ 223.00 

Total labor per year $ 81,395.00 

Fuel: 

106,684 kw. at 2% lbs. coal = 293,381 lbs.; 

therefore, 146.69 tons coal at $2.40 $ 352.06 

Total labor and fuel per day $ 575.116 

Total labor and fuel per year 209,897.00 

Hence : Per kw. hr. 

$575 ^ 106.684 = $0.00538 

Add for repairs, etc 0.00112 

Total $0.00650 

This allowance of $0.00112 per kw. for repairs of power station is 
equivalent to $119.50 per day, or $42,718 per year. Since a power 
station and sub-station would not cost more than $140 per kw., the 



R.i/Lir.ivs. nv.\ 

total cost of power plant would be $C33.."00 for a 4,115 kw. plant. 
Hence the $42,718 repairs per year is about 7% of the first cost. 

The allowance of 2 cts. per car mile for maintenance of equip- 
ment is far too low for large high speed electric cars (42-ton). He 
should have taken fully 10% of the first cost of each car, for 
annual repairs, and that divided by the annual car miles would 
have given the cost of repairs per car mile. 

The allowance of 5% per year for renewals of rails is excessive. 
Mr. Gottscliall errs seriously in this. He reasons as follows : 

The life rails for main line service of steam railway trunk lines 
is 15 years; but sucla a service is equivalent to 20 years on a high 
speed electric line wliere heavy locomotives are not used. Hence, 
a life of 20 years, or 5% depreciation, for rails in an electric line 
is assumed. Mr. Gottschall fails to consider that when a rail is 
removed from a main line it has a scrap value of about half its 
first cost. This being so, it has depreciated only 2%% per year, 
instead of the 5% assumed by Mr. Gottschall. 

On the other hand, the 6% depreciation that he assumes for 
white oak ties is; too low. Such ties will not last more than about 
10 years. 

But then, on the other hand again, his assumed 5% annual 
depreciation of rock ballast Is ridiculously high. 

Table XXVa. — Watt Hours Per Ton Mile. 

Distance "Watt hrs. per ton mile for schedule speed of 

between 40 mi. 35 mi. 30 mi. 25 mi. 20 mi. 15 mi. 

stops, miles. per hr. per hr. per nr. per hr. per hr. per hr. 

3 110 80 78 65 53 40 

21/a 121 90 83 74 54 40 

2 142 99 86 80 60 41 

ly, 123 95 85 68 43 

1 : ... 128 90 74 50 

Va ... ... 145 119 56 

% _^ _^ ••• ••• ••• J£o 

Train friction in 

lbs. per ton 35 30 27% 25 20 15 

Note: 1. The breaking effort or retardation is taken at 150 lbs. 
per ton. 

2. The stops are taken at 15 sees, each, except for the 15-mi. 
schedule, where 10 sees, are taken. 

3. A schedule speed of 25 mi. will require actual speeds of 40 to 
50 mi. per hr., etc. 

4. The rate of acceleration for the long runs varies from 75 to 
110 lbs. per ton, going as high as 210 lbs. per ton for the short 
runs. 

5. The table applies only to single car trains. If more than one 
car is used, the train friction in lbs. per ton decreases, hence the 
electric energy required decreases. 

6. The figures are for the electric energy required at the motors. 



1444 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Power Plants for Electric Railways.— "Electric Railways" 
(1907), by Sydney W. Ashe, contains the following power plant costs 
estimated by Mr. H. G. Stott: 

Per kw. 

Min. Max. 

I.Real estate $ 3.00 $ 7.00 

2. Excavation . 0.75 1.25 

3. Foundations, recipr. engines 2.00 3.00 

4. Foundations, turbines 0.50 0.75 

5. Iron and steel stiucture 8.00 10.00 

6. Building 8.00 10.00 

7. Floors, galleries and platforms 1.50 3.50 

8. Tunnels, intake and discharge 1.40 2.80 

9. Ash-storage pocket, etc 0.70 1.50 

10. Coal hoisting tower 1.20 3.00 

11. Cranes 0.40 0.60 

12. Coal and ash conveyors 2.00 2.75 

13. Ash cars, locomotives and track 0.15 0.30 

14. Coal and ash chutes, etc 0.40 1.00 

15. Water, meters, storage tanks and mains 0.50 1.00 

16. Stacks 1.25 2.00 

17. Boilers 9.50 11.50 

18. Boiler setting 1.25 1.75 

19. Stokers 1.80 2.20 

20. Economizers 1.30 2.25 

21. Flues, dampers and regulators 0.60 0.90 

22. Forced-draught blowers and air 1.25 1.65 

23. Boiler, hand and other pumps 0.40 0.75 

24. Feed water heaters, etc 0.20 0.35 

25. Steam and water piping, traps, separators, 

high and low pressure 3.00 5.00 

26. Pipe covering 0.60 1.00 

27. Valves 0.60 1.00 

28. Main engines, reciprocating 22.00 30.00 

29. Exciter engines, reciprocating 0.40 0.70 

30. Condensers, barometric or jet 1.00 2.50 

31. Condensers, surface .-. . 6.00 7.50 

32. Electric generators 16.00 22.00 

33. Exciters 0.60 0.80 

34. Steam turbine units complete 22.00 32.00 

35. Rotaries, transformers, blowers, etc 0.60 1.00 

36. Switchboards, complete 3.00 3.90 

37. Wiring for lights, motors, etc 0.20 0.30 

38. Oiling system, complete .^ 0.15 0.35 

39. Compressed air system, etc 0.20 0.30 

40. Painting, labor, etc 1.25 1.75 

41. Extras 2.00 2.00 

42. Engineering and inspection 4.00 6.00 

Total, excluding Items 4, 22, 31 and 34 $102.00 $148.00 

Mr. W. C. Gottschall gives a similar estimate, as follows : 



RAILWAYS. 144o 

Reciprocating Steam Engine Power-Stavion Costs Per Kilowatt. 

Per kw. 

Max. Mill. 

1. Buildings % 15.0'J % s.UO 

2. Foundations 3.50 L.^iO 

3. Boilers and settings 17.00 i».00 

4. Steam piping and covering. . 12.00 4.00 

5. Engines 32.00 20.00 

6. Generators 21.00 18.00 

7. Pumps, etc 1.00 l!oo 

8. Switchboards, etc 4.00 1..50 

9. Feed water heaters, etc 2.00 1.00 

10. Wiring conduits, etc 6.00 3.00 

11. Coal storage and conveyors 6.00 2.00 

12. Smokestaclt and flues 2.00 1.00 

13. Fuel economizers 4.50 2.50 

14. Stokers 3.00 2.50 

15. Ash conveyors 1.50 1.00 

16. Incidentals 2.00 2.0(i 

Total $132.50 $78.00 

A fair average is $100 to $110 per kw. The cost of sub-stations 
using rotary converters will range from $38 to $45 per kw. including 
the building. Land is not included in the above costs. 

Cost of Power Plant and Equipment of an Electric Railway. — Mr. 

W. A. Blanck gives the following estimated cost (iu 1904) of the 
electrical equipment of a 60-mile, single-track, interurban trolley 
railway : 

Direct Alternating 

Power House: current. current. 

Building $ 10,000 $ 10,000 

Foundations 2,500 2,500 

Boilers and settings 12,000 12,000 

Steampipe and covering 7,500 7,50(» 

Engines 22,000 22,000 

Generators, two 400 kw 18,000 23.000 

Exciters 1,000 1,000 

Step-up transformers, 800 kw 8,000 7,500 

Switchboard . 3,500 3,000 

Wiring 3,000 2,500 

Feed water heater 800 800 

Pumps 800 800 

Coal storage 1,000 1,000 

Smokestack and flues 2,000 2,000 

Fuel economizers 3,000 3,000 

Stokers 3,500 3,500 

Incidentals 4.400 4,400 

Total power house $103,000 $106,500 

Suh-station in Power House: 

Building extension $ 1,000 $ 600 

Synchronous converter, 300 kw 4,800 

Transformer, 300 kw. ; 200 kw. alternating 

current 3,200 2,000 

Switchboard 2,000 1.300 

Wiring • 1.000 500 

Incidentals . 600 200 

Total sub-station $ 12.600 $ 4.600 



1446 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Transmission Line (1/8 Miles): 

Poles (see Trolley Line below). 

Copper $ 10,000 $ 11,500 

Insulators, pins and cross-arms 7,500 5.000 

Erection 4,000 3,000 

Incidentals 1,000 1,000 

Total transmission line $ 22,500 ? 20,500 

Suh-stations Along Road: 

Buildings, four $ 8,000 $ 4,000 

Synchronous converters, four 19,200 

Step-down transformers 12,800 8,000 

Switchboards, four 8,000 5,200 

Wiring 4,000 2,000 

Incidentals 2,000 800 

Total 4 sub-stations $ 54,000 $ 20,000 

Trolley Line and Feeders: 

Poles, 3,500, at $5 ' $ 17,500 $ 17,500 

Poles distributed and set 4,000 4,000 

Guys and anchors 2.000 2,000 

Brackets with hangers 18,000 25,000 

Copper, direct current : 

Feeder, 12 miles, 5 00,000 circ. mils. 

Feeder, 48 miles. No. 0000. 

Trolley, 120 miles. No. 000 95,000 

Alternating current : 

Trolley, 60 miles. No. 00 21,500 

Feed insulators 2,000 

Erection 10,000 4,000 

Incidentals 7,500 4,000 

Total trolley line $156,000 $78,000 

Bonding of Rails: 

Both rails bonded $ 30,000 . ; . . . 

One rail bonded $15,000 

Cross bonds 2,000 1,000 

Total bonding of rails $ 32,000 $ 16,000 

Rolling Stock: 
10 vestibuled passenger cars, each with 4 

motors, wt. 30 tons $ 75,000 ? 85,000 

2 express passenger cars, each with 4 motors, 

wt. 35 tons 18,000 20,500 

2 baggage cars, each with 4 motors, wt. 

30 tons 10,000 12,000 

Snow plow and construction car 7,000 8,500 

Total rolling stock $110,000- $126,000 

Summary: 

Power house $103,000 

Sub-station in power house 12,600 

Transmission line 22,500 

Sub-stations 54,000 

Trolley line and feeders 156,000 

Bonding of rails 32,000 

Rolling stock 110,000 

Grand total $490,100 

Cost per mile (60 miles) $ 8,168 



- RAIL! J'. I vs. 14-17 

The running schedule upon which tlie above is based is as 
follows: 5 local cars having 1-hr. headway; 1 express car, making 
round trip in 3 hrs. ; 1 freight and baggage car, making trip be- 
tween the two terminals in 8 hrs. 

Cost of a Street Railway Power Plant and of Its Operation Mr. 

R. W. Conant gives the following estimated cost of a street railway 
power plant and its cost of operation : 

The plant has a capacity of 3,600 kw. There are three cross- 
compound condensing engines, three 1,200-kw. generators, and six 
water-tube boilers of 500-hp. each. The estimated cost of this plant 
in 1S9S was: 

Engines, condensers, heaters, separators and piping $ 91,800 

Feed pumps and fuel economizers IsioOO 

Boilers and flue connections complete 61,000 

Generators and switchboard complete 73^800 

Building, chimney, engine and boiler foundations, coal hand- 
ling apparatus, etc 120,000 

Land 17,000 

Engineering and sundries 5,000 

Total $386,600 

This is equivalent to $107 per kw. 

Mr. Conant estimates fixed charges at 11%, or $42,526, distributed 
thus : 

Per cent. 

Interest , 6 

Insurance and taxes 3 

Depreciation 2 

Total 11 

The item of "depreciation" is badly underestimated, for it includes 

current repairs. 

It is assumed that this station is operated with 3 shifts of men, 

8 hrs. per shift, for 8.760 shift hours per year. The crew of ona 

shift would be : 

2 enginemen. 
2 firemen. 
1 oiler. 
1 helper. 
1 coal passer. 

7 men at 27 cts. per hr. = $1.89. 
The plant is assumed to work with a load factor of 33%%, so that 
it actually averages 1,200 kw. for 8,760 hrs., or 10,500,000 kw. hours 
per annum. 

Therefore, we have : 

Per kw. hour. 

Fixed charges, $42,526 -=- 10,500,000 0.40 cts. 

Wages, $1.89^1,200 0.16 cts. 

Coal, 2.2 lbs., at $3 ton 0.33 cts. 

General expense, super., supplies and repairs. 0.09 cts. 

Total, including fixed charges 0.98 cts. 

Mr. Conant states that the fuel cost would be practically doubled 
were non-condensing engines used, for he has assumed a steam con- 
sumption of only 14% lbs. of steam per i. hp., a transformer efR- 



1448 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ciency of 90%, and a boiler efficiency of 9.4 lbs. of steam per lb. of 
coal. 

He calls the above a "standard plant," an ideal capable of realiza- 
tion, which is exceedingly doubtful, however, as the actual records of 
some 28 street railway power stations show. 
A summary of these 28 plants gives the following average: 
Average capacity, 2,140 kw. 
Average load factor, 30%. 
Average number men per shift, 10. 
Average number shifts, 2 of 12 hrs. 
Average wage, 20 cts. per hr. 
The average cost of generating power was: 

Per kw. hr. 

Labor, 1.5 hrs., at 20 cts 0.30 cts. 

Coal, 5 lbs., at $2.10 per ton 0,53 cts. 

General expense - 0.15 cts. 



Total, not including fixed charges 0.98 cts. 

The "load factor" of 30% means that the average output of elec- 
tricity during the entire year v\'as 30% the capacity of the plant; 
hence it was 30% of 2,140 = 642 kw. 

There was not a single one of these 28 plants that operated with 
as little fuel as Mr. Conant's "ideal plant," for the most efficient 
plant required 3 lbs. of coal per kw. hr. 

The cost of labor per kw. hr. obviously varies greatly as the 
"load factor" varies. In one of these plants the load factor was 
as high as 57%, giving a very low unit cost (0.18 ct. per kw. hr. ) 
for labor; while in another plant the load factor was only 11%, 
giving an extraordinarily high unit cost (1.1 ct. per kw. hr.) for 
labor. 

As above pointed out, Mr. Conant's estimate of his so-called "fixed 
charges" on the plant, is entirely too low. 

Cost of Operating Street Railways. — The most satisfactory records 
of this sort are to be found in the annual reports of the Massa- 
chusetts Railway Commission. The reports of other railway com- 
missions are either less detailed or relate to street railways that are 
comparatively new. 

Following is a brief summary showing the growth of street rail- 
w'ays in Massachusetts. 

Miles 
Miles of operated 
single by Car miles. Passengers, 

Tear. track, electricity, millions. Cars, millions. 

1887 

1888 

1889 

1890 

1891 

1892 

1893 

1894 

1895 

1896 1,277 

1902 2,444 

1908 2,675 



470 




20.6 


2',633 


125 


533 




23.2 


2,588 


134 


574 


51 


24.3 


2,942 


148 


. 612 


160 


26.5 


3,247 


165 


672 


289 


27.7 


3,494 


176 


755 


496 


29.7 


3,679 


194 


874 


. 711 


34.5 


4,040 


214 


929 


825 


36.7 


4,058 


220 


1,088 


1,016 


43.7 


4,426 


260 


1,277 


1,241 


53.6 


4,913 


292 


2,444 




100.3 


7,144 


465 


2,675 




117.0 


7,618 


602 



R.ULU'.iyS. ll-ld 

It will be noted that not till 1889 ■litl ekctricity come into use, 
and not till 1893 had it practically displaced horse power. 

Note that the mileage per car has hardly increased, nor the 
passengers per car mile. 

According to the report for 1908, the assets of Ma.ssachusetts 
street railways were : 

Construction S 82 934 355 

Equipment (rolling stock) 29!699i294 

Land and buildings 39,603,442 

Other permanent property 1 807999 

Cash S;i70,'683 

Miscellaneous assets 7,705,688 

Total assets $170,154,909 

The mileage was: 

Miles. 

Railway line owned (1st track) 2,233.85 

Railway line owned (2d track) 441.04 

Total main track owned 2,674.89 

Sidings, switches, etc., owned 166.70 

Total track owned. : 2,841.59 

Main track leased 577.10 

Total main track operated 2,741.00 

The equipment was as follows : 

Box passenger cars 3,876 

Open passenger cars 3,742 

Total passenger cars 7,618 

Other service cars 461 

Snow plows 779 

Other vehicles (wagons, etc.) 1,650 

Electric motors on cars 16,649 

We see from the above that the reported cost per mile of main 

single track operated was : 

Construction $31,005 

Equipment 11.103 

Buildings and land 15,569 

Total $57,677 

It is evident that no reliance can be placed in the so-called cost 
of construction,, for it really represents purchase price and not 
actual cost of construction. 

The cost of equipment, however, appears to be reliable, for it 
indicates a cost of about $4,000 per car. 

There were 17,267 employes ; 602,400,874 passengers were carried, 
and the gross earnings from operation were $30,780,762. The 
number of car miles was 116,982,089, or 42,700 car miles per mile 
of track. 

Table XXVI gives the operating expense, which I have calculated 
both in terms of the car mile and of the mile or single track 
operated. 

The repairs of cars and electric car equipment (Items 9 and 10) 
amounted to $2,429,253. Since the first cost of the equipment was 
$29,899,294, it appears that repairs amounted to a Iltt\e more than 



1450 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

8% of the first cost. However, sight should not be lost of the 
fact that half the equipment consisted of open cars, which are 
used only in the summer and at a time when the closed (box) cars 
are mostly idle. Therefore, the cost of repairs would be nearly 
double the 8% if all equipment were kept constantly busy, making 
the annual cost of repairs about 16% of the first cost of the active 
equipment. 

These repairs doubtless include renewals. 

Unfortunately the cost of rail renewals is not given as a separate 
item. The number of car miles per mile of track was less than 
half as many as on the average steam railway of America. 

Item 14, Wages of Employes, evidently refers to conductors and 
motormen, but does not include employes in the power plant. 

Table XXVI. — Operating Expense, Massachusetts Street Rts., 

1908. 



General Expense: Total. 

1. Salaries of officers % 690,082 

2. Office expenses and supplies 151,174 

3. Legal expenses 421, 6ir 

4. Insurance 248,972 

5. Other general expenses 407,304 

Total general expense ...$1,919,143 % 700 1.64 

Maintenance of Way: 

6. Repairs of roadbed and track % 1,273,992 $ 465 1.0!) 

7. Repairs of electric line construction. . . 393,047 143 0.33 

8. Repairs of buildings 184,747 68 0.16 



I'er mi. Per car 


single 


mile. 


track. 


cents. 


$ 252 


0.59 


55 


0.13 


154 


0.36 


91 


0.21 


148 


0.35 



$ 423 


0.99 


464 


1.09 


27 


0.06 


20 


0.05 



Total maintenance of way $ 1,851,786 $ 676 1.58 

Maintenance of Equipment: 

9. Repairs of cars $ 1,157,680 

10. Repairs of electric car equipment 1,271,573 

11. Repairs of miscellaneous equipment. . 75,124 

12. Provender and stabling 56,021 

Total maintenance of equipment. ,..$ 2,560,398 ? 934 2.19 

Transportation Expense: 

13. Electric motive power ? 3,928,820 

14. Wages of employes 7,948,277 

15. Removing snow and ice 136,002 

16. Damages for injuries 1,218,242 

17. Tolls for trackage rights 97,033 

18. Rents of buildings, etc 171,182 

19. Other transportation expense 710,695 

Total transportation expense $14,210,251 

Grand total operating expense 20,541,578 



$1,434 


3.36 


2,901 


6.80 


50 


0.12 


445 


1.04 


35 


0.08 


62 


0.15 


260 


0.60 


$5,187 


12.15 


7,497 


17.56 



RAILWAYS. 1451 

Power to Operate Street Cars. — The following data relate to small 
motor cars. 

The record of power consumed on an electric street railway, for 
the year 1S95, is as follows: 

Tons (2,240 lbs.) coal 19,172 

Car-miles, motor car 5,677,581 

Car-miles, trailer car 654,557 

Car-miles, total 6,421,638 

Car-miles, motor car per day 120 

Coal per motor car-mile, lbs 7.6 

Coal per car-mile, lbs 6.9 

Passengers per car-mile 4.1 

Ton-miles (2,000 lbs.), passengers at 140 lbs.... 1,810,033 
Ton-miles (2,000 lbs.), motor car at ey^ tons. ... 36,900,873 

Ton-miles (2,000 lbs.), trailer at 21/0 tons 1,645,140 

Ton-miles (2,000 lbs.), total 40,356,046 

Coal per ton mile, lbs 1.08 

Engine hours 25,183 

Elec. horsepower hours, total 15,305,254 

Watt hours, per motor car-mile 2,032 

Watt hours, per ton-mile 286 

Watt hours, per pound of coal 266 

Coal per electric horsepower, lbs 2.81 

Watts per motor car-mile 16,562 

Effort per ton-mile, foot-pounds 103,420 

Average pull per ton 19.5 

Schedule speed, miles per hour 7.37 

The "average pull per ton" is calculated from the consumption of 
electricity, and not by dynamometer test. 

Cost of Operating an Elevated Electric Railway. — "Electric Rail- 
way Economics" (1903), by W. C. Gottschall, contains the following 
actual cost of operating an elevated railway in a large city, operat- 
ing electric cars at a scheduled speed of 16 miles per hour. The 
age of the cars is not given, hence no sound conclusions can be 
drawn from these data as to equipment maintenance : 

Per car mile. 

1. Train crews, telegraphers, couplers and yard men $0.0237 

2. Station men, agents, porters and laborers 0.0072 

3. Maintenance and upkeep of cars, trucks and motive 

power 0.0125 

4. Repairs of elevated structure and roadway 0.0065 

5. Electric power 0.0123 

6. Miscellaneous expenses, supplies, etc 0.0021 

7. General expenses, salaries, etc 0.0084 

Total $0.0727 

8. Legal expenses and injuries 0.0053 

9. Taxes 0.0065 

Grand total $0.0845 

The power was 2 kw. hrs. per car-mile at the central station. 



1452 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA, 

Power to Operate New York Elevated and Surface Cars. — In Man- 
hattan elevated railways it is estimated that the electric power con- 
sumed per loaded car is as follows : 

Kw. per car. 

Operating (current measured at the car) 21.0 

Hea,ting (current measured at the car) 4.8 

Lighting (current measured at the car) 1.5 

Air pumps (current measured at the car) 0.6 

Total (current measured at the car) 27.9 

Line loss 7.8 



Grand total at the switchboard 35.7 

On the surface lines in Manhattan about 16 kw. per car in sum- 
mer, and 25 kw. in winter, is required. 

The power required at the switchboard to drive 224 elevated 
motor cars and 1,247 surface car-s in Brooklyn was determined to be 
as follows : 

— Kw. per car. — 

Surface Elevated 

car. car. 

Operation 15.95 36.85 

Heating 3.30 8.25 

Lighting 1.10 1.10 



Total 20.35 46.20 

Weight and Power of Motor Cars. — ^In the early days of electric 
railways small motor cars with bodies only 16 or 18 ft. long and 
with two 15-hp. motors were common. Such cars are still com- 
mon in the smaller towns and cities, and are not entirely out of 
use even in the larger cities. 

A large city car, 30 tons, with double trucks, equipped with four 
40-hp. motors (160-hp. total), and seating 44 people, is now the 
standard for heavy city traffic. 

Interurban cars vary considerably, but the following is fairly 
typical: Car 50 ft. long, seating 42 people, double trucks, weighs 
34 tons, is equipped with four 75-hp. motors (300-hp. total), and 
maintains a schedule speed of 30 miles per hour. 

Cost of Maintenance of Motor Cars. — Although considerable has 
been published on this subject, very little of value has thus far 
appeared. The reasons wiiy the data are unsatisfactory are these : 
(1) The age of the cars is not given. Obviously new cars entail 
much less expense for repairs than old cars. (2) The first cost of 
the cars, the size of the motors and the size of the cars are not 
stated. 

Pending further information, I recommend estimating the annual 
cost of repairs of motor cars (incl. motors) at 12% of the first cost. 

If a large motor car costs $7,500, the average annual maintenance 
over a long period of years (20) would then be $900. If the car 
travels 30,000 miles per j-ear, its maintenance will then be 3 cts. per 
car-mile. 

If the life of a car is 25 years, and no sinking fund is establislied, 
renewals being paid for annually as they become necessary, then 



RAILWAYS. 11.-. 1 

4% of the first cost will be tlie average annual cxpeniliture for jv- 
newals wlien distributed over a long term of years. Renewals (4%) 
being % as much as current repairs (Vl%), we have 1 ct. per 
car-mile for renewals of a $7,500 motor car, making a total of 4 cts. 
per car mile for repairs and renewals of a $7,500 car, when dis- 
tributed over a long term of years. 

In 1902 the repairs and renewals of street cars in Massachusetts 
were 1.65 cts. per car-mile, and the fust cost of the average car 
was $3,000. If the cost had been $7,500, as above assumed for 
large cars, we should have 2V{; X 1.65 =: 4.12 cts. per car-mile for 
repairs and renewals. This makes an excellent check upon my esti- 
mate of 16% of the first co.st for repairs and renewals of equip- 
ment. It was about ISSS tliat electric lines began to be built in 
Massachusetts, so that repairs and renewals of equipment 24 years 
later (1902) are a fair index of what may be expected in the 
future. Repairs and renewals of equipment per car-mile may rise 
still higher in Massacliusetts, even with cars of the present cost, 
for the mileage of street railways doubled about every six years 
between 1890 and 1902. 

The cost of maintenance of the power plant should be estimated 
in a manner analogous to the foregoing. 

Railway Operating Expenses, Etc. — The annual reports of the 
Interstate Coinmerce Commission and the reports of the various 
state railway commissions contain ^■aluable data on operating 
expenses. 

The miles of trackway include all 1st, 2d. 3d and 4th tracks, and 
amounted to 243,322. 

The miles of roadbed (or "line") include onlj- 1st track, and 
amounted to 222,340. 

The miles of track include all tracks, main, branch, side and yard, 
and amounted to 317,083. 

There are nearly 1.43 miles of ti-ack per mile of roadbed ia 
America. 

According to the report of the Interstate Commerce Commission 
for the year 1906, the following was operating expense, given for 
each item as a percentage of the total : 

Maintenance of Way and Structures : Per cent. 

1. Repairs of roadway 10.726 

2. Renewal of rails lil^ 

3. Renewal of ties 2.d09 

4. Repairs and renewals of bridges and culverts 2.20i 

5. Repairs and renewals of fences and road 

crossings, signs and cattle guards 0.413 

6. Repairs and renewals of bldgs. and fixtures 2.304 

7. Repairs and renewals of docks and wharves 0.241 

8. Repairs and renewals of telegraph 0.1* i 

9. Stationery and printing aI,-I- 

10. Other expenses ^■-^ ' 

Total 20.296 



1454 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Maintenance of Equipment : 

11. Superintendence 0.561 

12. Repairs and renewals of locomotives 8.080 

13. Repairs and renewals of passenger cars 1.968 

14. Repairs and renewals of freiglit cars 9.009 

15. Repairs and renewals of worli cars 0.26S , 

16. Repairs and renewals of marine equipment. . 0.232 

17. Repairs and renewals of shop machinery 

and tools 0.668 

18. Stationery and printing 0.047 

19. Other expenses- 0.563 

Total 21.39& 

Conducting Transportation : 

20. Superintendence 1.776 

21. Engine and roundhouse men 9.27& 

22. Fuel for locomotives 11.119 

23. Water supply for locomotives 0.650 

24. Oil, tallow and waste for locomotives 0.385 

25. Other supplies for locomotives 0.250 

26. Train service 6.375 

27. Train supplies and expenses 1.557 

28. Switch, flag and watchmen 4.357 

29. Telegraph expenses 1.751 

30. Station service 6.307 

31. Station supplies 0.611 

32. Switching charges — balance 0.293 

33. Car per diem and mileage — balance 1,231 

34. Hire of equipment 0.201 

35. Loss and damage 1.375 

36. Injuries to persons 1.139 

37. Clearing wrecks 0.200 

38. Operating marine equipment 0.685- 

39. Advertising 0.422 

40. Outside agencies 1.352 

41. Commissions 0.017 

42. Stock yards and elevators 0.055 

43. Rents for tracks and yards 1.751 

44. Rents of other buildings and other property 0.324 

45. Stationery and printing 0.629 

4 6. Other expenses 0.245 

Total 54.432 

General Expenses: 

47. Salaries of general offices 0.826 

48. Salaries of clerks and attendants 1.372 

49'. General office expenses and supplies; 0.263 

50. Insurance 0.481 

51. Law expenses 0.452 

52. Stationery and printing (g. o.) 0^182 

53. Other expenses 0.300 

Total • . 3.876 

Grand total (per cent) 100.000 

Grand total $1,533,404,385 

The cost of operating expense, expressed in various units, was as 
follows : 

Per train mile $1.3706 

Per car mile (approximately) 0.0833 

Per mile of roadbed (line) 6,896 

Per mile of trackway 6.303 

Per mile of track 4,836 



RAILWAYS. 14.>-. 

By multiplying the percentage given for any item in tlie table of 
operating expense by any of tlie above unit costs of operation, the 
corresponding item unit cost is obtained. 

Thus, Item 22, Fuel, is 11.119%. The total operating expense 
per train mile is .11.37. Hence $1.37 X 11.119% = |0.1523 per train 
mile for fuel. 

Thus, Item 2, Removals of Rails, is 1.432%. The total operating 
expense per mile of trackway is $6,303. Hence $6,303 X 1.432% = 
$90.21 per mile of trackway for rail renewals. 

In 1906, the total equipment of American railwaj^s was: 
Locomotives : 

Passenger 12,249 

Freight 29,848 

Switching 8.485 

Unclassified 1,090 

Total locomotives in service 51,672 

Cars : 

Passenger 42,262 

Freiglit 1,837,914 

Company service 78,736 

Total cars in service 1,958,912 

It will be noted that there were 3.45 passenger cars per passenger 
locomotive, and 61.6 freight cars per freight locomotive. 

The above does not include freight cars owned by private com- 
panies, on which the railways pay a mileage, the value of which 
is estimated to be $72,000,000. Nor does it include cars owned 
Ijy the Pullman Co., estimated at $51,000,000. If tlie average 
freight car owned by private individuals is worth $1,000, there 
would be about 72,000 of them. If the avei-age Pullman is valued 
at $10,000, there would be 5,000 of them. These numbers would 
increase the number of freight cars above given by about 4%, and 
would increase the number of passenger cars by about 12%. 

The average weight of the locomotives (exclusive of tender) was 
66 tons, of which 5 4 tons was on the drivers. The average tractive 
power was 24,300 lbs. 

The classification of freight cars was as follows : 

Box cars 843,118 

Flat cars 146,908 

Stock cars •. 64,202 

Coal cars 686,717 

Tank cars 5,324 

Refrigerator cars 31.782 

Other cars 55,584 

Total 1,833,635 



1456 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The average capacity of these cars was 32 tons. 



The following were the employes : 



Total 
Per day. per year. 



6,090 general officers $11.81 ? 15,911,369 

6,705 other officers 5.82 12,870,203 

57,210 general office clerks 2.24 41,227,916 

34,940 station agents 1.94 22,571,595 

138,778 other station men 1.69 70,702,517 

59,855 engine men 4.12 74,581,454 

62,678 firemen 2.42 44,247,306 

43,936 conductors 3.51 47,417,403 

119,087 other trainmen = 2.35 81,884,828 

51,253 machinists 2.69 40,326,031 

63,830 carpenters 2.28 40,961,083 

199,940 other shopmen 1.92 111,524,564 

40,463 section foremen 1.80 23,519,671 

343,791 other trackmen 1.36 112,196,214 

49,659 switch tenders, crossing tenders and 

watchmen 1.80 27,939,001 

36,090 telegraph operators and dispatchers. . . 2.13 24,729,669 

8,314 employes — acctg. floating equipment.. 2.10 4,776,654 

198,736 all other employes 1.83 103,414,175 



1,521,355 Total $900,801,653 

By multiplying the average daily wage by the total number of 
men in each class and dividing this product in the total annual 
payment, the average number of days worked can be ascertained. 
For all except "general officers" (240 days), and for "other 
trackmen" (270 days), the average is close to 315 days. The 
average employe received nearly $600 per year. 

In the case of trainmen, it must be remembered that the wage 
shown is not the true average daily income, for they are usually 
paid on an arbitrary basis, say 100 miles of run constituting a 
day's work. 

The following is a summary of the service performed by the 
railways according to the 1906 report. 

1. Passengers carried 797,946,116 

2. Passenger miles 25,167,240,831 

3. Passenger train miles 479,037,553 

4. Passengers per train, average 49 

5. Passenger's journey, miles 31.54 

6. Freight, tons, excluding those received from con- 

necting roads 896,159,485 

7. Freight, ton miles 215,877,551,241 

8. Freight, ton miles per mile of roadbed 982,401 

9. Freight, train miles .■ 594,005,825 

10. Freight, car miles 16,589,958,024 

11. Freight, tons per train 344.4 

12. Freight, average haul, regarding all railways as 

one system, miles • 240.9 

13. Total revenue passenger and freight train miles.. 1,105,877,091 

Item 13 would be the sum of items 3 and 9, were it not that 
there were also mixed trains (passenger and freight combined). 

It will be noted that the number of passenger car miles is 
not given, but it can be closely approximated, as follows: 



K.lILirAVS. 14.-.T 

Dividing the 42,262 passenger cars by the 12,249 passonger 
locomotives, we find there were 3.45 passenger cars per passenger 
locomotives. 

Hence multiplying the 479,037,553 passenger train miles by 3.45, 
we have 1,612,678,558 passenger car miles. This assumption implies 
that there would be as many passenger cars as locomotives in the 
shops, or otherwise idle. The Pullman sleeping cars are not in- 
cluded in the above, and as we have seen, they would add about 
12% to the total number of passenger cars. On this assumption, the 
total number of passenger car miles would be about 1,806,200,000. 

If we regard a locomotive and its t'mder as equivalent to two 
cars, multiplying the total train miles by 2 gives us the locomotive 
and tender car miles. 

Hence we have : 

Freight car miles 16,589,958,024 

Passenger car miles 1,806,200,000 

Total car miles 18,396,158,024 

Locomotive and tender miles 2,211,754,182 

Total car and engine miles 20,607,912,206 

Since there were 243,322 miles of trackway, we have 20,607,912,209 
-=- 243,322 = 84,700 ca.^s per year passing over each mile of track- 
way. 

The importance of tliis deduction will be seen when we come to 
consider the wear of rails. 

If we divide Item 13 (tlie total train miles), by the 243,322 miles 
of trackway, we have 4,540, which is the number of trains per 
year per mile of trackway. If we divide this 4,540 by 365 (the 
number of days in a j'ear), we have a little more than 12, which 
is the number of trains per day botli ways, or 6 trains per day 
each way on each trackway. 

If we divide 16.589,958,024 (the number of freight car miles) 
by 594,005,825 (the number of freight train miles), we get nearly 
28, which is the average number of freight cars per freight train. 

We have seen that there were about 3.5 passenger cars per 
passenger train, plus nearly 0.5 Pullman car, or a total of 4 cars 
per passenger train. 

Since about 45% of the trains were passenger trains and 55% 
freight, the average of both passenger and freight trains was about 
17 cars. 

Dividing 594,005,825 (the freight train miles) by 29,849 (the 
number of freight locomotives), we get nearly 20,000 miles per 
freight locomotive per year. This is not quite 55 miles per day. 

Dividing 479,037,553 (the passenger train miles) by 12,249 (the 
number of passenger locomotives), we get nearly 40,000 miles per 
year, or not quite 110 miles per day. The average of both freight 
and pasenger locomotives was about 25,500 miles per locomotive 
per year. 

We have seen that there were 62 freight cars per freight 
locomotive, and that there were 28 cars per freight train. Hence 



1458 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

there were about 62 — 28 = 34 freight cars not moving in trains, 
or about 34 ^ 62 = 55% of the car time was spent on sidings 
and in yards not attached to a locomotive. 

If 45% of the time was spent moving with a freight locomotive, 
and if (as we have seen) a freight locomotive averages 55 miles 
per day, then 55 X 45% 24.75 miles were averaged per freight car 
per day. This may be arrived at with greater accuracy thus : 
16,589,958,000 (freight car miles) divided by 1,958,912 (freight 
cars), gives nearly 8,460, which is the car miles per car per year, 
which is equivalent to 23.2 car miles per day. This checks very 
well with the approximate method flrst given. That method involved 
the assumption that time lost during shop repairs is the same for 
freight cars as for locomotives, which is not quite true, since about 
5% of the total freight cars and 8% of the total locomotives are 
constantly in the shops. It also involved the assumption that there ■ 
are laot more locomotive crews than locomotives, which is not far 
from correct, since there were 59,855 enginemen to operate the 
51,672 locomotives. 

The average haul of a ton of freight was 241 miles, which would 
take nearly 10 1/^ days at 23.2 miles per day, including time spent 
in yards and sidings, loading and unloading; but, since 45% of the 
time (as we have seen) was spent on the road, 4% days of car 
time were spent on the road traveling and 6 days on the side 
tracks, etc. 

The empty freight car mileage was 31.2% of the total freight car 
mileage. 

Since the average number of tons per freight train was 344, and 
since there were 28 cars per freight train, the average carried bj'. 
all cars (loaded and empty) was 344 -^- 28 = 12.3 tons nearly. Since 
68.8% were loaded cars, the average loaded car carried 12.3 -e- 68.8 
= 17.9 tons. 

The income was: 

Passenger revenue $ 510,032,583 

Mail 47,371,453 

Express 51,010,930 

Other earnings, passenger service 11,314,237 

Freight revenue 1,640,386,655 

Other earnings, freight service 5,645,222 

Other earnings from operation 59,741,198 

Unclassified 262.889 

Total earnings from operation -$2,325,765,167 

Income from other sources 256,639,591 

Total earnings and income $2,582,404,758 



R.ULir.iVS. 1459 

Considering all the railways as out- system, we have the following 
income account : 

Earnings from operation $2,325,765,167 

Clear income from investments 00,52U,30() 

Gross earnings and income $2,386,285,473 

Operating expense (incl. leased lines) .... 1,537, 448)702 

Net earnings and income $ 848,836,771 

Net interest on funded debt $ 305,337^754 

Interest on current liabilities 11,653,076 

Taxes 74,785,615 

Total fixed charges and taxes $ 391,776,445 

Balance available for dividends $ 457,060!326 

Net dividends $ 213,555,081 

Balance available adjustments and im- 
provements $ 243,505,245 

The revenue per train mile was : 

All trains $2,075 

Passenger trains 1.2 0:^ 

Freight trains 2. COS 

The average freight revenue was 0.74S ct. per ton mile. The 
average passenger revenue was 2.003 cts. per passenger mile. The 
operating revenue per mile of roadbed was $10,460. The operating 
expenses were 66.08% of the operatins' income. 

Average Life of Rails and Cost of Rail Renewals. — In determin- 
ing the annual depreciation of rails subject to a given traffic I made 
the following analysis for the Railroad Commission of Washington. 

The average cost rail renewals in the United States was $75 per 
miles of trackway, or $82 per mile of roadbed, or $58 per mile of 
track, as deduced from the 1904 report of the Interstate Commerce 
Commission. The mile of trackway is the preferable unit, for it 
represents the mile of 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th track. Naturally, the 
wear on rails in side tracks is almost insignificant. 

If the annual rail wear is $75 per mile of trackway, it remains 
only to know the average cost of a mile of rails to arrive at tlie 
percentage of annual renewals. The weight of rails in the average 
track is about as many pounds per yard of rail as the weight in 
tons of the average locomotive. 

In 1904 the average locomotive weight was 60 tons, and it is 
reasonable to suppose that the average weight of rail was not 
much in excess of 100 tons of rails per mile of track. 

Now, if we can ascertain the average cost of a ton of rails 
delivered to the distributing point of the average railway, we 
shall be able to estimate the value of a mile of rails in the 
average track. To determine the "center of gravity" of the railway 
mileage of America, I assumed that the center of each state would 
represent, with sufficient accuracy, the "center of gravity" of the 
railway mileage of that state. To ascertain the "center of gravity" 
of the total mileage, co-ordinate axes were drawn and the distances 
from these axes to fhe center of each state were measured. 

The abscissas and ordinates thus obtained were multiplied by 
their respective mileages of railway line. The sums of these prod- 



1460 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

ucts were divided by the total mileage of all lines, and the quotients 
were, of course, the abscissa and ordinate of the "center of gravity" 
of the entire railway mileage. This was found to be at a point 
not far north of St. Louis, Mo. 

The practice of railways has been to charge % ct. per ton 
mile for freight on rails, so that, in the year 1904, freight to the 
"center of gravity" of railway mileage could not have cost much 
to exceed $3 per ton from Pittsburg, or $1.50 from Chicago. The 
standard price of rails was $2 8, so the total cost delivered was 
not to exceed $31 per ton, and doubtless averaged less than $30. 
As a matter of fact, rails cost the Northern Pacific and the Great 
Northern less than $29.50 per ton delivered at St. Paul, at that time, 
so that we are safe in sashing that the average cost of rails 
delivered to the average railway distributing point was not far 
from $30 per ton. Hence enough new rails for an average mile of 
track (100 tons) cost about $3,000. Since rail renewals actually 
cost $75 per mile of trackway, we see that rail renewals cost 
2%% of the value of the rails in a mile of trackway. This is on 
the assumption that renewals of rails in side tracks was a com- 
paratively insignificant item, which is practically so. 

It must not be hastily assumed, however, that the life of the 
average rail is 40 years, for the fact is that it is less than half 
that. The $75 per mile of trackway represents cost of new rails 
minus the scrap value, or relaying value, of the old rails. There is, 
at present, no means of knowing exactly what the practice of all 
railway companies is as to the credit given on their books for the 
rails that are replaced, but it is certain that an old rail is worth at 
least its scrap value at the mills less the freight to the mills, or 
about $12 per ton. As a matter of fact, relajdng rails are worth 
considerably more, and since many old main line rails are used for 
branch lines and particularly for side tracks, it is evident that the 
credit given to old rails will somewhat exceed $12. From study 
of tlie accounting practice of several large railways, I concluded 
that $15 per ton would be not far from the average credit. Hence 
the net cost of the new rails (after deducting the credit for tlie 
old rails replaced) would be $15 per ton ; and, since the annual 
rail renewals averaged $75 per mile of trackway, there would be 
5 tons of new rails laid per mile per annum. Hence in a track 
averaging 100 tons of rails per mile, this would mean 5% renewals 
every year, or a rail life of 20 years in the main and branch line 
tracks. 

It is obvious that rail wear depends upon the density of traflfic. 
In 1904, there were 829,500 tons of freight carried Over each mile 
of roadbed, or 746,500 tons per mile of trackway. There were 4,370 
trains that i^assed over each mile of trackway, or nearly 12 trains 
per day, cf which 53% were freight, 44% passenger and 3% mixed 
trains. If we count an engine and its tender as equivalent to two 
cars, there were 78,540 cars passed over each mile of trackway 
during the year. 

"Wellington, in his "Economic Theory of Railway Location," has 
erred badly in his estimate of rail wear. He states that a rail 



R.iiur.-iys. jKii 

should cany 300,000 to 500,000 trains (of 500 tons each) hofore 
replacement. With 4,370 trains per year (the average of the 
U. S. in 1904), Wellington's rule would indicate a rail life of 
100 years! This is at least five times the actual life of 20 years 
above shown. As I have shown on page 1462, about 22% of the 
average railway line is curved. Even assuming that the average 
curve is as sharp as 6°, which Is, of course, far sharper than the 
average, and that a 6% curve increases the wear 100%, we see 
that the increased wear due to curves would be only 22% of 100% 
= 22% gi-eater than if the entire mileage of track were tangent. 

Part of Wellington's error arises from the assumption that a 
rail head can lose half its weight before renewal of the rail is 
necessary. As a matter of fact. Northern Pacific tests have shown 
that not more than one-quarter of the weight of the head is lost 
before renewals are made. On an 80-lb. rail, this would mean 
that when about 10% of its entire weight is lost by abrasion, 
the rail is unfit for further economic service, except in sidings 
and the like. Wellington was also misled by a belief that pre- 
vailed in the early SO's that a steel rail would last many times as 
long as an iron rail, a belief which was much too optimistic, as 
subsequent events have proved. 

In selecting a proper unit in which to measure rail wear there 
has been much dispute. Wear may be measured in three ways : 
(1) In terms of the number of tons of gross weight that pass over 
the rail before it is worn out ; (2) in terms of the number of trains ; 
or (3) in terms of the number of cars. Wellington favored the train 
as the unit, for he says : "The locomotive alone causes by far the 
greater portion of this wear." He cites the opinion of I^aunhardt, 
a German writer, to the effect that the engine causes fully half the 
wear — a conclusion apparently based upon nothing but theory. 
He also cites some theoretical deductions of Mr. O. Chanute. In 
brief, there was even then no real evidence to prove the contention 
that a locomotive causes as much wear as the rest of the train. At 
present, when wheel loads on the largest freight cars equal those 
on the average locomotive, the argument that a locomotive causes 
half the wear on a rail is manifestly absurd. 

I am satisfied that rail wear is not a function of the number of 
gross tons carried, nor of the number of trains, but of the number 
of cars that pass over the rail. Nor do I think that the weight on 
the wheels is a very material factor in the couse of wear. Rail 
wear on tangents is due mainly to the grinding of particles of grit 
and stoel between the wheel and the rail. The abrasion due to 
any grinding action is by no means proportionate to the pressure. 

In sawing wood the weight of a- cross-cut saw is sufficient to 
produce rapid abrasion of the wood, and nothing whatever is 
gained by bearing down on the saw. So, too, in cutting stone with 
grit or chilled shot, a comparatively light pressure is quite as 
effective in abrading the stone as is a heavy pressure : It should be 
remembered that it does not take a great weight applied to a 
grain of sanci to produce a very large unit pressure between the 
grain of sand and the weight. It is this unit pressure that counts. 



1462 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and it needs be only sufficient to cause slight penetration cf the 
sand into the steel to result in abrasion. What is true of sand 
grains is true of all other particles between, or minute protuberances 
and irregularities upon the two abrading surfaces — the rail and 
the wheel. 

As we have seen, the average rail in an American trackway 
has a life of about 20 years, when it carries 78,500 cars per year! 
Hence it carries 20 X 78,500 = 1,570,000 cars during its active life. 

I think it is more than mere coincidence that the life of a steel 
rail in a street "tramway" in England has averaged 1,500,000 cars, 
as shown below. At any rate, it is evident that rail wear is 
far more nearly a function of the number of cars that pass over the 
rail than of any other unit yet suggested. It will probably be found, 
however, that the most exact unit in which to measure wear is the 
number of wheels that pass over a rail. 

Curvature of Railways. — Since curvature affects the wear of 
rails, and thus affects the cost of tnick maintenance, it is of 
interest to know what per cent of the average railway track is 
curved. The following statistics, gathered in 1901, throw light on 
this matter. 

Miles of Per cent 

Road. roadbed. curved. 

Bur. Ced. R. & N 1,234 21 

Chicago & Alton 900 12 

C. & E. 1 725 12 

a & N. W 5,562 19 

C. M. & St. P. 6,423 20 

C. G. W 946 20 

C. O. & G ■ 659 17 

C. R. I. & P 3,680 21 

Del. & H 723 35 

Del. & Lack 908 35 

Denver & R. G 1,675 ' 30 

111. Centr 3,996 16 

Lehigh Valley 461 36 

Long Island 379 16 

Mich. Centr 1,642 14 

M., St. P. & Ste. Marie 1,039 14 

Mo. K. & T 1,988 20 

Mo. Pacific 5,329 21 

Nash. C. & St. L 1,195 25 

N. Y. C. & H. R 2,828 38 

N. T. C. & «t. L 512 6 

Pere Marquette 1,743 15 

Penn. (^West of Pittsburg) 2,762 21 

Penn. (East of Pittsburg) ; 4,287 34 

St. L. & S. F 1,640 - 29 

Seaboard Air Line 1,049 25 

So. Pacific (Pacific System) 5,155 24 

Tex. & Pacific 1,582 5 

Union Pacific 3,000 20 

Wisconsin Central 961 20 

Total 64,933 22.15 

Life of Rails on an Englishi "Tramway." — Mr. T. Arnall gave the 
following data in a paper read in 1892 before the Tramway's. 
Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 



K.ULlf.iyS. 141)3 

At Birmingham, a steam motor cor weighing 10 tons hauls a 
large car holding 60 passengers over girder rails weighing 98 lbs. 
per yd. After 8 years experience witn a very heavy traffic, Mr. 
Arnall concluded that such a rail will carry less than 750,000 steam 
cars before needing replacement. The life of the driving wheel 
tires is only 25,000 miles, due to stesp grades (5%), and frequent 
use of sand. If we include the passenger car, we see that a rail 
carried 1,500,000 cars before it was worn out. 

Average Cost of Maintenance of Equipment in America. — Individ- 
ual railways are apt to show quite wide fluctuations from year to 
year in the cost of repairs and renewals of rolling stock. This 
is due largely to the financial condition of the company, and often 
to the desire to make an unusually good showing as to net earnings. 
On the other hand, the average of all roads in America would be 
the best possible criterion of maintenance costs were the actual first 
cost of the equipment known. Unfortunately it is not known, but 
we can estimate the approximate first cost with considerable 
accuracy, using the annual reports of the Interstate Commerce 
Commission and applying unit prices to various classes of equipment 
there described. 

The report for 1906 shows that there were 51,672 locomotives of 
all kinds in the United States, and that the "repairs and renewals 
of locomotives" cost $123,893,482, which is nearly $2,400 per 
locomotive for the year. The average weight of each locomotive was 
66 tons, not including the tender, witii a weight of 54 tons on the 
drivers. 

A 66-ton locomotive costs about $12,000 new, hence the repairs 
and renewals for 1906 averaged 20% of the first cost. 

While the rules of the Interstate Commerce Commission require 
the railways to charge to "renewals" the full cost of a new loco- 
motive bought to replace an old one, the railways ignore this order, 
and properly charge to capital account the excess value of the new 
locomotive over the value of the old one. Hence the railway 
maintenance accounts show true repairs and renewals cost. It 
should be noted, however, that the amount charged to repairs and 
renewals of locomotives should be increased by nearly 10% of the 
20%, distributed as follows: 

Per cent. 

Superintendence of maintenance 2.9 

Repairs and renewals of shop machinery 3.4 

Stationery and printing 0.2 

Other expenses 2.9 

Total 9.4 

This does not include repairs and renewals of shop buildings nor 
interest on the shop plant, nor "general expenses" of the entire 
railway systems, the latter being nearly 3.9% of the total operating 
expense. 

However, if we add only 10% to the cost of "repairs and re- 
newals" of each locomotive to cover the above named items of 
direct costs of shop machinery, repairs, etc., we have a total of 
$2,640 per locomotive, or 22% of the first cost. 



1464 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The 1904 report shows that locomotiv?s averaged 60 tons weight 
and that "repairs and renewals of locomotives" averaged $2,250 
per locomotive. Since the average weight was nearly 10% less 
than for 1906, the "repairs and renewals" should be about 10% 
less, and such, in fact, is the case. 

In 1906, the average locomotive traveled 27,400 revenue train 
miles. The actual locomotive mileage was somewhat in excess of 
this, but no data are given from which it can be computed. 

Since the "repairs and renewals," which we shall now call 22% 
of the first cost of locomotives, includes true depreciation (re- 
newals of entire locomotive), we must deduct depreciation to arrive 
at true repairs. There is no available record of exactly what this 
has averaged in America, but my study of the equipment records of 
the Great Northern, Northern Pacific and other lines, has led 
me to conclude that about 3.6% is the least percentage of locomo- 
tives that have been retired from service anr.jally. This is equiva- 
lent to a life of 27.8 years. Due to the rapid increase in train loads 
in past years it is probable that from 1 to 5 % of the locomotives 
have been retired annually. If we assume that 4% were retired in 
1906, we have 22% — 4% = 18% of the first cost spent for true 
repairs. 

Of the 51,672 locomotives, 58% were freight, 16% switching, 24% 
passenger, and 2% unclassified. 

In 1906 tliere were 1,833,635 freight cars whose rated capacity 
was 32 tons. The "repairs and renewals of freight cars" amounted 
to ?138,141,295, or nearly $76 per car for the year. The first cost of 
a 32-ton car probably was about $600, so that "repairs and. renewals 
of freight cars" were about 12.7% of the first cost, to which should 
be added fully 10% (for reasons given) of this 12.7%, making a 
total of 14% as the annual cost of repairs and renewals. If 4% of 
the freight cars were "retired" in 1906, this would leave 10% as 
the cost of true repairs. 

In 1906 there were 42,262 passenger cars, and their "repairs and 
renewals" totaled $30,177,532, or $715 per car. The probable 
average first cost of passenger cars is about $6,000. Hence about 
12% was spent for "repairs and renewals" to which should be 
added (for reasons above given) fully 10% of the 12%, making a 
total of about 13.2%. 

If 4% were retired in 1906, the cost of true repairs was 9.2%. 
However, the percentage of passenger cars retired is somewhat 
less than freight cars. Hence true repairs of passenger cars 
doubtless were nearly 10% of the first cost. 

Summing up we see that true repairs of equipment were about the 
following percentages of their first cost : 

Per cent. 

Locomotives 18 

Freight cars 10 

Passenger cars 1*^ 



R.llLU.ns. 14G.J 

Repairs and renewals (— repairs and rlepreciation), were : 

Per cent. 

Locomotives ^-j 

FreislH cars ' .' 14 

Passenger cars H; j 

Cost of Maintenance of Equipment, N. P. Ry In matting my 

tippraisal of the equipment on tlie Nortlicrn Pacific Ry., as of 
June 30, 1906, I found liie company's boolvs showed the following 
original cost : 

1,005 locomotives $12,977,823 

478 passenger and accommodation cars. . 2,805,197 

127 sleeping and dining cai-s 1,583,792 

195 baggage, express and postal cars. . . . 685.750 

37,584 freight car.'; 22,843,823 

Floating equipment 497,102 





Per cent 


Annual 


of 


Lintenance. 


first cost. 


$2,540 

630 

69 


19.5 
10.0 
11.3 



Total §41,353,487 

This gives an average unit cost of; 

Locomotive .$12,970 

Passenger car 5,890 

Sleeping car, etc 12,480 

Baggage car 3,530 

Freight car 610 

The average first cost of each of three classes of equipment, 
and the average amount spent in repairs and renewals for the fiscal 
year 1906, were as follows: 

First 
cost. 

1,005 locomotives .?12.970 

800 passenger cars 6.340 

37,584 freight cars 610 

This annual maintenance (for the year 190G) includes repairs 
and renewals, but the "superintendence"' and "other expenses" are 
not included, and they .amounted to about 3.0% additional. 

The locomotives average 78 tons weight, not including the weight 
of the tender ; their average actual ages was 10.7 years, but their 
average "weighted age" was S.6 years. 

The average "weighted age" of the passenger cars was 11.1 j'ears, 
and of the freiglit cars, 8.2 years. 

At the prices now prevailing, this equipment would cost 10 to 
15% more if bought new. 

There were 137 switching engines in the above number and there 
were 229 passenger engines and 639 freight engines, and the 868 
engines averaged 28,600 miles each. Including all train and engine 
mileage, which was as follows : 

Passenger train miles 8,057,721 

Locomotives helping passenger trains 393,974 

Mixed train miles 849,035 

Freight train miles 12,24 8.582 

Locomotives helping freight trains 2,097.913 

Non-revenue train miles 1,229,736 



Total 24,876,961 



1466 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Since the revenue train mileage was 21,155,338, the 868 locomo- 
tives each averaged 24,300 revenue train miles. 
The car mileage was : 

Passenger cars 59,298,843 

Freight cars 415,358,345 

The average was 6.66 passenger cars per passenger train, and 
31.71 freight cars per freight train, of which 23.15 were loaded 
With 17.30 tons each = 400.47 tons load per train. 

The total spent for maintenance of all equipment (excepting 
marine) was $6,000,000, including superintendence and repairs of 
shop machinery. Since the first cost of all this equipment was 
$41,000,000, we see that the average co.ot of repairs and renewals 
was nearly 15% for the year 1906. 

Taking all locomotives and cars of all kinds (freight and pas- 
senger), the average first cost of each unit was $1,000 and the 
average cost of repairs and renewals was $150 or 15%. The value 
of this deduction will be apparent when we come to consider the 
percentage that should be allowed for annual repairs and renewals 
of electric motor cars. Many absurdly low estimates have been 
made as to the latter, based upon short experience with compara- 
tively new equipment, and also without any regard as to the actual 
first cost of the equipment. 

Life of Railway Cars and Locomotives, and Cost of Repairs, S. P. 
Ry.* — Mr. William Mahl, comptroller of the Union Pacific and 
Southern Pacific railways, gives some valuable data as to the life 
of equipment on the Southern Pacific I-lailway. 

The following are averages for the period of six years, 1902 to 
1907, the costs being the average cost per year: 

Expenditure on 
Number each per annum. 

Class. Serviceable. Repairs. Vacated. 

Locomotives 1,540 $3,165 $183 

Passenger cars 1,504 759 104 

Freight cars 42,983 70 17 

In "repairs" are included the annual expenditure for repairs and 
renewals of each locomotive or car, other than the expenditure for 
equipment "vacated," or retired. In "vacated" is included the cost 
of equipment destroj^ed, condemned and dismantled, sold or changed 
to another class. In 1903 there was a fire which destroyed $225,000 
worth of passenger cars, bringing up the cost per car "vacated" to 
$234 for that year, as against an average of $82 per car per year 
for the other five years of the period. Hence the $104 for passenger 
cars "vacated," as above given, is probably too high for a fair 
average. 

From 1891 to 1907, a period of 17 years, the average number of 
freight cars "vacated" each year was S.63% of the total number in 
service. Dividing 100 by this 3.63, we get 27%, which is, therefore, 
the average life in years of each freight car. These cars were 
nearly all wooden cars, of which the cost of a box car did not 
exceed $450, excluding air brakes. 

*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 23, 11)07. 



R.iijjr.iys. i4tiT 

In the six-year period (1902 to IDOT) the roUowins was iUa 

record of eiiuipnu'nt \atat('d: Cir<; 

Loco- Pas- Road 

motives. senger. Freight, service. 

Total number 294 299 11,797 468 

Av. price per locomotive or car : 

Credited to replacement fund.. |9, 298 $4,228 $553 $567 

Charged to operating exp 5,742 3,140 372 380 

Proceeds from sale or salvage. 3,556 1,087 180 188 

Since there were 294 locomotives "vacated" in six years, the 
average was 49 per year out of the 1,540 in service, or 3.2%, which 
is equivalent to a life of 31 years. Tlie life of passenger cars was 
practically the same. 

There were nearly 2,000 freight cars "vacated" per year out of 
an average of 42,983 in service, or nearly 4.7%, which is equivalent 
to a life of but little more than 21 years. But in the years 1906 and 
1907 6,338 cars were vacated, which is more than half of all vacated 
in toe six-year period, indicating an unusual amount of replacement. 
This is also borne out by the fact that for the 17-year period the 
life of freiglit cars averaged 271/2 j^ears, -is above stated. 

Percentage of Engines Laid Off for Repairs. — In estimating the 
number of pits required in shops for repairing 1,000 locomotives on 
tlie St. Louis and San Francisco Ry., in 1907, various data were 
used, from which it was concluded that 70 pits would be needed. 
This is equivalent to 7% of the total number of locomotives con- 
stantly in the repair shops. However, many large railways count 
on 8% of the locomotives constantly in the shops. The records of 
the St. L. & S. F. showed that there had been 2SS days worked each 
year by the men in the shops. Bach engine was estimated to 
spend 20 days in the shoD once a j^ear, and to travel 30,000 miles 
between these periods of general repairs. 

It is interesting to note how greatly the percentage of engines 
laid off for repairs has been reduced witliin recent years. On the 
Pennsylvania Ry., from 1851 to 1881, the average was nearly 18% 
constantly in tlie shops; for the years 1S81 to 1SS4, tlie average was 
nearly 15%. 

Percentage of Freight Cars Laid Off for Repairs. — This percent- 
age is ascertainable witli great accuracy, for it is shown in tlie 
weeldy statistical bulletins issued by the American Railway Associa- 
tion of Car BtRciency (Chicago). The average number of freight 
cars constantly in the sliops is about 5 to 514% of the total cars in 
service. 

Price of Locomotives. — Mr. Wm. P. Evans, of the Baldwin Loco- 
motive Works, gives the following: 

1885. 1905. 

Price Price 

Type of Weight, per lb. Weight, per lb. 

Locomotive. lbs. Price. cts. lbs. Price, cts. 

American 80,857 $6,695 8.28 102,200 $9,410 9.20 

Atlantic 187,200 15.750 8.30 

Mogul 72,800 6,662 9.12 

Pacific 227,000 15,830 7.00 

Ten wheeler 85,000 7,583 8.92 156,000 15,690 8.80 

Consolidation 92,400 7,888 8.54 192,460 14,500 7.50 



1468 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The price per pound is figured from tlie total weight of the engine 
with three gages of water in the boiler, but excluding the tender. 

Cost of Shop Machinery. — Mr. M. K. Barnum gives the following 
as the actual cost of shop machinery and tools for several different 
locomotive repair shops ; 

Locomotives. Area Cost 

Number At one During of shops of 

Sliop. of tools. time. ysar. sq. ft. tools. 

A 96 9 120 47,300 $76,600 

B 254 16 216 62,000 188,100 

C 226 22 300 131,300 147,400 

D 237 22 300 96,000 174,300 

B 282 50. 600 238,000 264,300 

He estimates tlie average useful life of shop machinery and tools 
at 20 years. 

Cost of Stopping Trains.* — Mr. J. A. Peabody states that an 
official of a Western railway gave him the following as tlie cost 
of stopping trains, determined by experiment. 

An 8-car passenger train, weighing 530 tons, including engine 
and tender half loaded, from and to a speed of 50 miles per hr., 
costs as follows per stop : 

Lbs. 

Coal to stop train (air pump) 30 

Coal to accelerate train (.estimated) 275 



Total coal 305 

Per stop. 

305 lbs. coal, at $2.15 per ton $0.33 

Brake shoe wear and tire wear (from laboratory 

tests) 0.03 

Wear of brake and draft riggings, etc. (esti- 
mated) 0.06 



Total $0.42 

The lost time in starting and stopping on a straight, level track, 
averaged 145 sees., or nearly 2% mins. This is the actual loss from 
tlie time that would have been required to make the trip had no 
stop been made. 

The corresponding items of cost of starting and stopping a 2,000- 
ton freiglit train (SO cars) from and to a speed of 35 miles per 
hr, were : 

Lbs. 

Coal to stop train (air pump) 50 

Coal to accelerate train ,.. 500 



Total coal 550 

Per stop. 

550 lbs. coal, at $2.15 $0.56 

Brake slice wear 0.15 

Other items, as classified above 0.29 



Total $1.00 



*Engineerin[/-Cuntractino, Feb., 190ij. p. 49. 



h'.l/LU-AVS. UGO 

Cost of Handling Locomotives at Terminals.— Mr. Charles H. 
Frye gives tlie following costs of handling loooniotivos at terminals 
in 1903. 

On the St. Louis & San Francisco line, the average cost jjer 
engine per time handled was $1.57 for wages of hostlers and 
assistants, fire cleaners and asphalt men, front end cleaners, wipers, 
boiler washers and assistants, sand dryers, laborers or sweepers 
and callers. 

On the Norfolk and Western, the cos: was $1.30 for repairs plus 
$0.52 for watching and liostlering, total $1.82 per engine per time. 

On the Molaile and Ohio, 4,832 locomotives were handled at the 
following labor cost per time : 

Hostlers $0.30 

Boiler washers 0. 1 

Callers (calling engine crew) COS 

Sand dryers 0.03 

Coalers O.SO 

Wipers 1.13 

Machinists 0.36 

Boiler makers 0.12 

Truck repairers 0.13 

Total $3.05 

On the Texas & Pacific the cost oi" despatching, in and out of 
terminals, was 2 cts. per engine mile, or $2.21 per engine per time. 

On the Wabash Ry., 17,060 engines were despatched by 636 men, 

during 1903, at the following labor cost per engine per time: 

Repairs -. $0.98 

Handling 0.84 

Total $1.82 

On the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern, the cost of allroimd- 
house expenses, including skilled mechanics on ordinary i-unning 
repairs, was : 

Skilled mechanics $1.87 

Other labor 1.73 

Total $3.60 

On the Seaboard Line, 7,615 engines were despatched at the 
following unit cost : 

Repairs $1.13 

SuppHes, labor 0.03 

Roundhouse men 0.64 

Total $1.80 

An Eastern road having 476 locomotives, handled at 31 round- 
houses by 231 men, gives the following unit cost for 13,388 
despatches monthly : 

Handling $0.79 

Running repairs 2.83 

Coal 8.32 

Supplies 0.43 

Water and water station 0.70 

Total $13.07 



1470 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

A Western line with 312 locomotives on 1,300 miles of line gives 
the following unit cost: 

General $0.70 

Washout 0.27 

Wiping 0.10 

Cinders 0.13 

Hostling 0.80 

Coaling 0.35 

Total $2.35 

Roundhouse repairs (heavy engines) 2.50 

Total $4.85 

These engines average 125 miles per engine handled. 



CHAPTER XII. 
BRIDGES. 

The Weight of Steel Bridges. — To compute the approximate cost 
of a steel bridge, it is first essential to estimate its Weight. Formu- 
las for estimating weights are given in this section, together witli 
many examples of weights of bridges actually built, both for high- 
way and for electric and steam railway purposes. 

The following formulas, taken from Johnson's "Modern Framed 
Structures," give the weight of steel in trusses and floor-beams of 
highway and railway bridges. 

For a highway bridge with a roadway 16 ft. wide, designed to 
carry 100 lbs. live load per sq. ft., use the following formula: 
W=12I, + 150. 

W = weight in lbs. per linear foot of bridge. 
L = span in feet. 
For bridges of less or greater width of roadway than 16 ft., sub- 
tract or add 15 lbs. per lin. ft. for each 2 ft. change in width. 

For railroad bridges designed according to Cooper's E-50 load- 
ing, the weight of steel per lin. ft. of bridge is as follows : 
For deck plate girders, 
W= 12 I, + 150. 
For through plate girders with beams and stringers, 

W= 12i-|-500. 
For truss bridges, 

W—7L + 650. 

The Weights of Steel Bridges for Highway, Railway and Electric 
Railway, Spans of 10-ft. to 300-ft.*. — In this issue we shall confine 
ourselves to the weights of standard bridges on the Northern Pa- 
cific Ry. and on the Santa Fe Ry., followed by Tyrrell's formulas 
for calculating the weights of bridges of moderate size. 

Weights of Standard Bridges, A. T. & S. F. Ry.— These single 
track bridges are designed to carry a moving load of two 139-ton 
consolidation engines, followed by a train weighing 3,200 lbs. per 
lin. ft., according to specifications drawn in 1902. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 23, 1908. 

1471 



1472 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Estimated Weights of Single Track Through Pin Truss Bridges ; 
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. 
Span c. to Weight 

c. of pins. per span. 

Ft. Lbs. Class. 

100 193,7001 D 

103 183,300 D 

110 195,300 D 

124 236,800 

126 283,9002 D 

128 244,3003 

130 251,500 

130 258,200* 

134 263,200 C 

149 295,500 C 

149 347, 500= D 

160 341,900 D 

164 346,100 C 

172 371,700 C 

200* 499,500« C 

210t 490,400" C 

260 702,400* C 

300 914,500" C 

Note — All truss spans of 14 It. and less have stiff bottom cords. 
*Soft steel. tMedium steel. 

1, - and '' stiff bottom chord carries floor; '^ 130-ft. span shortened; 
^ span for 5 ' curve ; " parallel chords ;',*," chords not parallel. 

C — Deep floors. D — Shallow floors. 
Estimated Weight of Single Track Plate Girder Bridges ; Atchison, 
Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. 

Through Girders. 

Class C. Class D. 

Lbs. Lbs. 







Deck Gil 


ders. 






Class A. 


Class B. 


Span. 




Lbs. 


Lbs. 


26 ft. 




12,800 


17,900 


30 ft. 




16.000 


23,900 


32 ft. 




17,500 


25,800 


34 ft. 




20,000 


28,600 


36 ft. 




21,600 


32,100 


40 ft. 




24,300 


36,600 


40 ft. 


10° curve. . 


24,600 




42 ft. 




26,000 


39,200 


44 ft. 




28,300 


36,000 


48 ft. 




35,500 


45,000 


48 ft. 


5° furve. . . 






48 ft. 


10° cur\e. . 






50 ft. 




36,900 


49,800 


52 ft. 




40,900 


50,000 


54 ft. 




42,500 


53,500 


58 ft. 






58,500 


60 ft. 




51,500 


62,400 


60 ft. 


5° curve. . . 






60 ft. 


10° curve. . 






62 ft. 








64 ft. 




56,100 


66,800 


64 ft. 


5° curve. . . 






64 ft. 


10° curve. . 






66 ft. 




58,600 




70 ft. 




68,800 


83,300 


70 ft. 


5° curve. . . 






70 ft. 


10° curve. . 






75 ft. 




78.500 


94,800 


75 ft. 


5 ° curve . . . 






75 ft. 


10° curve. . 






80 ft' 


* 


88,500 
110,600 




90 ft' 


* 




100 ft 




133.600 




105% 1 


ft 







34,300 
37,100 

'44,V00 
49,600 





63,400 




64,100 




64,400 




68,600 




73,000 




76,800 


80,200 


90,400 


80,600 


91,600 


81,100 


92,600 




93,600 


82,200 


97,700 


89,100 




89,700 




105,000 


iii'o'oo 


105,800 


113,100 


106,300 


113,900 


113,200 


129,200 


113,700 




114,000 




124,100 


136,400 


159,900 ■ 


172,200 



218,500 

* Weights given for girders Class C and D are for round ended girders. 



BRIDGES. 1173 

Classes A and C are designed in the most economic manner und 
are used wherever possible. Class B Is for spans of the least depth 
consistent with good service. Class D is for spans with shallow 
floors. 

Classes B and D are used only where it is less expensive to use 
these shallow bridges than to change the grade line. The tabulai- 
weight is the calculated weight plus 2 1/0%. If the shipped weight is 
in excess of the tabular weight the excess is not paid for. 

Weights of Standard Bridges, N. P. Ry. — In 1S99 standard plans 
were made for Northern Pacific Ry. bridges. The assumed live load 
was two 146-ton locomotives, followed by 4,000 lbs. per lin. ft. of 
track. The following table gives the approximate weights of sin- 
gle track steel bridges, the weights being given closely enough for 
purposes of preliminary cost estimates. 
I Beam : 
Span in ft. Weight in Lbs. 

20 10,000 

30 20,000 

Deck Plate Girders : 

25 13,000 

35 20,000 

40 25,000 

50 37,000 

60 50,000 

70 63,000-73,000 

80 96,000 

90 113,000 

100 133,000 

Through Plate Girders : 

40 40,000 

50 53,000 

60 70,000 

70 88,000-98,000 

80 118,000 

90 ■ 142.000 

100 170,000 

Deck Lattice : 

110 150,000 

120 165,000 

Through Lattice : 

110 174,000 

120 215,000 

Deck Pin Spans : 

130 202,000 

140 220,000 

150 244,000 

160 264,000 

170 297.000 

180 330.000 

190" ■ ' " 360.000 

200'...! 392,000 

Through Pin Spans: ^„„ 

130 210.000 

140' 230.000 

150'.:: ■.:".■. 252.000 

160 280,000 

170 303,000 

180 340.000 

190 374.000 

900 ".'.'. 410,000 



1474 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Formulas for Weights of Railway Bridges. — Mr. H. G. Tyrrell 
gives the following formulas: All weights (TF) are per lineal foot 
of single track bridge for steel only ; units 10,000 to 12,000 lbs. per 
sq. in. The live loads assumed are two engines weighing 100 tons 
each, and 4,000 lbs. per lin. ft. of track. 

Deck plate girder bridge W = 100 +9 L 

Deck lattice girder bridge W = 100 + 8 L 

Half through plate girder bridge with floor W=:100-[-12 L 

Same with ties on shelf angle W = 200 + 8y2 L 

Same with trough floor W = 600 + 10 L 

Hiveted through truss bridge TF == 400 + 6 L 

Riveted deck truss bridge, ties on top chord W = 200 +7 L 

Pin through truss bridge W = 400 -j- 5% 1/ 

Pin deck truss bridge with stringers W=400-|- 6 L 

Pin deck truss bridge, ties on top chord W=300-|- 6 L 

W = weight of steel, lbs. per lin. ft. 

L = span in feet. 

Railway Trestles. — Assumed loads same as above ; weight of 
spans as above. Weight of bents and bracing is 9 lbs. per sq. ft. 
of side profile from ground to base of rail. 

Mr. Tyrrell also gives the following formulas for the weights of 
single track railway bridges, for spans of 30 to 230 ft, designed ac- 
cording to Cooper's E 50 loading: 

Deck plate girders, 'W=100 + 12 L. 

Through plate girders, W = 500 + 12 L. 

Through truss spans, W = 600 + 7 1/. 

W — weight in lbs. per lin. ft. 

L = span in feet. 

Add 90% for double track bridges. 

Johnson's "Modern Framed Structures" gives the following formu- 
las for the same loading: 

Deck plate girders, W = 150 + 12 L. 

Through plate girders, W = 500 + 12 L. 

Through truss spans, W = 650 + 7 L. 

Cooper's E 50 loading provides for a train of two "consolidation 
engines" (177% tons each, including tender), followed by\ a uni- 
form live load of 5,000 lbs. per lin. ft. 

Formulas for Weight of Electric Railway Bridges. — Mr. H. G. 
Tyrrell gives the following formulas for weight of single track elec- 
tric railway bridges of 5 ft. to 200 ft. span. The weights include 
steel only, without safety stringers. The live load is assumed to 
cover the span from end to end. The details are figured for riveted 
Joints. 

I-beam spans of 5 to 20 ft, W=50 + 5L. 

For truss spans of 40 to 200 ft, loaded with 15-ton cars, or 1,000 
lbs. per ft, W =200 + 0.8 1,. 

For truss spans of 20 to 180 ft, loaded with 30-ton cars, or 2,000 
lbs. per lin. ft, W= 250 + 1.5 1/. 

For deck plate girder spans, loaded with 2,000 lbs. per lin. ft.. 
W= 30 + 5 I/. 

W = weight of steel per lin. ft. 

L = span in feet. 



BRIDGES. 1475 

Electric railway trestles : Weights of spans same as above ; 
weights of bents and bracing is U lbs. per sq. ft. of side profile from 
ground to base of rail. 

Weights of Bridges, III. Central R. R.* — The Department of 
Bridges and Buildings of the Illinois Central Railroad has made 
standard designs of steel bridges of all ordinary spans, and has 
plotted the weights of steel in each type of bridge. From the curves 
thus plotted certain formulas have been derived for ascertaining the 
weight (TF) of the steel in a bridge of any given span. It will be 
noted that these formulas are not like those found in text books. 

Among thai valuable diagrams of weights of standard bridges 
on the Illinois Central is one that gives the weight of draw (swing) 
bridges, from 75 to 450 ft. span. We do not recall ever having seen 
similar data for swing bridges. From the diagrams, we have pre- 
pared the tables that follow. 

The formulas and tables are for class "R" loading, which is as 
follows : 

"For all single track spans use equivalent uniform loads due to 
two 161.5-ton engines with a total wheel base of 104 ft., followed by 
a uniform train load of 4,600 lbs. per lineal foot of track. 

"For double track spans, of either two or three trusses, and up 
to 150 ft. span, use equivalent uniform loads due to full engine and 
train loading as above on each track. 

"For double track .spans, of either two or three trusses, and over 
150 ft. span, use equivalent uniform loads due to full engine and 
train loading on one track and uniform train load on the other. 

"The weight of track will be assumed at 420 lbs. per ft. The 
weight of steel will be taken from the diagrams." 

The weights of spans of intermediate length can be interpolated 
from the data given in the following tables : 

Weights of Steel in Single Track Draw Bridges. 

Without With 

provision for provision for 

Soan, ballast floors, ballast floors, 

ft. lbs. lbs. 

75 80,000 100,000 

100... 120,000 150.000 

125 170,000 215.000 

150 230,000 280,000 

175 295,000 360.000 

200 365,000 450.000 

225 450,000 550.000 

250 545,000 660,000 

275 655,000 800,000 

300 785,000 970.000 

350 1,100.000 2,320.000 

400 1,440.000 1,690.000 

450 1,800,000 2.090,000 

Note. — Weights of intermediate spans of swing 
bridges may be interpolated. For weights of double 

track spans with three ti'usses add 85% to the above 
weights. The spans given in the above table are 
from c. to c. of end bearings. 



*Engmeerhig-Contractmg, June 7. 1909. 



1476 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Weight of Steel in Single Track I-Beam Spans 

Without Ballast Floor. 

(1^=3.5 1/2+ 352 i 4- 1215.) 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

5 3,000 

10 5,000 

15 7,200 

20 9,700 

25 12,200 

30 14.900 

35 17,700 

Weights of Steel in Single Track Deck Plate 

Girder Spans^ Without Ballast Floor. 

(W = 9.5 i2+ 200 L + 450 for spans less than 70 ft.) 

(^=28^2 — 2,280 1,+ 83,400 for spans more than 
70 ft.) 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

30 15,000 

40 23,500 

50 34,000 

60 : 46.500 

70 61,000 

80 80,000 

90 105,000 

100 136,000 

Weights of Steel in Single Track Deck Plate 

Girder Spans. 

(Designed for future ballast floors.) 

Without I-Beams With I-Beams 
Span, for future for future 

ft. ballast floor. ballast floor. 

30 18,100 25,200 

40 28,400 37,400 

50 40.100 50,700 

60 54.500 67,200 

70 ti9,000 84,400 

80 90,800 108,400 

90 : 114,600 134,300 

100 150,100 172,300 

Weight of Steel in Single Track Through Plate 

Girder Spans, Without Ballast Floor. 

{W=lS2iL — 26,160 for spans less than 76 ft.) 

{W=75L^ — 9,927 Z,+ 433,740 for spans more than 
76 ft.) 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

30 28,500 

40 46,600 

50 64,600 

60 82,700 

70 100,700 

80 120,000 

85 131,800 

90 147,300 

100 190,500 



BRIDGES. 1 1^ 



"Weioht of Steel in Single Track Through Plate 
Girder Spans, Designed for Future Ballast Floor. 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

40 64.400 

50 81,200 

60 103,800 

70 128,000 

80 154,100 

90 189.600 

100 224.800 

Weight of Stebi. in Single Track Through Pin 

Spans, Without Ballast Floor. 

(Tr = 7.9I-=+ 870 7/ + 11.500.) 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

110 203.000 

120 230,000 

140 288,000 

160 353.000 

180 424,000 

200 500,000 

220 585.000 

240 675,000 

260 772,000 

280 874.000 

300 984,000 

320 1.100.000 

340 1,221.000 

360 1,349.000 

380 1.481,000 

400 1.621,000 

Weights of Steel in Single Track Through Pin 

Span Bridges, Designed for Future 

Ballast Floors. 

Span. Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

100 220,000 

120 290.000 

140 370.000 

160 455.000 

180 550.000 

200 650.000 

220 770.000 

240 900,000 

250 972,000 

Weight of Steel in Double Track Through Plate 

Girder Spans (2 Light and 1 Heavy Girder), 

Without Ballast Floor. 

(TV =4 1.2+ 2.980 1/ — 44.000 for spans 30 to 80 ft.) 

(W = 68 L2— 7.100 i + 352.800 for spans 80 to 100 ft.) 

Span. Weight. 

ft. lbs. 

30 49,000 

40 82.000 

50 115.000 

60 149.000 

70 184.000 

80 220.000 

90 264.000 

100 324.500 



1478 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Weight of Steel in Double Track Through Pin 
Spans (2 Light and 1 Heavy Truss), With- 
out Ballast Floor. 
(W=li.B8L^+ 1,583^+20,900.) 
Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

110 370,000 

120 418,000 

140 524,000 

160 640,000 

180 771,000 

200 911,000 

220 1,065,000 

240 1,230,000 

260 1,404,000 

280 1,593,000 

300 1,790,000 

320 2,000,000 

340 2,222,000 

360 2,455,000 

380 2,700,000 

400 2,955,000 

Note.— If the bridge is designed with only two 
trusses, instead of three, add 82% to the weiglits given 
in tlie above table. 

Weight of Steel in Double Thack Through Plate 

Girder Spans (2 Light and 1 Heavy Girder), 

Designed for Future Ballast Floors. 

Span, Weight, 

ft. lbs. 

40 117,300 

50 148,900 

60 187,700 

70 230,700 

80 282,100 

90 340,300 

100 402,100 

Formulas for Weight of Highway Bridges. — Mr. H. G. Tyrrell 
gives the following formulas for the weight of steel in highway 
truss bridges : 

L 

With sidewalks, W = 2.8 H 

11.3 
L 

Without sidewalks, W —5 -j 

9.5 
L = length of span in feet. 

W = weight of steel per sq. ft. of floor, including both carriage- 
way and walk. The weight includes bracing and shoe plates, but 
not joists or floor. These formulas were based upon designs of 
through truss spans from 50 to 150 ft., for roadways ranging from 
14 to 20 ft. wide. The trusses are riveted. The live load assumed 
was 80 lbs. per sq. ft. for trusses and 100 lbs. per sq. ft. floor beams, 
or a 6 -ton wagon. These bridges have timber joists and a floor 
composed of two layers of plank. 



BRIDGES. 1479 

The following formulas are for plate girder liigliway bridges hav- 
ing 16 to 24 ft. roadway and 20 to SO ft. .span, loading same as 
above. 



Through plate girder W = 3 + 

L 

Deck plate girder, W =: 2.1 H 

5 



L 



4.25 



W = weight of steel per sq. ft. and does not include the timber 
stringers and plank floor. 

For highway bridges with solid floors (assumed dead weight of 
floor, 150 lbs. per sq. ft.), Mr. Tyrrell gives the following formulas: 

L 
Deck plate girder bridges, TT = S 



Half through girder bridges, W = 3 + 
Truss bridges, W = 3 + 



2.6 
L 



2.4 
L 



4 

Weight of a 465-ft. Span Highway Bridge.* — The longest high- 
way truss span in America was built in 1901 across the Miami 
River at New Baltimore, Ohio. It has a span of 465 ft. c. to c. of 
end pins, and a depth of 66 ft. at the middle. The pin connected 
trusses are 25 ft. apart in the clear. The bridge is designed for a 
live load of 2,600 lbs. per lin. ft., with a live load of 100 lbs. sq. ft. 
on the floor system and a 6-ton road roller as a concentrated load. 
The floor system consists of plate girder floor beams, I-beam string- 
ers, and 2% -in. plank floor. There is no sidewalk and no street 
railway track. The weight of the bridge is 1,000,000 lbs., or 2,150 
lbs. per lin. ft. or 86 lbs. per sq. ft. 

Weight of a 406-ft. Span Highway Bridge.* — A very long highway 
truss span was built in 1899 across the Miami River at Hamilton, 
Ohio. The span is 406 ft. c. to c. of end pins. The trusses are 50 
ft. deep at the middle and spaced 26% ft. c. to c. The roadway 
is 22 ft. wide, and the two cantilever sidewalks are 6 ft. wide each, 
making a total floor width of 34 ft. The trusses are calculated for 
a dead load of 5,000 lbs. per lin. ft. of span and a live load of 2,720 
lbs. per lin. ft. of span, or 80 lbs. per sp. ft. of floor. The floor 
system is calculated for a 20-ton roller on two axles 12 ft. apart, 
or a 16-ton electric car. The floor of the roadway is asphalt blocks 
on concrete laid on buckle plates, supported by I-beam stringers. 
The sidewalks are concrete slabs. The total weight of steel in the 
bridge is 1,300,000 lbs. 

Weight and Cost of a Highway Bridge, 120-ft. Spans.*— A steel 
highway bridge was built in 1905 across the Wabash River at 
Terre Haute, Ind. It is 812 ft. long between abutments, and con- 
sists of 6 spans of 120 ft. each and one 75-ft. span in the center. 
The roadway is 50 ft. wide, and there is an 8-ft. cantilever sidewalk 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



1480 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

on each side, making a total floor width of 66 ft. It is a deck 
bridge, and each span has two riveted trusses 53 ft. c. to c, with 
three intermediate plate girders. The roadway is paved with brick. 
The total weight of steel in the bridge is 4,144,000 lbs. including 
88,000 lbs. of street car rails. There are 2,330 cu. yds. of concrete 
in the two abutments and 3,900 cu. yds. in the six piers; there are 
718 piles. The piers average 50 ft. high. The substructure cost 
$78,700, and the superstructure cost $192,500, a total of $271,200, 
by contract, including the removal of an old bridge and the build- 
ing of a temporary bridge, which is equivalent to $334 per lin. ft., 
or $5 per sq. ft. of floor area. 

Weight of a 450-ft. Span Highway Swing Bridge.* — A highway 
swing span of unusual length was built across the Connecticut River 
in 1896. The bridge is 450 ft. long. The trusses are 26 ft. c. to c, 
providing for one line of electric cars and two lines of carriages. 
The floor is designed to carry 100 lbs. per sq. ft., 14 ton electric 
cars or a 10 ton wagon. The trusses are designed to carry a live 
load of 1,500 lbs. per lin. ft. for chords and 2,000 lbs. for web. The 
floor consists of 4xl4-in. yellow pine stringers spaced 2i/i ft. apart, 
supporting two layers of plank, 3 in. and 2 in., respectively. The 
stringers for the car track are 15-in. steel beams weighing 42 lbs. 
per ft. There are 22 panels, depth 21 to 55 ft. The turntable is 
rim bearing. The drum is 4 ft. deep and 31 ft. diameter. Three 25- 
HP. motors are used, one for turning and two for blocking up 
the ends. An extra motor is provided. To open takes 
the motor 30 seconds. Working on 10-ft. levers the bridge 
is turned by four men in 8 minutes. The total weight of draw- 
bridge superstructure, including drum and flooring", is 1,3 80,000 lbs. 

Weight of a 520-ft. Double Track Swing Bridge.* — The longest 
swing span in the world is the Interstate bridge. It is a double 
track railway draw bridge, built in 1903, across the Missouri River 
at East Omaha, Neb. The trusses were designed to carry a live 
load of 11,180 lbs. per lin. ft. of bridge. This heavy load was al- 
lowed in case it should be desired to provide a cantilevered road- 
way and sidewalk 16 ft. wide on the outside of each truss. The 
weight of this 520-ft. draw span is 3,900,000 lbs. There were also 
9 plate girder 60-ft. spans in the approach, having a total length of 
575 ft., and a total weight of 1,773,000 lbs. The pivot pier was 
sunk to bed rock, a depth of 120 ft. below low water, by open dredg- 
ing inside a steel cylinder. 

The following are the quantities in the substructure : 

Cu. Yds. 

Mass in cribs and pneumatic caissons of 2 piers 80 ft. deep. . 4,180 

Mass in base of pivot pier 5,390 

Mass in bases of 8-pile piers and 2 abutments 2,330 

Masonry in shafts of 4 large piers 2,135 

Concrete in shafts of 8 shore piers and 2 abutments 1,550 

Lin. Ft. 

Piling below bases of 8 shore piers and abutments 19,900 

Lbs. 
Steel in pivot pier "well" or open caisson 580,000 

^Engineering'Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



BRIDCnS. 1481 

The "4 large piers"' above mentioned are the pivot pier uf the 
draw span and its two rest piers, and a tliird rest pier for an old 
existing draw span. 

The contract price for this 520-ft. swing bridge and approaches 
was $000,000. 

Weight of a 450-ft. Double Track Swing Bridge.* — A double track 
draw bridge, with !i approach (single track) spans, was built in 
1905 across the Tennessee River for the Illinois Central Ry., to re- 
place a lighter steel bridge built 17 years previously. The draw 
bridge is 450 ft. long, and about 25 ft. c. to c. of trusses. Three 
of the approach spans are 300 ft. each, and two are 130 ft. each, 
and are all single track, the trusses being 17i{. ft. c. to c. The 
weights of steel in these spans are as follows : 

Lbs. 

1 double track draw span (450 ft.) and turntable 2,576,000 

3 single track spans, 300 ft. each ,. .4,074.000 

2 single track spans, 150 ft. each 764,000 

Total 7,414,000 

The price for the draw span was 4.45 cents per lb. ready to as- 
semble; and the price for the pin connected truss spans was 3.64 
cents per lb. The cost by contract for erection was $90,000, which 
is about 1% cents per lb. The pivot pier is 62 ft. high, and 47 ft. 
diameter. It contains 873 cu. yds. of concrete footing and 1,356 cu. 
yds. of concrete above the footing, or a total of 2,229 cu. yds., and 
16,200 lbs. of reinforcing rods. It rests on 305 piles. 

Weight of a 438-ft. Single Track Swing Bridge.* — As a part of 
the single track bridge, built in 1899 over the Mississippi River, for 
the Davenport, Rock Island and Northwestern Ry., there are one 
361-ft., three 296-ft., and three 200-ft. pin-connected truss spans, 
beside a 438-swing span which is described subsequently. The 
trusses are designed for Cooper's Class E 35-train load, and the 
floor system for Class E 40. The trusses are 18% ft. c. to c. The 
weights of each span is as follows : 

Lbs. 

43S-ft. swing span (including machinery) 1.400,600 

361-ft. span (c. to c. end pins) 1.039,100 

296-ft. span (c. to c. of end pins) 742.400 

200-ft. span (c. to c. of end pins) 410,000 

Weight and Cost of a 334-ft. Four Track Swing Bridge.* — A four 
track swing bridge was built in 1900 across the Chicago Drainage 
canal at West 46 th street, Chicago, for the Chicago & Western In- 
diana R. R. It is unique among four track swing bridges in that 
it has two trusses instead of three. By this arrangement the cen- 
ter pier is only 43 ft. diameter, thus saving about 20 ft. of length 
over a three-truss bridge that gives the same clear waterway. The 
bridge is 334 ft. long c. to c. of end bearings. It is 29^1 ft. c. to c. 
of trusses, two of the tracks being supported on cantilever floor 
beams outside the trusses. The total width is 57 ft. The live 
load, continuous girder of four supports, is 4,980 lbs. per lin. ft. 

*Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



1482 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

«n the adjacent inside traclt, 4,200 lbs. per lin. ft. on the adjacent 
outside traclc, with no load on tlie distant outside track. 

The weight of steel and iron is 2,692,000 lbs., exclusive of the 
operating machinery. 

The pier is octagonal, 44 ft. diameter, over coping, masonry shell 
7 ft. thick, filled with earth inside, is 30 ft. high and rests on clay. 
The substructure cost $51,353, the contract prices being: Excava- 
tion, 51 cts. ; concrete, $7.30; stone masonry, $13.35 per cu. yd. 
Tlie superstructure cost $131,393, or nearly 4.9 cts. per lb. includ- 
ing the floor. The total cost was $182,746, or $547 per lin. ft. of 
bridge, or $137 per lin. ft. of track. 

Weight of a 231ft. Single Track Swing Bridge.* — A single track 
swing brige was built across the St. Joseph River, for the Pere 
Marquette Ry., to replace an older span having become too light for 
modern locomotives. The bridge is 231 ft. c. to c. of end floor 
beams, and 17 ft. 8 ins. c. to c. of trusses. It was designed for 
Cooper's Class E loading, and its weight is 600,000 lbs. It is ope- 
rated by a 30-HP. gasoline engine which opens or closes it in one 
minute. 

Weight of a 216-ft. Double Track Swing Bridge. — A double track 
swing bridge was built in 1899 across Kinnickinnic River, near 
Milwaukee, for tlie Chicago & Northwestern Ry., to replace a single 
track pin-connected bridge built 19 years previously. It is a rivet- 
ed lattice truss draw bridge, 216 ft. long, trusses 27 ft. apart in the 
clear, and designed for a load of two 131i4-ton engines followed by 
a train weighing 4,000 lbs. per lin. ft. on each track. Its weight 
is 1,200,000 lbs. including track, machinery, etc. 

Weight and Cost of a 1,504-ft. (3 Spans) Cantilever Double Track 
Bridge.* — The longest cantilever railway bridge in America is a 
bridge finished in 1903 across the Monongahela River at Pittsburg, 
for the Wabash R. R. It is 1,504 ft. long exclusive of approaches. 
The channel span is 812 ft. c. to c. of piers, and each of the shore 
spans is 346 ft. c. to c. of piers. The steel towers are 126 ft. high, 
and the depth of the suspended span is 60 ft. The live load con- 
sists of two consolidation engines (on each track) followed by a 
train load of 4,500 lbs. per lin. ft. Tlie weight of the superstructure 
is 14,000,000 lbs., or 9,300 lbs. per lin. ft. The cost of substructure 
and superstructure was $800,000, or $533 per lin. ft. 

The four piers were sunk to rock by the pneumatic caisson 
process. The height of the four piers averaged 110 ft, of which 
35 ft. is below low water. 

Weight and Cost of a 1,296-ft. (3 Spans) Cantilever Double Track 
Bridge.* — A double track cantilever bridge was finished in 1903 
across the Ohio River, at Mingo Junction, Ohio, for the Wabash 
R. R. It is 1,296 ft. long exclusive of approaches. The channel 
span is 700 ft. and each of the two shore spans is 298 ft. c. to c. of 
piers. The steel towers are 109 ft. high, and the depth of the sus- 
pended span is 51% ft. Two of the piers have caisson founda- 



■' Engineer in (j-Contracting, Oct. 7, 190S. 



BRIDGES. 1483 

tions and are 115 tl. high, 25 ft. of which is below low water level. 
One pier is 100 ft. higli, of which only 10 ft. is below low water. 
There is an abutment (instead of a fourth pier) 40 ft. high. The 
weight of the superstructure is 12,000,000 lbs. exclusive of ap- 
proaches. The cost of the substructure and superstructure was 
$750,000, or $577 per lin. ft. 

Weight and Cost of a 2,750-ft. (5 Spans) Cantilever Double Track 
Bridge.* — A double track cantilever bridge was finished in 1905 
across the Mississippi River at Thebes, 111., for the Illinois Central 
and other railways. It has a length of 2,750 ft. (exclusive of con- 
crete approaches) and consists of 5 spans: one 671 ft., two 521 ft., 
and two 518 ft., measured center to center of piers. The steel 
supei-structui-e weighs 24,000,000 lbs., and cost $1,400,000, and tlie 
substructure cost $600,000, a total of $2,000,000, which is $800 per 
lin. ft. The piers have an average height of about 115 ft. from the 
cutting edge of the caisson to the top of the pier, and the water 
averages 20 ft. deep when low. One pier was sunk to a depth of 40 
ft. below low water. There is a double track concrete viaduct ap- 
proach on each side, having a total length of about 1,200 ft., con- 
sisting of 65-ft. arches. The height of this viaduct is about 100 ft., 
and its cost was $300,000, or about $250 per lin. ft. 

Weight of a 1,380-ft. (3 Spans) Cantilever Highway Bridge.* — A 
cantilever highway bridge was finished in 1903 across the Ohio 
Hiver at Marietta, Ohio, for the Ohio River Bridge and Ferry Co. 
Its length is 1,380 ft. exclusive of two approach spans of 220 ft. 
each and a plate girder viaduct 640 ft. long, but with these the 
total length is 2,460 ft. The width is 28 ft. c. to c. of trusses, or 25 
ft. clear width of roadway including a 4% -ft. sidewalk. The live 
load for the trusses was assumed at 60 lbs. per sq. ft. ; and for 
the floor system it was assumed at 80 lbs. per sq. ft. or a steam 
roller of 15 tons. The cantilever is of peculiar design, due to neces- 
sity of providing two channels and of placing one of the piers in a 
shallow part of the river. The length of the main channel span is 
650 ft. ; the south anchorage span is 600 ft. ; the north anchorage 
span is 130 ft. ; all c. to c. of piers. The trusses are pin connect- 
ed. The floor system consists of plate girder floor beams, timber 
stringers, and plank floor. The weight is 4,800,000 lbs., including 
the approach spans and the viaduct. 

Weight and Cost of a Scherzer Highway Lift Bridge. t — A Scherz- 
er rolling lift highway bridge was built in 1897 across the Chicago 
River at Halsted street. Length of movable part, 176 ft, divided 
into two leaves 38 ft. long, giving a clear span of 121 ft. between 
faces of abutments and 109 ft. between protection piles; length of 
each of the two anchor spans, 50 f t. ; total length 276 f t. ; width of 
carriageway, 34 ft. c. to c. of trusses; width of each sidewalk, 7^4 
ft. center of truss to center of hand rail ; total width, 50 ft. The 
bridge was designed to carry 100 lbs. per sq. ft., or an 18-ton motor 
car followed by trailers weighing 15 tons, each on an S ft. wheel 



*Engineering-ContracUng, Oct. 7, 1908. 
"^Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 



14S4 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

base and having 37 ft. length. The weight of superstructure, in- 
cluding the 50 ft. appi'oach spans, is 820 tons, of which 300 tons is 
counterweights. The weight of the machinery is 70 tons. Each 
leaf is operated by a 50 HP. motor. It requires an average of 40 
HP. to open each leaf, and abotit the same for closing, the time 
required being % min. to open and the same to close. The cost of 
the bridge to the city was : 

Substructure 3 34,500 

Superstructure 55,400 

Machinery 13,560 

Electrical equipment 5,400 

Engineering, inspection, temporary foot bridge and inci- 
dentals 14,740 

Total ?123,60O 

Cost of a Scherzer Highway Lift Bridge.* — ^In 1894 a Scherzer 
rolling lift highway bridge was built across the Chicago River, on 
Van Buren street, Chicago. The span is 115 ft. c. to c. of bearings, 
giving a clear channel of 109 ft. It has 2 I'oad'^'ays of 21 ft. c. to 
c. of trusses, and 2 sidewalks of SYn ft. each. The piers are of con- 
crete and sandstone masonry resting on piles. Bach leaf of the 
bridge has 3 trusses, and is counterweighted with 129 tons of cast 
iron. The floor is plank, resting on steel I-beams. Two 50 HP. 
motors operate each leaf. Tests have shown that it requires an 
average of 60 HP. to raise one leaf at a time, and 96 HP. to raise 
both sides simultaneously. 

Exclusive of engineering and inspection, the bridge cost : 

Superstructure 5 73,100 

Substructure 79,600 

Electric equipment and machinery 11,150 

Total ?163,850 

Weight of a Scherzer Railway Lift Bridge.* — A double track bas- 
cule bridge of the Scherzer type was built in 1904 to replace a draw 
bridge built 17 years previously, the draw bridge having become too 
light for the traffic on the Central R. R. of New Jersey. The bridge 
is part of the Newark Bay crossing. The bridge consists of two 
lift spans, back to back, across two separate channels. Each of 
these spans is 120 ft. c. to c. to center of piers, or 110 ft. between 
piers ; but, due to the skew, the clear channel width is only 85 ft. 
Each span weighs 2,000,000 lbs., about half of which is in the cast 
iron counterweight, leaving 1,000,000 in the span alone. 

Weight of a Scherzer Railway Lift Bridge.* — A rolling lift bridge 
of the Scherzer type was built in 1899, at the Fort Point Channel, 
Boston, for the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad. It 
is a skew bridge, the skew being 42°. One truss is 113 ft. long, the 
other being 84 ft., and the distance from center to center of chords is 
27 ft. The weight of this double track bascule bridge is 381,200 lbs. 
The counterweights weigh 3,100 lbs. The time to operate the bridge 
one way is 35 sees, with a 60 HP. motor. 



*Engineering- Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 1485 

Cost of a Page Highway Lift Bridge.*— A trunnion Ijasculo high- 
way bridge was built in 1901 across the Chicago River at Ash- 
land avenue. The bridge is of the Page type and consists of two 
leaves, 168 ft. c. to c. of trunnions. The bridge is 2uS ft. long, and 
has a clear waterway of 140 ft. between fender piles. The trusses 
are 40 ft. c. to c. carrying a 36-ft. clear roadway with two 8-ft. 
cantilever sidewalks, making a total of 52 ft. of floor width. The 
bridge is designed for a live load of 100 lbs. per sq. ft. for the road- 
way and SO lbs. for the sidewalks ; concentrated load 20 tons on 
two axles 12 ft. c. to c. The weight of steel in each leaf is 340,- 
000 lbs. There are about 620,000 lbs. of cast iron for counter- 
weights of each leaf. The substructure required the following quan- 
tities : 

Excavation 6,500 cu. yds. 

Concrete 2,820 cu. yds. 

Sheet piling and bracing 250,000 ft. B. M. 

Timber in protection work and dock 23,500 ft. B. M. 

Piles in protection worli and dock 7,300 iin. ft! 

Piles in coffer dam 2,100 Iin. ft. 

Tlie contract price was: 

Substructure $ 35,5 10 

Superstructure 91^200 

Total ?126,740 

Cost of a Page Railway Lift Bridge.* — A double track single- 
leaf bascule bridge of the Page type was built in 1907 over the 
Chicago River by the Chicago & Alton Ry. It has a span of 150 ft., 
and there is an approach span of 64 ft. The superstructure, in- 
cluding electrical equipment for operation, cost ?115,000. The sub- 
structure, including the removal of an old pivot pier and some 
dredging of the channel, cost $50,000, making a total cost of $165,- 
000. Tlie substructure contained 3,200 cu. yds. of concrete. 

Cost of a Trunnion Bascule (Lift) Bridge.* — A trunnion bascule 
highway bridge was built at Clybourn Place, Chicago, in 1902, ac- 
cording to designs of Jolin Ericson, City Engineer. The bridge is a 
fixed center, double leaf, counterbalanced bascule, 128 ft. c. to c. 
of pivot bearings, and 120 ft. c. to c. of piers, witli a clear channel 
of 100 ft. between the guard piles that protect the piers. The 
length over all is 180 ft. Eacli leaf has tliree tlirougli trusses, 21 ft. 
c. to c, and the total widtli of the bridge is 60 ft., the sidewalks 
being carried on 9-ft. cantilever brackets. The motive power is two 
38 HP. motors. Tlie bed of the river is about 4 ft. below the 
lower chord of the bridge, and the water is 23 ft. deep. The sub- 
structure is of concrete resting on piles. The contract price wa.s 
$69,000 for substructure and $86,000 for superstructure, or a total 
of $155,000. Tlie weight of each leaf is 640,000 lbs. including struc- 
tural steel, cast iron rack, timber and counterweights. This is 
equivalent to nearly $1,300 per Iin. ft. of span between piers, or 
?860 per Iin. ft. of total length. 

Cost of a Trunnion Bascule (Lift) Bridge.*— A trunnion bascule 
highway bridge was built in 1903 at Northwestern avenue, Chi- 

* Engineering -Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 



1486 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

cago. It consists of two leaves, and the span between centers of 
trunnions is 205 ft., while tlie span between abutments is 190 ft., and 
the clear width of the channel is 165 ft. between the timber pro- 
tection works. There ai-e three lines of trusses 21 ft. c. to c, and 
9 ft. cantilever sidewalks, making a total width of 60 ft. There are 
two approach spans, one of 75 ft. and one of 17 ft. The total length 
of the bridge is 361 ft., and it contains 2,180,000 lbs. of structural 
steel, 1,400,000 lbs. of counterweight pig and cast iron, and 200,000 
lbs. of machinery-. The substructure consists of 4,500 cu. yds. of 
concrete and 300 cu. yds. of rubble curb walls for the approaches. 
The contract price for the substructure was $88,200, and ?208,50O 
for the superstructure, a total of $296,700. 

Weight of an 840 ft. Span Arch Bridge.* — The Niagara Falls and 
Clifton steel arch bridge was built in 1895-1 89 8. It consists of a 
main span of 840 ft. and two end spans, one of 190 ft. and the other 
of 210 ft., giving a total length of 1,240 ft. The main arch springs 
from the solid rock. The arch is two-hinged, parabolic, and has a 
rise of 137 ft. The end spans are pin-connected, inverted bow string 
trusses. The bridge carries on one level two lines of trolley car 
tracks, two carriageways and two sidewalks, having a total width of 
46 ft. There are 1,637 cu. yds. of masonry in the substructure. The 
materials used in the main span Avere as follows : 

Lbs. 

Two-arch trusses, not including laterals 1,673,356 

Laterals of arch 383,522 

Bents, including lateral bracing 450,577 

Longitudinal bracing 150,705 

Sl-vewbacks and slioes 226,634 

Floor system 766,287 

Total 3,651,081 

In addition there were : 

New York end span 344,862 

Canadian end span 371,733 

Hand rail and floor fastening.? 83,048 

Miscellaneous (field rivets, etc. ) 81,323 

Grand total 4,532,047 

There were 246,000 ft. B. M. of timber in the permanent flooring. 
Weight and Cost of a 195 ft. Span Arch Bridge.* — A steel arch 
highway bridge was built in 1900 across Nine-Mile Run, at Pitts- 
burg. The total length i;5 444 ft. The carriageway is 36 ft. wide, on 
each side of which is 6% -ft. cantilever sidewalk, making a total 
width of 49 ft. of floor. It consists of a steel arch span, 195 ft. c. 
to c. of pins, and a steel viaduct approach of five 24-ft. plate girder 
spans on each side of the arch span. The arch span is a pair of 
three-hinge plate girders. The sidewalks and carriageway are made 
of buckle plates and concrete, the carriageway being paved with 
asphalt. The arch has a rise of 59 ft. ; and, as the ground rises 
rapidly from the skewbacks toward each end of the bridge, the 
average height of the viaduct approaches is about half this rise, or 
30 ft. 

*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 



BRIDGIIS. 1487 

The materials were as follows : 

Structural steel (lbs.) 1,457,000 

Railing, 889 lin. ft. ( lbs. ) 6o!o00 

Stone Masonry (cu. yds.) 1,410 

Concrete (cu. yds.) '287 

Paving on roadway (aq. yds. ) 1,800 

Paving on sidewalk (sq. ft. ) S^SOO 

Curb (lin. ft.) 890 

The total contract cost was $86, .534, including .?535 for mill, shop 
and field inspection of the steel, or 70 cts. per ton for inspection. 

This is equivalent to $195 per lin. ft., or $4 per sq. ft. of floor. 

Weight of a 207 ft. Span Arch Bridpe.* — A single track, three- 
hinged steel arch bridge was finished in 1903 across the Menominee 
River, Michigan, for the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry., replac- 
ing a steel bridge built 17 years previously, which had grown too 
light for the traffic. The bridge is 355 ft. long, consisting of a 
three-hinged arch of 207 ft. span and four plate girder approach 
spans of 39% ft. each. The trusses are 22 ft. c. to c. The arch 
hq,s a rise of 52 ft. The bridge is designed according to Cooper's 
specifications for a live load of two consolidation Class E-50 loco- 
•motives and 7,000 lbs. per lin. ft. behind the engines. The weight 
of steel in the arch span is 480,000 lbs., and in the approach spans it 
is 150,000 lbs. 

Weight and Cost of a 440 ft. Span Arch Bridge.* — A steel high- 
way bridge was built in 1906 in Pittsburg. It is known as the Oak- 
land Bridge. It is 800 ft. long and has a roadway 20 ft. wide, with 
a 7 ft. cantilever sidewalk on each side. It consists of an arch hav- 
ing a span 440 ft. and a rise of 70 ft., and a steel viaduct approach 
at each end of the arch, the spans of the approach girders being 
30 to 40 ft. each. The arch span consists of two lattice girder arch 
ribs, abutting on concrete abutments built on the solid rock. The 
arch is not hinged. The cost of this bridge was $138,000, which is 
equivalent to $172 per lin. ft., or $4.50 per sq. ft. of floor area. 

Cost of Steel Arch Bridge.* — A steel highway bridge was built 
in 1906 across the Potomac River, at "Washington, D. C. The bridge 
is 1,000 ft. long between abutments, and consists of 6 three-hinged 
arch spans of 129 ft. each, and one two-leaf bascule span of 103 ft. 
Each of the arch spans has six plate girder ribs. The bridge is 4 8 
ft. wide between handrails, having two 6% ft. sidewalks and a 35 
ft. roadway. The rise of the arches is 14 ft., and the height of the 
piers averages about 65 ft. to the spring line. The concrete piers 
rest on pile foundations. The site of each pier had to be dredged 
before driving the piles. The low water surface is about 10 ft. 
below the spring line of the arches. The bridge cost $375,000, or 
$375 per lin. ft, or $7.80 per sq. ft. 

Weight of the Burlington Bridge of the C, B. & Q.f— In 1890 a 
double track steel railway bridge was built across the Mississippi 
River, at Burlington, for the C, B. & Q. R. R., to replace a single 

*Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 
■^Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 4, 1908. 



1488 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

track iron bridge built 22 years before. The 6 spans of 250 ft. each, 
weighed 3,340 lbs. per lin. ft. The draw span of 363 ft. weighed 
3,980 lbs. per lin. ft. The bridge was designed to carry a moving 
load of 6,000 lbs. per ft. of double track structure (3,000 lbs. per 
ft. of single track), this load being increased 50% in estimating 
the variable effect of a moving load. 

The cost of engineering was 5% of the total cost of piers and 
superstructure. 

Weight of a Double Track Draw Bridge, 195 ft. Span. — A double 
tracli swing bridge (through riveted truss) was built in 1901 across 
the Hackensack River, N. J., for the D., L. & W. Ry. Its weight 
is 1,206,000 lbs. and its length is 195 ft. 

Weight of a 533 ft. Span Railway Bridge and of a 323 ft. Draw 
Span Across the Delaware. — A double track railway bridge was 
built in 1896 across the Delaware River, at Bridesburg, for the 
Pennsylvania and N. J. R. R. Co. There are three spans of 533 
ft. each, and a draw span of 323 ft. The weight of steel in each 
of the three 533 ft. spans is 4,182,000 lbs. 

The weight of the steol in the draw span with riveted work is 1,- 
505,000 Ib.s., and the weight of the machinery is 356,000 lbs., total 
1,861,000 lbs. 

A steel traveler was used to erect the bridge. The traveler was 
110 ft. high, 46 ft. wide at the bottom and 81 ft. wide on top. Its 
weight was 292,000 lbs. without trucks. 

Weight of a Highway Cantilever Bridce, 1,024 ft. Long. — Mr. 

Gustave Kaufman gives the following data relative to the weight of 
a highway bridge at Cincinnati, built in 1890. 

The cantilever bridge has a span of 520 ft. c. to c. of piers, and 
the shore arms of the cantilever are each 252 ft. long, malcing a 
total length of 1,024 ft. This does not include several approach 
spans on each side. 

The weight of metal is as follows: 

Lbs. 

Shore arms of cantilever 1,376,978 

River arms of cantileve'.' 691,360 

Suspended span (208 ft.) 335,185 

Total 2,403,523 

It required % gal. of paint per ton of metal for two coats. 

The bridge trusses were designed for a live load of 80 lbs. per sq. 
ft. The stringers and floor beams were designed for. a live load of 
100 lbs. per sq. ft., or a 15-ton steam roller. The roadway con- 
sists of 6 lines of iron stringers riveted to iron floor beams, and 
covered with cross timbers, spaced 30 ins. c. to c, to which are 
spiked two layers of oak flooring having a total thickness of 5% ins. 
Tlie roadway is 2 ft. wide in the clear, and the sidewalks (which 
are on brackets outside of tlie trusses) are each 7% ft. wide in 
the clear. 

Estimating Cost of a Steel Bridae Erection. — The cost of erect- 
ing steel bridges should be separated into two main items: (1) 



BRIDGES. 1480 

cost of falsework, anrl (2) cost of erecting the steel. Usually, how- 
ever, engineers wlio liave published cost data have unfortunately 
lumped these two items together. 

The cost of falsework for any given bridge, and of a traveler of 
given design, can be estimated from the data given in the section 
on Timljerwork, and from data in the following pages. 

It should be remembered that railway plate girder bridges are 
usually ei-ected with little oi no falsework. Railway plate girders 
up to 80-ft. span, and occasionally up to 120-ft. span, are shipped 
as single pieces. Short girdei-s are skidded flat into position from 
the car and then turned on edge. Long girders may be lifted from 
the cars by gallows frames and lowered to position. 

Swing bridges are erected on the pile fender or guard pier, which 
serves as the falsework. Tliis makes the cost of erection much less 
tlian for truss bridges for which falsework must be built. 

Steel viaducts are erected with travelers, so that no falsework is 
required. 

The cost of materials and of labor on steel bridges should be 
recorded in terms of the pound of steel as the unit, or in terms of 
the ton of 2,000 lbs. 

Cost Per Lin. Ft. and Per Sq. Ft. — It is customai^y to state the 
cost of railway bridges in terms of the lineal foot of span, while the 
cost of highway bridges is preferably reduced to the square foot of 
floor area as the unit. However, it should be remembered that, in 
either case, the unit cost increases rapidlj^ as the span increases. 

The cost of viaducts is often given in terms of the sciuare foot of 
profile area ; but care should be taken to state whether the total 
profile area is estimated below the base of the railway rail, or below 
the top of the towers. 

Most Economical Span. — Mr. J. A. L. Waddell, M. Am. Soc. 
C. B., was, I believe, the first to enunciate the following theory (in 
1890) : "For any crossing, the greatest economy will be attained 
when the cost per lineal foot of the substructure is equal to the 
cost per lineal foot of the trusses and lateral systems." Note that 
the cost of the floor system, being practicallj^ independent of the 
length of the span, does not enter into this generalization. 

The following is the demonstration of this theory : Assume a 
bridge crossing of indefinite length, with the depth to bedrock con- 
stant. Let 

S = cost per lin. ft. of substructure. 

T = cost per lin. ft. of trusses and laterals. 

F = cost per lin. ft. of floor system. 

T = cost per lin. ft. of entire bridge. 

L = length of each span. 

Y = S+T + F. 

Assuming that slight changes in L will not materially affect the 
size of the piers, S will vary inversely as L, hence 

K 
S = , K being a constant. 



1490 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

But, for slight changes of L, T varies nearly directly as L, hence 
T = C L, C being a constant. Since F is practically a constant, being 
a function of panel length and not of span length, we have 

K 

Y = • h C i +F, 

L 

in which Y is to be made a minimum. Differentiating we have 

— K d L flY— S 

(lY := \- C d L, whence, by putting = O, we have 

i2 ' dL L. 

T 
H = O, or S = T. 

A further differentiation sliows that the result corresponds to a 
minimum. Although no bridge is indefinite in length, and although 
ledge rock usually is found at different depths, still this same prin- 
ciple may be applied to each pier and the two spans that it helps to 
support, by making the cost of the pier equal to one-half the total 
cost of the trusses and laterals of the two spans. 

The principle obviously applies to trestles, viaducts and elevated 
roads. 

In an ordinary viaduct, consisting of alternate spans and towers, 
the cost of all the girders in two spans (one span being over the 
tower), plus the cost of the longitudinal bracing of one tower, 
sliould equal the cost of the two bents of the tower plus the cost 
of tlieir masonry pedestals. 

In an elevated railway, the cost of the stringers or girders of one 
span should equal the cost of one bent, including its pedestals. 

The Life of Steel' Railway Bridges.* — Considering the economic 
importance of the subject, it is astonishing that no tabulated sta- 
tistics as to the life of American steel railway bridges can be found 
in print. 

Bridge engineers are accustomed to denominate wooden bridges 
as "temporary," while they call steel bridges "permanent." The 
annual reports of railway managers to stockholders contain these 
expressions, and there is a general acquiescence in the propriety 
of their application. But the facts are that steel railway bridges 
are so far from being permanent that they, too, should be classed 
as temporary. 

We must not be misunderstood as decrying the lasting qualities 
of steel itself, for there is abundant evidence that iron and steel 
are exceedingly lasting under certain conditions. Let us illustrate. 

The "first iron railway bridge" was built in 1823, for the Stock- 
ton & Darlington Ry., at West Auckland, England, and was not 
removed until 1903, after 80 years of service. This bridge is illus- 
trated and described in the "Railroad Gazette," July 8, 1904, p. 125. 
The bridge was, in fact, an iron trestle with cast iron posts and 
four iron spans of 12 ft. 8 ins. each. The spans consisted of double 
arch members of wrought iron united by cast iron struts. 



*Engineerinff-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 1491 

As is well known, the life of an iron or street railway bridge ia 
not limited by the durability of the bridge, but by Its ability to with- 
stand the steadily increasing loads imposed upon it. 

The average age of the 1,000 locomotives in use on the Northern 
Pacific Railway is 10.4 years. There are in service (or, at least, 
there were two years ago) several locomotives 34 years old. This 
road has been in existence so long that Its rolling stock may be 
said to have reached a condition of normal renewals. Wlien a con- 
dition of normal renewals is reached as to cross ties, the life of the 
average tie is just twice the age of the existing a^•erage tie. If the 
age of the average tie is found to be 5 years, and a condition of 
normal renewals of 10 per cent per annum exists. In like manner, 
rolling stock ultimately approximates a condition of normal re- 
newals. It does not reach exactly that condition, due to the steady 
growth of traffic on the railway. But, if we multiply the 10.4 
years by 2, we have 20.8 years, which is the approximate average 
life of locomotives on the Northern Pacific Ry. Due to the in- 
crease in the number of locomotives each year, the true average 
life is slightly greater than the 20.8 years thus ascertained. 

Since there has been a complete renewal of locomotives in about 
20 years, and since the locomotives have grown progressively' heav- 
ier, it is logical to look for a renewal of steel bridges in about the 
same length of timef and in fact that is what has occurred. Table 
I shows the life of 10 bridges. 

Table I. — Si-iowikg Life of Tex Railway Bridges. 

Item Location of V\'hen Life, 

No. Name of R. R. Bridge. Built. Years. 

1 C, M. & St. P Rock River 1884 19 

2 Wabash Sangamon River 1SS5 21 

3 C, B. & Q Big Rock Creek 1881 22 

4 111. Cent Big Muddy River 1889 13 

5 111. Cent Tennessee River 18SS 17 

6 C. & N. W Kinnikinnic River... 1880 19 

7 P. M St. Joseph River 1887 17 

8 Grand Trunk Niagara 1877 19 

9 C, M. & St. P Menominee Rirer 1886 17 

10 C. R. R. of N- J Newark Bay 1887 17 

Average of the above ... IS.l 

It will be noted tliat the average life of these 10 steel railway 
bridges has been 18.1 years. "When it is remembered that the life 
of an uncovered Howe truss wooden bridge is rarely less than 10 
years and is frequently 20 years (see committee report of the As- 
sociation of Railway Superintendents of Bridges and Buildings, 
October, 1899), what becomes of the designation "permanent" as 
applied to steel in contrast with wooden railwaj^ bridges? The 
consensus of opinion given in the report above cited was to the 
effect that a Howe truss, properly housed in, would last more than 
40 years. A housed in wooden highway bridge, of the Howe truss 
type, was taken down at Zanesville, Ohio, after 6.5 years of service. 

With such statistics before us, we are forced to conclude that 
most railway bridge engineers have fallen into serious error in 
not giving proper consideration to the temporary character of steel 
railway bridges as heretofore designed. 



1492 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

'Wliile we cannot predict with accuracy what the increase in rail- 
way bridge loading will be in the future, there is nothing more cer- 
tain than that an increase will occur. Since the first railway was 
built, there has been a steady growth in the size of locomotives and 
cars. When will it cease? No man can tell. Therefore, if we 
plan for tlie future upon the teachings of the past SO years, we must 
either make due allowance for increased weight of rolling stock 
when designing steel railway bridges, or we must cease calling 
them "permanent" and apply to them, as to timber bridges, their 
proper designation, "temporary." 

In addition to the important bearing that such statistics as are 
here given have upon bridge design, there is the further impor- 
tance of such data in solving problems of railway appraisal. In 
making his appraisal of railways of Washington for the State Rail- 
road Commission, Mr. H. P. Gillette had to make an estimate of 
the "present value" of all structures. Nearly all the steel railway 
bridges in Washington are comparatively new, and, as the ap- 
praisal of the railways was made primarily for rate making pur- 
poses, Mr. Gillette assigned no depreciation to the steel bridges. 
This gave the railways more than "the benefit of the doubt," for 
there can be no doubt that there is no real permanency in steel 
railway bridges as at present designed. For taxation purposes, it 
is clear that a depreciation of about 5 per cent per annum should 
be made from the first cost of all steel railway bridges. 

Even a casual study of bridge books and bridge literature must 
impress an engineer with the lack of attention that engineers have 
given to this all important subject of the life of bridges. The text 
books treat the problems of bridge design largely as problems in 
pure mathematics and mechanics, and ignore many equally impor- 
tant principles of bridge economics. Most of the de- 
signers of reinforced concrete railway bridges are making the same 
blunders tliat have characterized the designers of steel railway 
bridges, namely, designing for present loadings without provision 
for the future. 

Life of Railway Bridges. — Mr. J. E. Greiner states that the life of 
Iron or steel railvA^ay bridges "has been scarcely 25 years," due to 
the steady increase in the weight of locomotives. He gives the 
following table of weights of locomotives in the Baltimore & Ohio 
Ry., for 60 years: 

Year. Weight in tons. 

18.3.5. . .; 10.7 

1851 37.3 - 

1863 45.4 

1873 52.6 

1881 54.3 

1886 56.6 

1890 66.5 

1894 80.4 

1895 95.0 (electric) 

The increase between 1885 and 1895 has been 75%, or 7l^% per 
annum. The increase between 1835 and 1895 has been 788% for 60 
years, or 13% per annum. 



BRIDGllS. 1 l!i:i 

/>.moiint of Work Done Per Man in a Laroe Bridne Works.— At 
the Pencoyd Vvofks of the Ameiitan Bridge Co. ihi.- followine was 
the amount of work done in the first lialf of the year ISiOl : Tlie 
number of men employed was 765 (of wliom ;>8 wei-e draftsmen) 
and the output was 82,600,000 lbs. in 6 mos., or nearly 13,800,000 
lbs. per mo. The average output per man per month was, there- 
fore, 18,300 lbs. The output of oar-h of the different classes of 
men was as follows per month : 

Pounds. 

Draftsmen (08 menl 1 40.000 

Templaters (30 men) 455,000 

Bridge shop 21,300 

Forge ] 1,000 

Eye-bar shop 35,400 

The output per draftsman was found by dividing the total out- 
put of the works by the number of draftsmen employed ; in likes 
manner the output per templater was calculated ; but the output of 
each man in the bridge shop, forge and eye-bar shop was calcu- 
lated only on the basis of the number of pounds handled in each 
of those departments. 

Cost of Erecting A., T. & S. F. Ry. Bridges. — The average cost 
per ton of the bridges erected on the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe 
Ry., in 1907, all of which were on the main line of this railway, 
and consequently made it necessary to contend with all ti-ains was 
as follows : 

Per ton. 

Trusses, 9S4 tons erected ?4.63 

Girders, 2.784 tons erected 5.49 

I-beams, 2,837 tons erected 2.88 

All the girders and I-beams were erected with steam wrecker 
and through spans with the derrick car. it will be noticed that the 
girder work cost more than the trusses, the reason for this being 
that a good part of the girder work was on second track, where one 
girder had to be cut apart and moved to the outside and a heavier 
girder set in its place. The bridge gang traveled over a territory 
of 5,000 miles and the cost of moving was also charged to the 
bridges. The riveting was done by hand. 

Falsework for a Railway Bridge.* — The new Havre de Grace 
bridge for the Pennsylvania R. R. in Maryland of 255 ft. and one 
of 192 ft., is a double track deck truss structure about 4,115 ft. 
long composed of one 280-ft. swing span and 17 fixed spans from 
192 ft. to 255 ft. long. The swing span and the 8 fixed spans were 
fabricated and erected by the American Bridge Co. The ' swing 
span was erected up and down stream on the fender, and the fixed 
spans were erected on pile trestle falsework. The construction of 
the falsework trestle, the method of its erection, and the total and 
unit quantities of lumber used are given in this article from data 
furnished by Mr. H. F. Lofland, General Manager of Erection, 
American Bridge Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 

♦Abstracted from Engineering-Contracting, June 5, 1907, but 
omitting the drawings. 



1494 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Under the shore span (192 ft.) a falsework of framed bents 
constructed was employed. In deeper water pile bents were used 
with the caps directly on the pile tops and every other panel braced. 
The number of piles in a bent was increased with the increase in 
the depth of water ; for spans 2, 3, 8 and 9 six pile bents were used, 
■ and for spans 4 and 7 eight pile bents, while spans 5 and 6 had 
double bents of eight piles each. The 8-pile double bents were two 
bents of 8 piles each, the bents being spaced 4 ft. c. to c. The 
longitudinal bracing was universally 4x8-in. stuff for diagonals and 
6x8 in. stuff for horizontals. 

The method of construction was to drive the piles for all nine 
spans complete, then to cofnplete the falseworks for the first five 
spans and finally to transfer the caps and bracing to spans 6, 7, 
8 and 9 from preceding spans as fast as these were erected. The 
piles ran from 50 to 90 ft. in length and were driven to a pene- 
tration of 25 ft. in all spans except 5 and 6, where a penetration 
of only 20 ft. was permitted. The schedule of piles for the several 
spans was as follows : 
Spans. , No. piles. Total lin. ft. 

2-3 48 2,400 

3-4 48 2,550 

4-5 64 4,320 

5-6 128 9,920 

6-7 128 11,200 

7-8 64 4,400 

8-9 48 2,760 

9-10 48 2,880 

Total 576 40,430 

There were, therefore, about 18 lin. ft. of piling used for lineal 
foot of span, not counting the posts in the pier bents. 

The falseworks were proportioned for a maximum concentrated 
live load at one corner of the traveler of 35,000 lbs. ; it was also 
proportioned for the following panel loads; 192-ft. span, dead load 
due to steel superstructure, 45,000 lbs., live load due to haviling 
out materials, 24,000 lbs. ; 255-ft. spans, dead load, 79,000 lbs., live 
load, 35,000 lbs. As stated above, caps and bracing for spans 2, 
3, 4 and 5 were reared in spans 6, 7, 8 and 9. The total falsework 
in addition to piling was then : 
Span. Description. Ft. B. M. 

1-2 — Bents and bracing 22,720 

2-3 — Caps and bracing 12,147 

3-4 — Caps and bracing 12,147 

4-5 — Caps and bracing 20,325 

5-6 — Caps and bracing i . . . 31,824 

Total 99,163 

This total is exclusive of the timber in the posts of the pier 
bents. These posts are 12x12 ins., and average about 41 ft. in 
length ; there are four posts to each bent and 17 bents. They con- 
tain, therefore. 492 X 4 X 17 = 33,4 56 ft. B. M., which, added to the 
above total, gives 132,619 ft. B. M., or 60 ft. B. M. per lineal foot 
of bridge (river spans). The total weight of steel in the river 



BRIDGES. MO.j 

spans was 16,000 tons, so that there were used 6.74 lin. ft. of pilins 
and about 22.1 ft. B. M. of falsework timber per ton of steel. 

Cost of a Steel Railway Bridge and Foundations.— Mr. "\V. A. 
Rogers gives the following data relative to erecting a 4-span single 
track bridge across Grand River, Mo., for the C, M. & St. P. Ry. in 
1895. Tlie 4 spans were 138 ft. long each, and weighed 178,600 
lbs. each. The work was done by company forces at the follow- 
ing cost : 

Falsework — 

Materials $1,606.90 

Labor l,S34.y!) 

Train service 150.00 

Total $3,591.89 

Two I'ilf Piers — 

Material Sj 420.24 

Labor 2S7.00 

Train service 40.00 

Total § 747.24 

Foundation Three Masonry Piers — 

Material (pile.s and timber grillage)....? 601.40 
Labor 1,773.00 

Total $2,374.40 

Stoneioork Three Masonry Piers — 

343,080 lbs. stone $2,061.93 

501 sacks cement 176.90 

Miscellaneous material 22.94 

Labor 3,485.53 

Total $5,747.30 

Iron Superstructure — 

700,009 lbs. wrought iron $17,216.91 

14,489 lbs. cast iron 195.43 

Miscellaneous 21.06 

Labor erecting 1,952.97 

Train service 96.78 

Total $19,483.15 

Floor — 

Materials $1,051.32 

Labor 292.82 

Total $ 1,344.14 

Moving the Spans — 

Materials $ 136.62 

Labor 521.99 

Train service 58.20 

Total $ 716.81 

Removing old pile piers, pulling piles, 

and removing falsework 593.05 

Removing driftwood (burning) 938.78 

Night watchman 465.50 

Engineering 1,145.96 

Grand total , $37,148.22 

This is equivalent to nearly $70 per lin. ft. for the 552 lin. ft. 



1496 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The first item of falsework includes taking down 4 old Howe truss 
bridges. The falsework item amounts to $6.53 per lin. ft., and is 
equivalent to 0.5 cts. per lb. of iron in the bridge. The erection of 
the iron cost 0.29 ct. per lb., which added to the 0.5 ct. makes a 
total of about 0.8 ct. per lb. for erection and falsework, or $16 
per ton. 

The stone masonry required 4,800 lbs. of stone in the rough per 
cu. yd., and cost $8.04 per cu. yd., of which $4.87 was labor. 

The floor, or deck, cost $22.22 per 1,000 ft. B. M., or $2.44 per 
lin. ft. for labor and materials, of which $0.52 per lin. ft. was for 
labor. 

The four spans were erected on the old piers and subsequently 
moved 30 ft. lengthwise on rollers riding on temporary plate girder 
spans; the cost of this moving was $179 per span, or 0.1 ct. per lb. 
It took 6% days to move the spans, although it took only 15 mins. 
to pull a span from the old pier to the new, using a locomotive. 

Engineering was 3% of the total cost. 

Cost of a Steel Bridae of 155-ft. Span. — The following data ap- 
peared in Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 3, 1907, and relate to the 
cost of building a steel railway bi-idge of 155 ft. span (total weight 
131 tons), to take the place of an old Howe truss bridge. Two con- 
crete abutments on pile foundations were built at a cost of $2,600 
each, or $5,200 for both abutments. There was nothing unusual 
about this abutment work, so its cost will not be given in detail. 
All work was done by "company forces," and the itemized cost is 
given below. 

Wages were $3.40 per 10-hour day for foreman, $2.50 for bridge- 
men, and $2.00 for laborers. The engineman on the hoisting en- 
gine received $2.50 a day, and the fireman received $2.00. In trav- 
eling to and from the site of the work, the time of the men amount- 
ed to 16 days. 

Time- traveling, 16 days, at $2.50 $ 40.00 

Erecting Traveler — 

3 days at $3.40 $ 10.20 

30 days at $2.50 75.00 

9 days at $2 18.00 

$ 103.20 

Rigging Blocks and Tackle on Traveler — 

1/2 day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

6 days at $2.50 15.00 

IVa days at $2 3.00 

$ 19.70 

Loading Engine on Derrick Car for Erection — 

Va day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

6 days at $2.50 15.00 

IVa days at $2 3.00 

$ 19.70 

Taking Traveler Down — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

6 days at $2.50 15.00 

2 days at $2 4.00 

$ 22.40 



BRIDGES. 1 iDi 

Picking Up Tools After Erection — 

4 days at $2.50 S looo 

Unloading Bridge Uteel — 

. 2 Va clays at $3.40 .« s.70 

19 days at $2.50 47. 50 

6 days at $2 12.00 

5 G8.20 

Painting hiaccessible Parts with Tioo Coats — 

8 davs at $2.50 .«; oq 00 

14 days at $2 liS.OO 

$ 48.00 

Erecting Bridge Trusses — 

6 days at $3.40 .? 20.40 

9(5 days at $2. .50 240.00 

6 days (enginemen) at $2. .50 15.00 

G days (liremen) at $2 12.00 

$ 287.40 

Removing Old Deck and Pony Bents to Erect Floor Sgstein — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

9 days at $2.50 22.50 

? 25.90 

Putting in Steel Floor System — 

2 days at $3.40 % 6. SO 

32 days at $2.50 81.25 

2 days at $2 4. 00 

2V. days (ensinemen) at $2.50 6.25 

$ 103.30 

Getting tools, etc., ready for riveting — 

4 days at $2.50 $ 10.00 

Riveting — 

40 days at S3 $120.00 

40 days at $2.50 100.00 

9 days (.blacksmith) at $3 27.00 

$ 247.00 

Putting in Maclvjie Fit Bolts — 

2 days at $3.40 $ 6. SO 

8 days at $2.50 20.00 

$ 26.80 

Timber Deck — Handling Ties — 

i/> day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

3 days at $2.50 7.50 

1 day at $2 2.00 

$ 11.20 

Framing Ties — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

5 days at $2.50 12.50 

4 days at $2 8.00 

$ 23.90 

Placing and Fitting Ties — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

7 days at $2.50 17.50 

$ 20.90 

Framing and Fitting Guard Rail — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

4 davs at $2.50 10.00 

2 days at $2 4.00 

$ 17.40 

Boring and Bolting Guard Rail and Ties — 

8 days at $2.50 $ 20.00 

Total labor on supersti-ucture $1,125.00 



1498 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This is equivalent to practically $7.30 per lineal foot of bridge, 
or $8.59 per ton. The labor cost per ton of bridge may be sum- 
marized as follows: 

Per ton. • 

General labor, $215 $1.64 

Unloading steel, $68.20 52 

Painting inaccessible parts, $48 37 

Removing old deck, $25.90 20 

Erecting trusses and floor system, $390.70 2.98 

Riveting and machine bolts, $283.80 2 17 

Timber deck work, $93.40 71 

Total $S.59 

Strictly speaking, the items of labor on the timber deck should 
not be cliarged as a part of the cost of work on the steel portion 
of tlie bridge. The labor on the ties and guard rails, it will be 
seen, amounted to 60 cts. per lineal foot of bridge. It will be noted 
that there is no charge for fuel used by the hoisting engine, nor for 
transportation charges on the engine and materials for the traveler. 
Tlie hoisting engine was in use 9 days, so that the fuel item could 
not have exceeded $30, and was doubtless much less. 

The following is a summary of the total cost of this steel bridge 
on its concrete abutments : 

Two concrete abutments $ 5,200.00 

Renio\-ing old bridge 200.00 

Falsework 1,220.00 

Bunk house 40.00 

Materials in superstructure 7,200.00 

Labor erecting superstructure 1,125.00 

Engineering and inspection 585.00 

Total $15,570.00 

This is practically $100 per lineal foot of bridge, including cost 
of abutments. 

It will be noted that the false work cost about $8 per lineal foot 
of bridge, and amounted to a little more than the labor cost of 
erecting the bridge; but this cost of $1,220 for false work included 
both labor and materials. The cost of false work' for ordinary 
bridges like this can be estimated as equivalent to the cost of a 
pile trestle, unless the height of the lower chord of the bridge above 
the bed of the river is so great as to necessitate building one or 
more decks of framed bents on top of the pile bents. 

Cost of a Steel Bridge of 180-ft. Span.* — In our last issue we gave 
details of the cost of erecting a railway bridge of 155 ft. span. 
The general remarks relating to that bridge also apply to the one 
discussed in this article. Both bridges were through spans, riveted 
trusses, on concrete piers, erected by company forces. This 180-ft. 
bridge had a total weight of 172 tons. The cost of erecting the 
bridge was as follows : 

Building Traveler — 

11/2 days, foreman, at $3.40 $ 5.10 

11 days, carpenters, at $2.50 27.50 

$ 32.60 



■'Enrjineerino- Contracting, Apr. 10, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 149'J 

Erecting Traveler — 

1 '/•! <1ays, foreman, at $o. 10 % 5.10 

12 (lays, carpenters, at $:2.50 oO.OO 

10 days, laborers, at $2.25 22.50 

Vi day, work train at $25 12.50 

$ 70.10 

Rigging Traveler with Blocks, Tackle, etc. — 

IMi days at ^.'J.IO ^ 5.10 

10 days at $2.50 25. (10 

10 days at $2.25 22.50 

? .52.60 

Taking Down Traveler — 

1/0 day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

5 days at $2.50 12.50 

5 days at $2.25 11.25 

1 da.v, stationary engineer, at $3 3.00 

? 28.45 

Gathering Up Tools, Engine, etc.. After Erecting — 

1 day at $3.40 $ .'..^ 

5 davs at $2.50 12.50 

3 days at $2.25 t;.75 

1 day, woi'k train, at $25 25.00 

§ 47.65 

Raising Derrick for Unloading Bridge Materials — 

V' day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

21/2 days at $2.50 6.25 

3 days at $2.25 6.75 

1 liour, stationary engineer, at 30c .30 

1 laour, worli train, at $2.50 2.50 

$ 17.50 

Building Platform for Bridge Materials — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.4 

8 days at $2.50 20.00 

10 days, laborers, at $2.25 22.50 

§ 45.90 

Unloading Bridge Steel — 

2i/> days at $3.40 $ 8.50 

7 days at $2.50 17.50 

14 days at $2.25 31.50 

2V;> days, stationary engineer, at $3 7.50 

1 day, work train 25.00 

5 S9.00 

Painting Inaccessible Parts, Two Coats — 

6 days at $3.40 $ 20.40 

4 days at $2.50 lo.(tO 

21 days at $2.25 47.25 

$ 77.65 

' Unloading and Placing Stationary Engine for Erecting Bridge — ■ 

1/0 day at $3.40 - $ 1.70 

4"days at $2.50 10.00 

4 days at $2.25 9.00 

1 day, stationary engineer 3.00 

? 23.70 

Erecting Steel Trusses — 

5 days at $3.40 $17.20 

40 days at $2.50 100.00 

40 days at $2.25 90.00 

5 days, stationary engineer, at $3.00 15.00 

1 day, work train 25.00 

$ 247.20 



1500 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Taking Out Pony Bents to Erect Floor System — 

21/2 clays at $:i.50 $ 6.25 

2 days at $2.25 4.50 

-' ? 10.75 

Putting in Steel Floor System — 

5 days at $.3.40. . $ 17.20 

30 days at $2.50 75.00 

26 days at $2.25 58.50 

4 days, stationary engineer, at $3 12.00 

? 162.70 

Riveting — 

50 days at $3 $150.00 

60 days at $2.50 150.00 

32 days at $2.25 71.00 

15 days, blacksmith, at $2.50 37.50 

$ 40S.50 

Putting in Machine Fit Bolts — 

1 day at $3 $ 3.00 

4 days at $2.50 10.00 

9 days at $2.25 20.25 

$ 33.25 

Timber Deck — Framing Ties — 

114 days at $3.40 $ 5.10 

8 days at $2.50 20.00 

4 days at $2.25 9.00 

$ 34.10 

Placing and Fitting Ties — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

21/0 days at $2.50 6.25 

9 days at $2.25 20.25 

$ 29.90 

Framing and Fitting Guard Rail — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

4 davs at $2.50 10.00 

4 days at $2.25 9.00 

$ 22.40 

Boring and Bolting Guard Rail and Ties — 

7 davs at $2.50 $ 17.50 

1 day at $2.25 2.25 

$ 19.75 

Taking Out Old Deck — 

1/2 day at $3.40 $ 1.70 

1 day at $2.50 2.50 

1 1/3 days at $2.25 3.35$ 7.55 

Total labor $1,461.25 

This is equivalent to $8.10 per lin. ft. of bridge, or $8.48 per ton. 

It will be seen that it took 50 days of labor, including foreman, 
• but excluding work train crew, to erect the bridge, thus making 
the average wage about $2.60 per day of 10 hours. 

In comparing labor costs per unit of work done, it is always 
well to state the average wage paid, for, otherwise, serious errors 
may be inade in comparing unit costs given only in dollars and 
cents. Wages have been rising so rapidly within recent years that 
the necessity of stating the average wage is more urgent than ever. 

The wages of the foreman constituted 7 per cent of the total 
wages paid. 



BRIDGES. ■ 1501 

The cost per ton for erecting this bridge may bo summarized 
as follows : 

Per ton. 

Preparing and dismantling plant, $318.50 $1.85 

Unloading steel, if 89 5:j 

Painting inaccessible parts, $77.65 45 

Erecting trusses and floor system, $4:i0.ti5 2!'45 

Riveting and machine bolting. .?141.75 2!55 

Timber deck work, $113.70 66 

Total $8.48 

It will be seen that the work on the timber deck cost 63 cents per 
lin. ft. of bridge. 

The total cost of this bridge on concrete abutments with pile 
foundations was as follows : 

Two concrete abutments, materials and lalior .$ 4.700 

Materials tor superstructure 9,500 

L,abor erecting superstructure 1,461 

Falsework and removal of old bridge 2,800 

Engineering and superintendence 370 

Total $18,831 

This is practically $105 per lineal foot of bridge, including abut- 
ments. 

Cost of Two Steel Truss Bridges of 180-ft. Span, and One Plate 
Lattice Girder Bridge of 100-ft. Span.- — In our issue of April 10, wo 
gave the detailed cost of erecting a steel bridge of 180 ft. span. 
The following data relate to two spans, also of 180 ft. each, on 
which the labor of erection cost was very much less per ton than 
the cost given in our issue of April 10. This difference appears to 
have been due to better management and more efficient workmen on 
the work about to be described. These two 180-ft. spans were 
erected by a contractor, and the costs are the actual costs to the 
contractor, exclusive of contractor's profits. The bridges were 
single track, through, riveted trusses erected with a traveler. The 
average force engaged was as follows : 

1 General foreman at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 Carpenter foreinan at 4.00 4.00 

1 Sub-foreman at 3.50 3.50 

7 Riveters, etc., at 3.25 22.75 

10 Bridgemen at 3.00 30.00 

8 Carpenters at 2.75 22.00 

3 Laborers at 3.50 7.50 

1 Stationary engineman at 3.25 3.25 

1 Water boy at 1.50 1.50 

33 Total men $3.00 $99.50 

It will be noted that the average wage paid was $3 per day of 
10 hours, as compared with $2.60 on the bridge described in our 
issue of April 10. No attempt was made to record the exact cost 
of each item of the work, but account was kept of the number of 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 8, 1907. 



1502 • HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

men and the number of days required to perform each item of the 
work, and the average wage was assumed to be $3 per man day. 

Preparatory Work — 

50 Man days traveling at ?3 $ 150.00 

50 Man days erecting traveler and derricks at $3 150.00 

12 Man days taking down same 36.00 

40 Man days removing old floor at $3 120.00 

20 Man days unloading steel and ties . 60.00 

Steel Work — 

70 Man days putting in new steel floor system at 

$3 : 210.00 

100 Man days erecting steel trusses at $3 300.00 

125 Man days riveting • 375.00 

Timber Deck — 

20 Man days framing ties at $3 $ 60.00 

30 Man days laying floor at $3 90.00 

Painting — 

46 Man days, first coat 138.00 

42 Man days, second coat ; 126.00 

Total labor $1,815.00 

Wear of tools, ropes, etc 100.00 

Coal for engine and blacksmith 70.00 

Total $1,985.00 

The steel in each of the two bridges weighed 170 tons, or 340 tons 
in both bridges, or 1,800 lbs. per lin ft. Summarizing the cost of 
erection, we have : 

Per ton. 

Lost time traveling, $150 $0.44 

Erecting and taking down plant, $186 0.55 

Removing old floor system, $120 0.35 

Unloading steel and ties, $60 0.18 

Steel work, $855 2.60 

Timber deck work, $1.50 0.44 

Painting, $264 0.78 

Wear of tools, $100 0.30 

Coal, $70 0.20 

Total $5.84 

The above does not include the cost of erecting the falsework, 
but it includes the item of "removing old floor system" or the wood- 
en bridge which was replaced by the new steel bridge. 

It will be noted that the labor on the timber deck of the new 
bridge cost only $150, which is equivalent to 40 cts. per lin. ft. 
This is about two-thirds the cost of similar work given in our issue 
of April 10. In fact the whole cost of erection was correspondingly 
less in this bridge work, in spite of the fact that the daily wages 
averaged 15 per cent higher. A comparative study of this sort will 
frequently disclose unsuspected inefficiency of men and foremen. 

We shall next consider the cost of erecting a steel plate lattice 
girder of 100 ft. span. This girder was erected by company forces, 
and it replaced a wooden bridge. The weight of the steel was 82 
tons, or 1,640 lbs. per lin. ft. It was erected by a force of 18 men 
in 10 days, including 2 days spent in traveling, and the average 



BRIDGES. 1503 

wage paid was ?3.1S per day, including the foremen in the aver- 
age. The foremen's wages amounted to 13 per cent of the total 

wages paid, which was an unusually high percentage. The rate 
of wages were as follows : 

General foreman $ 5.00 

Sub-foreman 3.50 

Drivers of rivets 3.25 

Heaters of rivets 3.00 

Buckerup of rivets 3.00 

Bridgemen . . . , 3.00 

Carpenters 2.75 

Stationary engineman 3.25 

Time Traveling — 

2 days at $5.00 $ 10.00 

2 days at 3.50 7.00 

12 days at 3.25 39.00 

18 days at 3.00 54.00 

4 days at 2.75 11.00 

38 days total at $3.18 S121.00 

Rigging — 

1 day at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 day at 3.50 3.50 

4 days at 3.50 13.00 

6 days at 3.00 18.00 

12 days total at $3.30 $ 39.50 

Loading Tools — 

2 days at $5.00 $ 10. OO 

2 days at 3.50 7.00 

5 days at 3.25 16.25 

5 daj'-s at 3.00 15.00 

14 days total at $3.45 $ 48.25 

Steel Work — Erecting Girders — 

1 day at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 day at 3.50 3.50 

4 days at 3.25 13.00 

6 days at 3.00 IS.OO 

12 days at $3.30 $ 39.00 

Erecting Floor System — 

1 day at $5.00 $ 5.0O 

1 day at 3.50 3.50 

10 days at 3.25 32.50 

12 days at 3.00 36.00 

24 days total at $3.21 $ 77.00 

Riveting — 

2 days at $5.00 $ 10.00 

2 days at 3.50 7.00 

18 days at 3.25 58.50 

20 days at 3.00 60.00 

42 days total at $3.23 $135.50 

Tiinier Deck — 

6 days framing ties at $2.75 $ 16.50 

12 days laying floor at 2.75 33.00 

18 days total at $2.75 ? 49.50 



1504 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Painting — 

10 days at ?3.25 ? 32.50 

10 days at 3.00 30.00 

20 days total at ?3.12 ? 62.50 

Total labor ?572.75 

Wear of tools 35.00 

Coal 10.25 

Total $618.00 

Summary — 

Per ton. 

Traveling $121.00 $1.48 

Rigging 39.50 0.48 

Loading tools 48.25 0.50 

Steel work 252.00 3.08 

Timber deck 49.50 0.60 

Painting 62.50 0.76 

Tools and coal 45.25 0.55 

Total $618.00 $7.54 

It will be noted that the cost of work on the timber deck wa& 
491/2 cts. per lin. ft. 

The cost of building the false work is not included in the above 
estimate. 

Cost of Erecting a Draw Bridge of 236-ft. Span.* — This single 
track railway bridge has a span of 236 ft., and a length of 239 ft. 
over all. Trusses are 16 ft. c. to c, and the depth of truss is 
uniform and 25 ft. c. to c. of chord pins. The center panel is 16 ft. 
and the remaining 10 panels are each 22 ft. The bridge is designed 
to be turned by hand only, and has a drum 22% ft. x 4% ft. The 
bridge was designed for a live load of 3,300 lbs. per lin. ft. 

The total weight of the metal is 433,300 lbs., distributed as 

follows : 

Lbs. 

Trusses 205,60 

Lateral bracing 20,000 

Floor system 107,000 

Turntable — 

Drum (221/, ft. diam.) -. . 21,400 

Wheels (46) 16,200 

Track 11,100 

Rack 4,900 

Tread pis 5,200 

Gearing and journal boxes 25,400 

End lift 10,200 

End supports 6,300 

Total 433,300 



*Engineermg-Contracting, Aug. 21, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1505 

The itemized cost (to the contractor) of election was as follows: 
General Expense: 

7.5 days, foreman at $5.00 ^ 37.50 

44 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 \\\ 132!oo 

34 days, laborers, at $2.00 \\\ 6s!oO 

10 days, watchman, at $2.00 ' ' " ''O 00 

3 days, blacksmith, at $3.00 \\\\ oloo 

98.5 Total labor, at $2.67 $->66 50 

3,000 ft. B. M. in traveler, at $25 75.'00 

Total $341.50 

Thus $341 includes the cost of ei-ecting a derrick to unload the 
Bteel from cars, the labor of making and erecting traveler. 

Erection of Steel Work: 

19 days, foreman, at $5.00 $ 95.00 

110 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 33o!o0 

80 days, riveters, at $3.00 240!00 

73 days, heaters and buckers, at $::!.00 146.00 

84 days, laborers, at $2.00 168.00 

366 Total labor, at $2.65 $ 969.00 

30 days' rent of hoisting engine, at $3.00 90 00 

10 tons coal, at $3.00 3o!oO 

Total $1,089.00 

The engineman received the same wages as tlie In-idgrmen and 
was classed with them. 

3 days, foreman, at $5.00 $ 15.00 

9 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 27.00 

80 days, painters, at $2.50 200.00 

92 days total labor $242.00 

Total materials and labor $337.00 

Timber Deck (11,000 ft. B. M.): 

3 days, foreman, at $5.00 $15.00 

26 days, carpenters, at $2.75 71.50 

3 days, laborers, at $2.00 6.00 

32 days total labor, at $2.90 $92.50 

It will be noted that the labor of framing and placing the timber 
deck (i. e., the ties, guard rails, etc.), cost $5.50 per M., or 38 cts. 
per lln. ft. of bridge. 

Since the bridge weighed 433,000 lbs., or 216.5 tons, the cost per 
ton for erection may be summarized as follows : 

General Expense: Per ton. 

Labor $ 266.50 $1.23 

Material for traveler 75.00 0.35 

Erecting Steel: 

Labor $ 969.00 $4.49 

Rent of engine 90.00 0.42 

Coal for engine , 30.00 0.14 



1506 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Painting: 

Materials ? 95.00 $0.44 

Labor 242.00 1.11 

Timber declv 92.50 0.42 

Total $1,860.00 $8.60 

This work was done by a contractor who received $12 per ,,^n 
for erecting the bridge. Practically no falsework was necesa«,ry, 
since the bridge was erected upon the "draw protection," which 
served as a falsework. 

The bridge metal cost 4 cts. per lb. f. o. b. cars, ready for 
erection, and, since the contract price was 0.6 cts. for erection, the 
total was 4.6 cts. per lb. in place, or $19,931 for the total super- 
structure, exclusive of the timber deck. This is equivalent to nearly 
$85 per lin. ft. There wei'e nearly 70 ft. B. M. per lin, ft. cf 
timber deck (ties and guard rail), which cost $20 per M., or $1.40 
per lin. ft. of bridge. 

Cost of Erecting Pratt Truss Bridges. — A Pratt truss steel rail- 
way bridge, 130 ft. long, 14 ft. wide and 20 ft. high, was built to re- 
place two Howe pony truss bridges, each 65 ft. long. The cost of 
this work was as follows : 

Falsework, materials and labor $174.00 

Removing falsework 100.00 

Taking down two Howe truss bridges 145.00 

Wages of common laborers were $1.50, and of bridgemen $2.50 a 
day. 

It took a gang of 20 men 45 hrs. to erect a 200-ft. span Pratt 
truss highway bridge, of the combination type (wooden upper chord 
and posts and steel lower chord and diagonals), after the pile false- 
work was in place. The roadway was 16 ft. wide. A hoisting en- 
gine was used, and the posts were up-ended in pairs just as trestle 
bents are raised. A mast was used in raising the upper chord 
pieces. There was no oupper falsework, nor was a traveler used. 

Cost of Three-Plate Girder Bridges of Ten Spans.* — The data in 
this article relate to three plate girder (deck) bridges, on concrete 
abutments and piers, having pile foundations, built to replace exist- 
ing timber bridges. 

The first bridge consisted of three spans, one 30-ft. and two 75-ft. 
girder spans, having a total weight of 110 tons. The work was 
done by company forces, the details of cost being as follows : 

Moving rigging from the last bridge — 

1/2 day, foreman, at $3.40 $ 1.70 

21/2 days, carpenters, at $2.50 6.25 

2 days, laborers, at $2.25 '. . . 4.50 

1 day, stationai-y engineer, at .$3 3.00 

$15.45 
Erecting portals for lowering the tioo 76-ft. girder spans — 

1 1/2 days at $3.40 $ 5.10 

6 days at $2.50 15.00 

3 days at $2.25 6.75 

$26.85 
*Engineering-Contracting, April 17, 1907. 



BRIDGES. Io07 

Erecting portals for lowering the 30-ft. span — • 

1 hour at 34 cents ^ 34 

3 hours at 25 cents ..'.'...'... .75 

4 hours at $2.25 '...'.....'. '.dO 

1 hour, sta. engr., at 30 cents .30 

^. ? 2.29 

Rigging portals ivitli Mocks and tackle — 

% day at $3.40 s 1.70 

2 y^ days at .$2.50 6 25 

21/2 days at $2.25 '.'. 5,^2 

'% day, sta. engr., at $3 1.50 

$15.07 
Placing tivo stationary engines for erecting girders— 

3 hours at 34 cents $ 1 02 

11/2 days at $2.50 3.75 

1 1/2 days at $2.25 3.38 

% day, sta. engr., at $3 1.50 

$ 9.65 
Picking up tigging after erecting — 

2 hours at 34 cents S .68 

1 day at $2.50 2.50 

1 day at $2.25 2.25 

2 hours, sta. engr., at 30 cents 60 

$ 6.03 

STEEL WORK. 

Putting down hearing slioes — 

2 hours at 34 cents $ .68 

1 day at $2.50 2.50 

1 day at $2.25 2.25 

$ 5.43 
Placing and loioering the two 15-ft. spans — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

51/2 days at $2.50 13.75 

51/2 days at $2.25 12.37 

1 day, engr., at $3 3.00 

2 days, work train, at $25 50.00 



$82.52 
Taking out pony bents to erect floor system — 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

6 days at $2.50 15.00 

5 days at $2.25 11.25 

I day, engr., at $3 .' 3.00 

$32.65 
Painting inaccessible parts with two coats — 

19 days at $2.25 $42.75 

Putting in steel floor system — 

2.2 days at $3.40 $ 7.48 

II days at $2.50 27.50 

13 days at $2.25 29.25 

3 days, engr., at $3 9.00 

2 days, work train, at $25 50.00 

$123.23 



1508 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Riveting — 

3S days, rivetei's, at $3 $114.00 

60 days, at ?2.50 150.00 

4 days, blacksmith, at $2.5 10.00 

1274.00 
Putting in machine fit bolts — 

7 days at $2.25 $15.75 

Placing and lowering 30-ft. span — 

0.3 day at $3.40. . $ 1.02 

11/2 day at $2.50 3.75 

11/2 day at $2.25 3.38- 

0.3 day, engr., at $3 90 

34 day, train, at $25 12.50 

$21.5& 

TIMBER DECK. 

Framing ties — 

5 days at $2.50 $20.00 

Placing and fitting ties — 

11/2 days at $3.40 $ 5.10 

8 days at $2.50 20.00 

6 days at $2.25 13.50 

$38.60 
Framing and fitting guard rail — 

3/2 day, foreman, at $3.40 $ 1.70 

3 days at $2.50 7.50 

21/3 days at $2.25 5.63 

$14.83 
Boring and bolting guard rails and ties — 

1/2 day, foreman, at $3.40 $ 1.70 

41/2 days at $2.50 11.25 

31/2 days at $2.25 7.87 

$20.82 

Tearing up old deck and lowering track on new bridge— 

1 day at $3.40 $ 3.40 

5 days at $2.50 12.50 

2 days at $2.25 4.50 

$20.40 
Total labor $787.87 

This is equivalent to $7.15 per ton, or $4.35 per lin. ft. of span. 

The cost per ton may be summarized as follows : 

Per ton. 

General labor preparatory to erection, $75.34 $ 68 

Painting inaccessible parts, $42.75 / . . . .39 

Placing girders, $265.38 2.41 

Riveting and mach. bolts, $281.75 2.63 

Timber deck work, $114.65 1.04 

Total $7.15 

The timber deck work cost 64 cts. per lin. ft. of span. It will be 
noted that there were 4% days of work train service cesting $112.50, 
or $1.02 per ton. Deducting this, we have $675 left, to be divided by 
247 days' labor, which gives $2.73 as the average wage paid. There' 



BRIDGES. 1509 

were 13 days of foreman's time, which amounted to $44, or less 
than 7% of the 675. 

The total cost of this bridge was ; 

. Four concrete abutments and piers % 7,950 

Materials in superstructure 5,600 

Labor erecting superstructure 788 

False worli 770 

Engineering and inspection ." 500 

Total 115.608 

This is practically $85 per lin. ft. of bridge, including abutments 
and piers. The falsewoi'k cost about $4 per lin. ft. of bridge, or 
practically as much as the labor of erecting the spans. 

It will be seen that the substructure cost more than the super- 
structure. 

The second bridge was three 60-ft. plate girder spans, having total 
weight of 69 tons, on concrete abutments and piers. The cost of 
erecting by company forces was as follows : 

Erecting false hents for lowering girders — 

1 day, foreman, at $3.40 $ 3.40 

4 days, carpenters, at $2.50 10.00 

10 days, laborers, at $2.25 22.50 

$35.90 
Tearing up old bridge deck and pony bents — 

O.S day at $3.40 $2.72 

5.6 days at $2.50 14.00 

5.6 days at $2.25 12.60 

$29.32 
Placing and lowering girders from flat cars to piers — 

1.2 days at $3.40 $ 4.08 

8.4 days at $2.50 21.00 

8.4 days at $2.25 18.90 

$43.98 
Framing ties-^ 

1.5 days at $3.40 $ 5.10 

14 days at $2.50 35.00 

$40,10 
Putting ties in place and relaying trade — 

0.3 day at S3.40 $ 1.02 

2.1 days at $2.50 5.25 

2.1 days at $2.25 4.73 

$11.00 
Framing and placing guard rail — 

1.5 days at $3.40 $ 5.10 

8 davs at $2.50 20.00 

6 days at $2.25 ■ 13 50 

$38.60 
Tearing down false bents — 

0.1 day at $3.40 ? -34 

0.7 day at $2.50 1-75 

0.7 day at $2.25 1-5' 

$3.66 



1510 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Work train on erection — 

3 days at $25 $75.00 

Total labor ?277.56 

This is equivalent to $4.02 per ton, which may be summarized -as 
follows : 

Per ton. 

Erecting and tearing down false bents, $39.56 $ .57 

Tearing up old bridge deck and pony bents, $29.32... .42 

Placing girders, $43.98 64 

Timber deck work, $89.70 1.30 

Work train service, $75 1.09 



Total $4.0 



The labor cost of $277.56 is equivalent to $1.34 per lin. ft. of span. 
Tearing up old bridge deck and pony bents cost 16 cts. per lin. ft. 
The cost of the timber deck work was 50 cts. per lin. ft. 

Exclusive of the train service, the total labor cost of erection was 
$202, which, divided by the 82 days, is $2.46 per day. The fore- 
man worked 6% days, receiving $22, which is 11% of the labor cost, 
exclusive of train service, or 8%, including train service. As noted 
above, it took 1 foreman and 14 men 12 hours to place and lower 
the three girder spans. The first span took 5 hours ; the second 
span, 4 hours ; and the third span, 3 hours. 

After erecting the new bridge, at the cost above given, it took 
tlie gang about a day additional to tear down the old wooden 
bridge, at a cost of $44. 

Tlie total cost of this three-span girder bridge was : 

Four abutments and piers $ 5,400 

Materials in superstructure 3,600 

Labor erecting superstructure 278 

False work 650 

Engineering and inspection 340 

Total $10,268 

This is $55 per lin. ft. of bridge. The falsework cost $3.50 per 
lin. ft. 

The third bridge consisted of two 75-ft. girder spans and two 70-ft. 
girder spans (through bridge) on concrete abutments having pile 
foundations. The rates of wages paid were the same as on the 
first bridge, givaii above, and the cost per ton and per lin. ft. of 
bridge were about the same. The summary of the cost is as fol- 
lows, the total weight of the four-span bridge being 197 tons: 

Per ton. 
Removing old deck and placing girders, $295.50. .'.... $1.50 

Putting in floor system, $309.30 1.57 

Riveting, $482.80 2.40 

Painting inaccessible parts, $13.80 07 

Timber deck work, $112.30 57 

Train service, $275.80 1.40 

Total $7.51 

The timbef deck work cost 40 cts. per lin. ft. of bridge. The 
total labor cost of erection was $1,480, or $5 per lin. ft. of bridge. 



BRIDGES. 



1511 



The total cost of the bridge was as follows : 

Five piers and abutments § 9,100 

Materials in superstructure 10,700 

Labor erecting superstructure 1,4 80 

False work 1,320 

Removing old bridge 520 

Bunk house 60 

Engineering and inspection 500 

§23,680 

This is nearl3' $80 per lin. ft. of bridge. The falsework cost ?1.40 
per lin. ft. 






H- 



I EU574.08^ 



I 



TT 



0^ 



Top Plan. 



0»6.-CpNTt^. 



I 



i I EJ.J5eZ.08 



End 
Elevation. 

Boxes 4K4'^j'g"r^. 
made of J" Pine /<? 
be placed where 
Anchor Bolt-ho/es 
crre shown. Boxes 
to be broken out 
when Bo/ts are sef. 

Fig. 1.- 



/^Tg Pock 



Side Elevot+ion. 



X 



± 



5'C>--M-4'X 




Bo-H-om Plan. 
-Bridge Pier. 



Cost of a Plate Girder Railway Bridge with Concrete Piers.* — A 

deck plate girder railway bridge was constructed in the late Fall and 
in the Winter of 1905-6 to carry the Kansas City, Mexico & Orient 
Railway over the South Canadian River about 7 miles south of Oak- 
wood, in Dewey County, Oklahoma. The whole structure was built 



*Engineerinff-Contracting, April 3, 1907. 



1512 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



by company forces and the following account of the methods of 
work and its cost has been prepared from information furnished 
by Mr. W. W. Colpitts, Assistant Chief Engineer, Kansas City, Mo. 

Description of Bridge. — At the point of crossing, the river at 
ordinary high water is from 2,000 ft. to 4,000 ft. wide and drains 
approximately 1,000 square miles of territory consisting largely of 
rolling prairie. At low water the stream is shallow and easily 
fordable. The extreme rise at high water is about 10 ft., and at 
such periods the velocity of the current exceeds 6 miles per hour. 
The river bottom is quicksand and varies in depth to the underlying 
rock at the point of crossing from 12 to 60 ft. 

After a careful study of the conditions respecting the elevations 
of high water, depth of foundation, nature of approaches and gen- 
eral character of the stream, a layout consisting of 1,000 ft. of 50-ft. 
deck plate girders at the north end where the rock is within 12 to 18 



5^!^ 





/x5->)| . 
Transverse Section. 



/6'S" 

/7'7'- 

Sectional Plan. 



>1 
— >1 



Fig. 2. — Cofferdam. 



ft. of the surface, and of 1,000 ft. of pile trestle at the south end 
where the rock shelves off to a maximum depth of 60 ft., was de- 
cided upon as the most economical structure to fulfill the necessary 
requirements.- The grade line was established to admit of replac- 
ing the pile trestle portion of the structure with 70 and 85 ft. deck 
plate girders at a later period. A concrete abutment and concrete 
piers were designed to carry the 50-ft. plate girders. Figure 1 
shows the dimensions and details of the piers. 

Metlwds of Construction. — The work was begun in the late fall, 
when an extreme rise in the river was unlikely to occur, and the 
very low cost of the structure was partially due to the fact that 
the work was little interfered with by high water. Telephone com- 
munication was established witli Teloga, a point about 40 miles up 
the river, and a watchman stationed at that point observed and re- 
ported the stage of water at frequent intervals. 



BRIDGES. 



1513 



The concrete in the piers was of the following proportions : Tola 
Sunflower Portland cement, one part ; Arkansas River sand, fur- 
nished by Messrs. Luttgerding Bros., of Wichita, Kan., three parts ; 
crushed limestone, passing a 2-in. ring, furnished by the Frazier 
Stone Co., of El Dorado, Kan., five parts. The concrete in the 
bridge seats was of the proportions, 1-2-4. 

The bases of the piers and abutment were put down in open 
coffer dams. Fig. 2. The sheet piling, Fig. 3, for the first pier was 
driven with a light hammer, but this was found to be both slow and 
inefficient. The lower strata of sand proved to be more compact 
than had been anticipated, and, by this method, considerable diffi- 
culty was experienced in driving the sheet piles accurately and in 
preventing leaky joints. The balance of the sheet piling was driv" 
with a 2-in. jet drawn to a 1-in. nozzle, and this method proved 
entirely satisfactory. The water was supplied by a 7 x 5 x 10-in. 
Gardner Duplex pump. Tlie pile with the jet placed in the groove 






Fig. 3. — Sheet Pile. 

sank rapidly and accurately with the weight of two men clinging 
to a hanger slung over . the top of the pile. When the pile had 
reached the bottom, it was struck several blows with a 12-lb. sledge 
to broom the point on the rock. 

The piles were driven between 6 x 8-in. walings, firmly secured 
with wrought iron clamps, to prevent irregularities in the driving. 
Built up angles were made for the returns at the corners and jetted 
to rock in the ordinary manner. The actual time required to drive 
a coffer dam seldom exceeded ten hours. 

It was originally the intention to build a form inside the coffer 
dam and to gather the water from leakages in a sump at one corner 
to be pumped out by a pulsometer, and to withdraw the sheet piling 
after the completion of the base. So little difficulty was experienced 
in preventing leakages that this plan was abandoned and the con- 
crete was deposited against the sheet piling, which no attempt was 
made to recover. It was estimated that the loss of the sheet piling- 
was more than offset by the time and expense necessary to have 
built an inside form. 

The sand was pumped from the coffer dam by means of a No. 4 
Morris centrifugal sand pump, having a 6-inch flexible suction 



1514 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



pipe and protected foot valve. The power to drive this pump was 
furnished by a traction engine, because of the ease with whicli it 
was supported on tlie river bottom at the pier sites. A suflicient 
amount of water was allowed to flow into the coffer dam through 
a small weir to keep the sand of the right consistency to be handled 
by the pump. As the excavation proceeded, the necessary shoring 
was placed in position. When the sand had been completely re- 
moved, the bottom of the sheet piling was grouted with cement mor- 
tar and the coffer dam kept dry by means of the pulsometer pump, 
while leaks were being stopped and other necessary work done, pre- 
vious to depositing concrete. Except in cases where bad leaks or 
accidents occurred, the time required to remove the sand from a 
coffer dam averaged about eight hours. It was interesting to note 






































k— Jl'74-'- 

E\evort-ion, Both Sides. 



Bill of Material— One Pier. 
_6 Pes., 4"x6"— 14'; 3 Pes., 4"x6"— 10'; 9 
Pes., 2"xl2"— 12'; 50 Pes., 2"x8"— 12'; 40 
Pes., 2"x4"— 12'; 30 bolts, %"xll"; 60 O. G. 
washers for % bolts; 25 lbs. 20d wire nails. 




II 
M 
I., 

■k-'— 7'^5-'- >l 

Nosed Ends. 



Frame S'be/ow Top.- 



Fig. 4. — Forms for Pier. 



the good state of preservation of tree trunks and limbs removed 
from the coffer dams. Leaves and twigs found in the compact 
sand near the rock were quite fresh and green. 

The concrete was mixed with a No. 1 Smith mixer, having a batch 
capacity of about 9 cu. ft. The capacity of the machine was found 
to be ample to fill a coffer dam before the next ahead was com- 
pleted. The mixer was placed in position on the slope of the em- 
bankment approach, with the main line track at its rear and 
facing a temporary material track. This temporary track turned 
out from the main line about 500 ft. beyond the mixer and extended 
diagonally down the embankment approach on a 3% grade and 
across the river bottom alongsside the pier sites. The portion of the 
track in the river bottom was supported on bents of spliced ties, 
jetted to the rock, and wired to the coffer dam to avoid the danger 
of loss in case of high water. The sand and crushed rock were 
delivered by cars from the main line track, immediately above the 
mixer, and the cement was stored in a shanty at one side of the 
mixer. The concrete materials and machinery were, in this man- 



BRIDGES. 



151i 



ner, very conveniently located for rapid work and well above the 
high water line. The concrete was transported to the pier sites in 
improvised dump boxes, set on push cars. These dump boxes were 
hinged longitudinally and discharged directly into the coffer dams. 
The grade of the temporary track carried the push cars by gravity 
to the coffer dams and they were returned by teams, for which 
purpose a straw and brush road had been built paralleling the track. 
As the work progressed farther into the stream, more cars were 
added properly to balance the work. While the concrete in the base 
was still fresh, a number of steel reinforcing bars, 8 ft. in length, 
were set in place along each end to insure a good bond between the 
base and shaft. 




Fig. 5. 



In general, the work of putting in the bases was organized so that 
about the same time was required in filling a coffer dam with con- 
crete, in excavating the sand from the next, and in driving the sheet 
piling for the third. These three operations were thus carried on 
simultaneously and, although interruptions in one part of the work 
or the other occurred frequently, the gangs were interchangeable 
and no appreciable loss was suffered, except in time, because of such 
delays. 

In piers 19 and 20, where the rock was from 17 to 19 ft. below 
the surface, some difRcultj*^ was encountered due to the presence of 
Assures in the rock, from which it was necessary to remove the sand 
to fill with concrete. In such cases, the larger leaks were stopped as 
much as possible by driving sheet piles against the outside face 
of the coffer dam and into the fissures, and the smaller leaks by 
manure in canvass bags rammed into the openings. 

Upon the completion of all bases, the frames (Figs. 4 and 5) for 
several shafts were set in position and the work of filling with 
concrete proceeded as in the case of the bases, except that a derrick 



1516 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

erected on a flat car and stationed at the pier was utilized to raise 
the dump boxes in depositing the concrete in tlie forms. As soon 
as the concrete in one shaft had set sufficiently to permit of it, the 
forms were removed and placed on the pier ahead. Four sets of 
forms were used for the sliafts. 

The girders, which were furnished by the American Bridge Co., 
were set in place with a derrick car of 20 tons' capacity. 

Cost of Construction. — The following are the average prices paid 
for materials and labor : 
Material: 

Lumber for forms, etc., $16.50 per M. ft., B. M. 

Cement, Kansas Portland, ?1.50 per bbl. 

Broken limestone, 45c per cu. yd., Kan. 

Sand, Arkansas River, 15c per ton. 
Labor: 

General foreman, $110 per month. 

Assistant foreman, $75 per month. 

Timekeeper, $60 per month. 

Riveters, 35c per hour. 

Blacksmith, 30c per hour. 

Blacksmith assistant, 20c per hour. 

Carpenters, 22 %c and 25c per hour. 

Enginemen, 25c per hour. 

Firemen, 20c per hour. 

Night watchman, 20c per hour. 

Laborers, 17 %c and 20c per hour. 

Team (including driver), 40c per hour. 

Note : The prices quoted for lumber, cement, limestone and sand 
are prices f. o. b., Louisiana, Tola, Kan., El Dorado, Kan., and 
Wichita, Kan. 

The total and unit cost of constructing the concrete piers and 
abutments and of erecting the steel superstructure are given in the 
following tabulation. Altogether there was about 2,300 cu. yds. of 
concrete in the substructure, most of which, as stated above, was a 
1-3-5 mixture. 

Machinery and Supplies — 

Concrete mixer, 20% of cost $ 152.10 

Supplies, freight, hauling, setting up 505.04 

Total $ 657.14 

Centrifugal sand pump, 20% of cost $ 27.00 

Supplies, freight, hauling, setting up 277.50 

Rent of traction engine to operate , 83.25 

Total $ 387.75 

Water pump and pipe, 20% of cost $ 29.00 

Supplies, freight, hauling, setting up 177.32 

Total $ 206.32 

Pile driver engine, 20% of cost $ 100.00 

Supplies, freight, hauling, setting up 243.65 

Total $ 343.65 

Grand total $1,594.86 



BRIDGES. 1517 

Coffer Dams — 

Materials, lumber and nails $1,285.26 

Freight and train haul 'sosiss 

Labor making piles 696!82 

Labor driving piles .....! l,384!o5 

Total $3,672.46 

The sheet piling took 63,500 ft. B. M. of lumber ; the cost per 
1,000 ft. B. M. for the sheet piling was then: 

Materials, lumber and nails $ 20.08 

Freight and haulage 4.82 

Labor making piles : 10.97 

Labor driving piles 21.80 

Total .....? 57.67 

Forms, Platforms and Runways — 

Lumber, hardware, etc .? 224.59 

Freight and train haul 40.20 

Labor making, removing and placing 556.51 

Total % 821.30 

Concrete Materials — 

Cement, freight, unloading and storing $4,617.48 

Sand, freight, unloading, etc ; 1,336.05 

Broken stone, freight, unloading, etc 2,026.92 

Total $7,980.45 

This gives us for 2,300 cu. yds. of concrete a cost of $3.47 per cu. 
yd. for materials, including freight, storage, and unloading charges 
of all kinds. A line on the proportion of the cost contributed by 
these latter items may be got by taking the prices of the materials 
f. o. b. at the places of production and assuming the proportions 
for a 1-3-5 concrete. According to tables in Gillette's "Handbook of 
Cost Data," a 1-3-5 broken stone concrete requires per cubic yard 
1.13 bbls. cement, 0.48 cu. yd. sand and 0.80 cu. yd. broken stone. 
We have then : 

L13 bbls. cement, at $1.50... $1.69 

0.48 cu. yd. sand, at 20c 10 

0.80 cu. yd. stone at 45c 36 

Total $2.15 

This leaves a charge of $1.32 per cubic yard of concrete for 
freight and handling materials. The cost of mixing concrete and 
placing it in the forms was $3,490.87, or $1.52 per cu. yd. We have 
then: 

Cost of concrete materials per cu. yd $3.47 

Cost mixing and placing concrete 1.52 

Total $4.99 

The miscellaneous expenses of the work comprised: 

Watchman, tools, telephone, etc $ 722.48 

Shanties, furnishings, supplies, etc 829.04 

Total $1,551.52 



1518 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

To this has to be added ?1.134.28, the cost of excavating tlie coffer 
dams. The total and unit costs of tlie different items of the con- 
crete substructure work can now be summarized as follows : 

Item. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Machinery and supplies $ 1,594.86 ? .69 

Coffer dams 3,672.49 1.60 

Forms, etc 821.30 .36 

Concrete materials 7,980.45 3.47 

Mixing and placing concrete 3,490.87 1.53 

Excavating coffer dams 1,134.28 .49 ■ 

Miscellaneous 1,551.52 .67 

Totals $20,245.74 ?8.80 

The weight of steel in the plate gh'ders was 694,479 lbs. The 
total and unit costs were as follows : 

Item. Total. Per lb. 

Steel girders $19,128.42 2.730 cts. 

Freight on girders 1,365.60 0.215 

Unloading and stacking 140.35 0.015 

Total $20,634.37 2.96 cts. 

Erecting girders $ 1,363.48 0.211 cts. 

Derrick car, 20% of cost 127.10 0.009 

Total $ 1.490.58 0.22 cts. 

Grand total 3.18 cts. 

The cost of the deck, material, freight, labor and painting was 
$2,388.42, making the total cost of the superstructure $24,513.37. 
Adding to this the cost of the substructure, as given above, we have 
$44,759.11 as the total cost of the bridge. The cost per lineal foot, 
then, was : 

For superstructure $24.51 

For substructure 20.24 

Total $44.75 

Cost of Erecting Riveted Deck Girder Bridse. — A riveted deck 
girder bridge, 710 ft. long and 56 ft. high, consisting of seven 80- 
ft., one 60-ft. and three 30-ft. sections, was erected as described 
below. The bridge was to replace 525 ft. of timber trestle and two 
105-ft. overhead Howe truss spans on a railway line over which 
22 trains were moved between 7 a. m. and 6 p. m. Two travelers 
with tackle were used in the work. While the excavation was be- 
ing done the falsework was put in, by trestling the two 
spans and cutting out a section 1 ft. long of the posts 
of the trestle part, and introducing an intermediate cap, 
a distance of 12 ft. below the rail to form lookouts for 
track for travelers. In this way the cost of the false- 
work was reduced and everything could be placed from the top. 
using one traveler for placing the pedestal stones the entire length, 
and for placing the posts on the return trip. After the posts had 
been placed the other traveler was erected in order to carry both 
ends of the girders. Owing to circumstances, the materials were 
unloaded 2,000 ft. from the bridge and were brought to it on push 
cars ; that is, all except the girders, which were loaded on trucks 



BRIDGES. 1519 

and moved with a locomotive. The girders were riveted together 
on the skids, the ties, tie plates, guard rail and rail placed upon 
them, and then loaded on trucks ready to be sent out. Jacks were 
placed under each end of the girders when they had been spotted 
over their place and they were raised clear of the trucks. The 
tackle was then attached, a strain taken, the trucks run out, and 
the jacks released, and they were swung clear. Owing to the 
height, the stringer-ties and guard rail had to be taken on deck. 
The bents were let down on the intermediate caps and the girders 
lowered into place by the means of the lines. It was possible to 
swing the girders either way, so that when they were within 6 
ins. of their seat a small bar, pointed at each end, could be inserted 
to guide them into place. The first 80-ft. girder was placed in 2 
hours and 22 minutes, and the second was placed in 1 hour and 38 
minutes, while another girder was placed in 58 minutes. The fol- 
lowing costs, incomplete though they are, may be of some value. 
The work was done some years ago when wages were lower than 
they now are. Cost of placing the 11 girders, together with the 
riveting, unloading steel, loading on trucks, engine attendance, etc., 
Avas $1,255.49, or 11.7683 per lin. ft. ; cost of placing four rocker 
and three tower bents was $570.04, or $0.8003 per lin. ft.; total 
cost of superstructure, including falsework and traveler, was 
$2,248.85, or $3.1674 per lin. ft. The cost of riveting was as fol- 
lows : 

Rivets. Per rivet. 

Riveting girder 8,026 $0.0502 

Riveting bents 480 0.1066 

Riveting girders to post 264 0.1458 

Cost of an Iron Bridge, Including the Cost of Masonry Abut- 
ments.* — In this article we give the cost of erecting a 130-ft. span, 
supported by stone abutments and pier, at New Buffalo, Mich., 
for the Chicago & West Michigan Ry., the work being done in 1894. 
The statement of the cost of the bridge to the railway company 
was as follows : 

False work material (estimated) $ 75.00 

Ties, etc 134.86 

Iron span 5,568.00 

1,050 cu. yds. excavation at $0.25 262.50 

425.4 cu. yds. stone (Grafton) at $6.86 2,917.39 

445 cu. yds. stone cut and laid at $6.50 2,892.50 

Filling behind abutment, laborers 35.25 

Filling behind abutments, engine work 5.10 

Filling behind abutment, 10% above labor 4.04 

Labor taking down old truss and erecting false 

work 170.75 

Labor framing and placing ties and tie guard. . . 67.39 

Labor taking down false work 27.00 

Total cost $12,159.78 

The actual cost of the stone masonry per cubic yard was $13.05 ; 
of this sum $6.50 was for cutting and setting and $6.55 for the 
stone. The above cost of the stone is the cost to the railway 



* Engineering-Contracting, February, 1906. 



1520 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

company at La Porte. Delivered at New Buffalo the stone would 
cost $8.10 per cubic yard, making the actual cost of the masonry 
$14.60 per cubic yard. The stone measured 425.4 cu. yds. in the 
block and made 444 cu. yds. in the wall, thus overrunning 19.6 cu. 
yds. A total of 51 cars of stone was used, the average weight per 
car being 34,500 lbs. ; the average number of cubic feet per car 
was 226 ; and the average weight per cubic foot was 144 lbs. 
These figures were based on the shipping weights of the cars. The 
stone was scabbled only, which accounts for the high weight per 
car. 

The total cost of erecting the bridge was $265.14, this including 
the labor for taking down the old truss, erecting false work, fram- 
ing and placing ties and tie guard, and the labor for taking down 
the false work. The cost of erecting the 130 ft. span was there- 
fore a trifle over $2 per foot. 

It will be noticed that the weight of the iron span is not given 
in the above statement of the cost of the work, nor is the num- 
ber of men, the rate of wages or the time employed. The state- 
ment would have been much more complete had these details been 
obtainable. 

Cost of a Plate Girder Bridge With Concrete Piers in Mexico.* — 
The following is rearranged from data originally published in the 
"Railway Age-Gazette" : The bridge consists of 17 spans of 50 
ft. deck plate girders carried on concrete piers and reinforced con- 
crete piers and reinforced concrete abutments. The substructure is 
founded on solid rock ranging in depth below low water from 
zero on the west shore to 19 ft. on the east shore. The west abut- 
ment and succeeding 13 piers were carried to rock; the three 
remaining piers and the east abutment were set on piles driven to 
rock and cut off at low water level. The piers consist of bases 
14 ft. 9 ins. X 7 ft. 9 ins. in dimensions and varying in height with 
the depth of foundation, and sliafts 13 ft. 9 ins. x 6 ft. 9 ins. at 
the base; 12 ft. x 6 ft. at the top over coping and 28 ft. high. Each 
shaft contains about 84.8 cu. yds. of concrete. The spans between 
pier centers are 50 ft. 3 ins. The abutments are of reinforced con- 
' Crete. 

Two methods of construction were employed. The first method 
was used for the west abutment and the succeeding six piers. Ope- 
rations were conducted from the river bed. The west abutment 
was above water level and was straightforward construction. For 
this six succeeding piers U. S. Steel Sheet Pile cofferdams were 
built and excavated ; the base forms were set inside and concret- 
ed, and then the sliaft forms were erected and concreted. A 60 x 
120x4 ft. barge in the river carried a hoisting engine and stiff 
leg derrick. This derrick handled the forms and also a clam 
shell for excavating the cofferdams. A pile driver supported on 
heavy horses drove the sheeting. The concrete was mixed on the 
river bed by a % cu. yd. Chicago Improved Cube mixer and taken 
to the work in dump buckets in push cars running on a track 



*Engineering-Gontracting, Feb. 3, 1909. 



BRIDGES. 



1521 




^-5 



\6 



o 
d 

a 



be 



which was extended from pier to 
pier. At the piers the buckets were 
raised and dumped by means of a 
mast and crosshead. When tlie pier 
was completed tlie girders were set 
by means of a 15-ton derrick car. 

Work was conducted in the man- 
ner described from April 20, 1907, to 
May 1, 1908. This slow progress 
was due largely to the fact that 
the organization was such that one 
part of the work had to await the 
completion of another, no two op- 
erations being carried on at the 
same time. Furthermore the driv- 
ing and pulling of the steel sheet- 
ing was a tedious process. It took 
from a week to ten days to drive 
the sheeting for one cofferdam, and 
in penetrating the cemented gravel 
the piles were often so battered and 
bent that it took as long or longer 
to pull as to drive them. The ex- 
cavation of the cofferdam occupied 
about two days. It was to remedy 
this slow progress that the second 
method of construction was devised 
by Mr. W. W. Colpitts, Assistant 
Chief Engineer, who assumed per- 
sonal charge of the work. 

A second track was laid parallel 
to the main track as shown by Fig. 
6. To support this second track 
20-ft. guard rail timbers were in- 
serted between each pair of main 
track ties and secured with hook 
bolts to the girder flanges. On the 
overhanging ends of these timbers 
two lines of 3 x 12-in. planks, on 
5-ft. centers, were laid to carry the 
second track rails. The concrete 
mixed was removed from the river 
bed and placed on the west bank as 
shown by Fig. 6 ; the second track 
led directly to and from the mixer. 
A siding was also laid to the mixer 
for the sand and gravel cars, which 
were loaded at a nearby cut- 
ting. Water was pumped to the 
mixer from the river as shown by 
Fig. 6. 



1522 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The second track was extended from pier to pier as fast as the 
main track was completed, so that the derrick car could be run 
out on the second track to a position alongside the last completed 
pier. The derrick car boom was lengthened about 25 ft. by splic- 
ing and trussed with wire cables to sustain a load of 4 tons at its 
outer end. From the boom a 66-ft. extension of the second track 
was suspended by cables at the boom and at mid-length ; the 
inner end of the extension track was supported by a bent on the 
pier. The arrangement of the extension track is made above by 
Fig. 6 ; as will be seen the concrete could come from the mixer by 
car to directly over the pier. When a pier had been concreted the 
extension track was set one side and detached and the derrick was 
available for erecting the plate girders. 




Shell moJc oj 36 

Culvert Pip«. CalflCl' 
'/zCaijd VIeiqfyt litO* 




Fig. 7. — Concrete Bucket. 



For depositing concrete below water, a bucket was devieed to 
operate with a single line, as illustrated in Fig. 7. It was built 
of a 3-ft. section of 36 in. corrugated iron culvert pipe, having a 
capacity of % cu. yd. In the bottom, which was of wood, was a 
clap valve 8 ins. square opening upward A 1-in/ iron trunnion set 
6 ins. off center was secured to the bottom. A bale with chain 
hooks at its extremities was attached to the pile line of the der- 
rick car which was led through a block at the end of the boom 
directly over the center of the pier. To the top of the bale was 
pivoted a counter-weighted trip engaging a lip on the side of the 



BRIDGES. 



1523 



bucket. The bucket was carried on a push car and the mixer dis- 
charged directly into it. It was then run out to the end of the ex- 
tension, the hooks of the bale slipped over the trunnions, the trip 
caught on the lip, the bucket raised, and the car pushed from un- 
der it. The bucket was then lowered and upon its weight being 
taken on the bottom the trip automatically released. As the bucket 
was slowly raised from the bottom and upset, the valve in the bot- 
tom opened and the concrete poured out without disturbance ; its 
construction being such that it discharged toward the lowest point. 
Three buckets were used, one being dumped while two others were 
on their way to and from the mixer ; the loaded car using the 
second track, the empty car returning on the main track. 

The concrete for the shafts was carried in dump boxes on push 
cars. Fig. 8. The forms were securely wired to prevent distor- 
tion from the falling concrete and baffle boards were used to dis- 
tribute the concrete uniformly. 

It was found that detachable cast steel teeth on the lips of the 
clam shell greatly increased the daily capacity of the dredge and 




Fig. 8. — Concrete Car. 



this fact suggested the advisability of doing away entirely with 
the steel sheet piling which had proven both expensive and slow. 
The greatest depth to rock was 19 ft. below the low water surface 
and was practically level over the area of a pier. It was decided 
to sink open wooden cofferdams, first dredging as deep as practic- 
able m the open water at the pier site, the limit of which proved 
to be about 12 ft. In the meantime, the timber for the cofferdams 
was being framed on the bank. They were built as follows : The 
three bottom courses were composed of condemned bridge string- 
ers, the lower one having a 45° cutting edge, unshod. Above the 
stringers the sides were composed of 3xl2-in. plank, spiked to cor- 
ner posts and studs. 

During construction the cofferdam was supported on a raft also 
composed of condemned bridge stringers. The raft was built with 
an open bay, about 1 ft. larger on all sides than the cofferdam. 



1524 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Across the center of the opening was stretched a heavy telegraph 
wire supporting tlie ends of four planks, the other ends resting on 
the raft. The lower courses of timbers of the cofferdam were then 
set in position on these planks and drift-bolted together. The 
position of the cofferdam on the planks was such that only a small 
percentage of its weight came upon the wire. The two other 
courses of stringers were then laid and bolted to these, after which 
the 3 -in. planks comprising the balance of the sides of cofferdam 
were spiked to the corner posts and studs. When completed, the 
wire was cut and the cofferdam launched into the water below, 
Which, as stated above, had previously been dredged to a depth 
of about 12 ft. It was then guyed to its exact position and held 
level by lines from the boom of the barge derrick. Four posts or 
legs, with the lower ends resting on the bottom of the excavation, 
were spiked to the outside corners and all the guys removed, al- 
lowing the cofferdam to rest entirely upon these legs. To make 
provision for weighing the cofferdam while being sunk, stringers 
were placed across its ends and on the portions projecting bej'ond 
the sides, a floor of other stringers was laid and boxed up to a 
height sufficient to carry a load of about 75 tons of gravel each. 
The dredging operations were then begun and the material taken 
from the interior of the cofferdam placed in the boxes until they 
were filled. When the dredging had continued to a point where 
the bearing was tmiform on the cutting edge of the bottom, the 
legs detached themselves from the sides and floated to the sur- 
face. 

By carefully sounding the bottom and loading the boxes uni- 
formly as the dredging proceeded, the cofferdam sank uniformly 
to the rock. The load was not removed from the boxes until the 
concrete had been placed, when by cutting the wires supporting the 
sides the gravel dropped into the water. The cofferdam was pre- 
vented from bulging when the concrete was being deposited, by 
means of a wire cable strung around the top and wedged taut at 
each of the studs. The derrick car was not removed from its 
position supporting the extension track uhtil the concrete in both 
tlie base and shaft had been placed. The pile line of the derrick 
car was, therefore, available in removing the form on the shaft of 
the pier behind and erecting it on the recently completed base. 
The operation of filling it with concrete was then begun. While 
the work of placing the concrete in the base, erecting the form for 
the shaft, filling it and setting the girders was going on, the barge 
was emploj^ed in dredging for and sinking the next cofferdam, and 
in this manner the work proceeded until the 13th pief was com- 
pleted. 

The piles in the foundations of the three piers on the east bank 
of the river were driven with rail leads suspended loosely from 
the boom of the stiff-legged derrick, which had been removed and 
placed on skids on the bank. The forms were set and filled in the 
manner described. 

The method of building the west abutment was as follows : Upon 
the completion of the excavation, the form was built up to a point 



BRIDGES. 1525 

3 ft. above the bottom of the overhang. The piles were then 
driven and tlie back-filling completed up to the level to which the 
form had been built and care taken to tamp the filling solidly un- 
der the form for the overhang. The form was then filled with con- 
crete to the top and the overhanging slab, which was 3 ft. thick, 
reinforced with steel to enable it to support the load of green con- 
crete that would later come upon it. The form for the upper por- 
tion was then completed and the whole filled with concrete up to 
the bridge seat in two days' run. The west abutment was com- 
pleted and the last span set on August 27, 1908, an average, after 
May 1, of one pier and span about every nine working days. 

The statement of cost will be especially interesting to those who 
are familiar with conditions in the Republic of Mexico. Generally 
speaking, machinery, materials and supplies of all kinds are much 
more costly than in the United States, but this disadvantage is 
partly offset by cheap labor. The scale of wages (in U. S. cur- 
rency) that prevailed on the work are given below: 

The cost of materials delivered at the work w.as as follows: 

General foreman $150.00 per month 

Sub-foremen 1.00 per day 

Hoisting engineers 4.00 per day 

Firemen 1.50 per day 

Carpenters 1.50 per day 

Blacksmiths . 2.00 per day 

Laborers (peons) .75 per day 

Cement, ner bbl $ 3.73 

For lumber, per M. ft. B. M 23.33 

Bridge timber, per M. ft. B. M 36.65 

Reinforcement, per ton 79.20 

Steel sheeting, per ton » 54.15 

Bridge steel, per ton 69.98 

In the statement below a proportion of the cost of all machin- 
ery and tools is charged against the bridge, depending upon their 
condition and availability for future work. 

Abutments. 

(Contain 586.2 cu. yds. concrete.) 

Material. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Cement, 694.4 bbls., at $3.73 $2,590.11 $4.42 

Sand, 263 cu. yds., at $0.501/2 132.81 0.23 

Gravel, 526 cu. yds., at $0.501/2 265.62 0.45 

Lumber, 22,232 ft, B. M., $23.33 518.66 0.88 

Piles, 240 lin. ft., at $0.22 52.80 0.09 

Reinforcement, 41,730 lbs., at $3.96 1,632.51 2.79 

Machinery, proportionate cost 59.21 0.10 

Wire and nails '^^I'll ^AJ: 

Total material $5,468.72 $9.33 



1526 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Labor. 

Excavation for foundation $ H?"n? nli 

Building and removing forms "^^i-^i a 11 

Driving piles in foundation >-'(■' j, ^-j^ 

Placing steel reinforcement ooIkq n5o 

Mixing concrete "or qq ni 7 

Placing concrete 10^^ a'aq 

Pumping water 1 8.74 U.O^ 

Cleaning and storing machineis, etc 61.00 0.10 

Total laljor $1,087.65 ?1.86 

Total material and labor $6,556.37 $11.19 

Bases of Piers 1 to 16, Inclusive. 
Bases 1 to 6 contain 373 cu. yds. 
Bases 7 to 16 contain 887.7 cu. yds. 



Total 1,260.7 cu. yds. 

Material : Total. Cu. yd. 

Cement, 1,233 bbls., at $3.73 $4,599.09 $3.65 

Sand, 591 cu. yds., at $0.501/2 298.46 0.24 

Gravel, 1,182 cu. yds., at $0.50y2 596.92 0.47 

Cofferdams of piers 1 to 6 : 
Lumber, 3 M., B. M., at $23.33...$ 69.99 

Steel sheet piling 924.72 

Wire nails and oil 53.00 

Machinery 817.00 

Fuel 700.00 

Material in cofferdams 1 to 6 $2,564.71 

Per cu. yd. concrete in bases 1 to 6.$ 6.88 

Cofferdams of piers 7 to 16 : 
Lumber, 26 M., B. M., at $23.33..$ 606.58 

Piles in foundation 198.00 

Wire nails and oil 210.25 

Machinery 1,353.66 

Fuel 1,200.00 



Material in cofferdams 7 to 16. $3,568.49 6,133.20 

Per cu. yd. concrete in bases 7 to'16 $4.02 



Total material $11,627.67 

Labor : 

Mixing concrete 580.33 

Placing concrete 662.26 

Pumping water 38.00 

Cleaning and storing machines, etc 122.01 

Cofferdams of piers 1 to 6 : 

Excavation $ 857.22 

Driving sheet piling 1,653.19 

Pulling sheet piling 371.60 

Building inside forms 214.21 

Labor on cofferdams 1 to 6 $3,096.22 

Per cu. yd. concrete in bases 1 to 6 $8.30 

Cofferdams of piers 7 to 16: 

Excavation $1,010.05 

Piles in foundation 313.23 

Building and sinking cofferdams. 870.89 

Labor on cofferdams 7 to 16. . . $2,194.17 5,390.39 

Per cu. yd. concrete in bases 7 to 16 $2.47 

Total labor $ 6,692.99 

Total material and labor $18,320.66 

Labor and material of cofferdams 1 to 6 per cu. yd. concrete . 
Labor and material of cofferdams 7 to 16 per cu. yd. concrete. 



BRIDGES. 1527 

Shafts of Piers, 1 to 16, Inclusive. 

(1,357.2 cu. yds. concrete. The shafts of the piers did not differ 
appreciably in cost, and the statement Is not divided as in the case 
of the bases.) 

Materials : Total. Per cu. yd. 

Cement, 482 bbls., at $3.73 % 4,617.74 % 3.41 

Sand, 257 cu. yds., at 50% cts 321.69 0.24 

Gravel, 514 cu. yds., at 50% cts 643.38 47 

Lumber, 3,000 ft.. B. M., at $23.33 163.31 0.12 

Machinery, proportionate cost 155.00 0.11 

Wire and nails 101.50 0.07 

Lubricating oil 28.50 0.02 

Fuel ■ 919.00 0.68 

Total material $ 6,950.12 $ 5.12 

Labor : 

Building and removing forms $ 582.55 $ 0.43 

Mixing concrete 602.45 0.45 

Placing concrete 652.79 0.48 

Pumping water 39.00 0.03 

Cleaning and storing machinery 122.01 0.09 

Total labor $ 1,998.80 $ 1.48 

Total material and labor $ 8,948.92 $ 6.60 

Total cost of substructure $33,825.95 $10.56. 

Steel SiKins. — It 50-ft. Deck Plate Girders. 

Material : Total. Per ton. 

Steel, 611,734 lbs., f. o. b. New York $16,822.68 $55.00 

Freight and brokerage 4,582.68 14.98 

Fuel, setting and riveting girders 181.36 0.59 

Total material $21,586.12 $70.57 

Labor : 

Unloading and setting girders $ 294.45 $ 0.96 

Riveting girders 640.35 2.09 

Setting anchor bolts - 105.00 0.34 

Machinery, proportionate cost 253.70 0.83 

Total labor $ 1,293.50 $ 4.22 

Total material and labor $22,879.62 $74.79 

Deck. — Ties L. L. P. S-in. x 10-in x 10-ft., Spaced 13-in. Centers; 
Guard Rails L. L. P., 7-in. x 9-in. x 20-ft. 

Per 

Material : Total. M. B. M. 

62,401 ft, B. M., f. o. b. Safton, La $ 1,123.22 $18.00 

Freight and brokerage 1,163.78 18.65 

Fuel 25.50 0.40 

Total material $ 2,312.50 $37.05 

Labor : 

Framing and placing $ 561.68 $ 9.00 

Machinery, proportionate cost 60.63 0.97 

Total labor $ 622.31 $ 9.97 

Total material and labor $ 2,934.81 $47.02 

Total cost of superstructure $25,814.43 

Total cost of bridge $59,640.38 



1528 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Erecting a Draw Bridge of 236-ft. Span.* — This bridge 
has a span of 236 ft., and a length of 239 ft. over all. Trusses are 
16 ft. c. to c, and the depth of truss is uniform and 25 ft. c. to c. 
of cliord pins. The center panel is 16 ft. and the remaining 10 
panels are each 22 ft. The bridge is designed to be turned by hand- 
only, and has a drum 22% ft. x 4% ft. The bridge was designed 
for a live load of 3,300 lbs. per lin. ft. 

The total weight of the metal is 433,300 lbs., distributed as 
follows : 

Lbs. 

Trusses ' 205,600 

Lateral bracing 20,000 

Floor system 107,000 

Turntable — 

Drum (22% ft. diam.) 21,400 

Wheels (46) 16,200 

Track 11,100 

Rack 4,900 

Tread pis 5,200 

Gearing and journal boxes 25,400 

End lift 10,200 

End supports 6,300 

Total 433,300 

The itemized cost (to the contractor) of erection was as 
follows : 

General Expense — 

7.5 days, foreman at $5.00 % 37.50 

44 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 132.00 

34 days, laborers, at $2.00 68.00 

10 davs, watchman, at $2.00 20.00 

3 days, blacksmith, at $3.00 9.00 

98.5. Total laboi', at $2.67 $266.50 

3,000 ft. B. M. in traveler at $25 75.00 

Total $341.50 

This $341 includes the cost of erecting a derrick to imload the 
steel from cars, the labor of making and erecting traveler. 

Erection o/ Steel Work — 

19 days, foreman, at $5.00 ; ...$ 95.00 

110 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 330.00 

80 days, riveters, at $3.00 ' 240.00 

73 days, heaters and buckers, at $2.00 146.00 

84 days, laborers, at $2.00 168.00 

366. Total laborers, at $2.65 $ 969.00 

30 days' rent of hoisting enghie, at $3.00 90.00 

10 tons coal, at $3.00 30.00 

Total $1,089.00 

'^ Engineering-Contracting , May 29, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1529 

The engineman received the same wages as the bridgemen and 
was classed with tlieni. 

3 days, foreman, at $5.00 $ 15.00 

9 days, bridgemen, at $3.00 ' . 27 00 

80 days, painters, at $2.50 ',\\ 20o!oO 

92 days total labor $242.00 

Total materials and labor $337!oO 

Timber Deck {11,000 ft. B. M.) — 

3 days, foreman, at $5.00 $15.00 

26 days, carpenters, at $2.75 71.50 

3 days, laborers, at $2.00 6.00 

32 days total labor at $2.90 $92.50 

It will be noted that the labor of framing and placing the tim- 
ber deck (i. e., the ties, guard rail, etc.) cost $5.50 per M, or 38 cts. 
per lin. ft. of bridge. 

There is clearly some error in the amount of red lead and oil 
above given. Since the bridge weighed 433,000 lbs., or 216.5 tons, 
the cost per ton for erection may be summarized as follows : 
General Expense — Per ton. 

Labor $ 266.50 $1.23 

Material for traveler 75.00 0.35 

Erecting Steel — 

Labor $ 969.00 $4.49 

Rent of engine 90.00 0.42 

Coal for engine 30.00 0.14 

Painting — 

Materials $ 95.00 $0.44 

Labor 242.00 1.11 

Timber deck 92.50 0.42 

Total $1,860.00 $8.60 

This work was done by a contractor who received $12 per ton 
for erecting the bridge. Practically no falsework was necessary, 
since the bridge was erected upon the "draw protection," which 
served as a falsework. 

The bridge metal cost 4 cts. per lb. f. o. b. cars, ready for erec- 
tion, and, since the contract price was 0.6 cts. for erection, the total 
was 4.6 cts. per lb, in place, or $19,931 for the total supersti-ucture, 
exclusive of the timber deck. This is equivalent to nearly $85 per 
lin ft. There were nearly 70 ft. B. M. per lin. ft. of timber deck 
(ties and guard rail), which cost $20 per M, or $1.40 per lin. ft. 
of bridge. 

Cost of Howe Truss Bridges, Cross- References. — In the section 
on Timberwork will be found other data on Howe truss bridges. 

Cost of a 150-ft. Howe Truss Bridge — The following data were 
published in Engineering-Contracting, June 26, 1907. "While the 
old-fashioned Howe truss railway bridge is no longer built in the 
eastern part of America, it is still to be found in the West, and 
is likely to remain in use, here and there, for many years to 
come Practically nothing has ever found its way into print as to 



1530 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

the cost of erecting Howe truss bridges, hence the following data 
should be of value to many of our readers. 

A railway Howe truss through span bridge of 150 ft. span, was 
erected by company forces at the following cost ; 
Loading Bridge Material — 

2 days, foreman, at $3.00 ? 6.00 

18 days, carpenter, at 2.50 45.00 

12 days, helper, at 2.00 2-t.OO 

32 days. Total $2.34 $75.00 

Loading Hoisting Engine — 

0.5 day, pile driver engr., at $3.00 $ 1.50 

0.15 day, carpenter, at 2.50 3.75 

0.5 day, helper, at 2.00 1.00 

2.5 days. Total $2.50 $ 6.25 

Loading Pile Driver — 

1 day, carpenter $2.50 $ 2.50 

1 day, helper 2.00 2.00 

2 days. Total $2.25 $ 4.50 

Fitting Up Pile Driver — 

13.5 days, carpenter $2.50 $33.75 

3.5 days, helper 2.00 7.00 

17 days. Total ,..$2.40 $40.75 

Driving Pile Falsework — 

1 dav, foreman $3.00 $ 3.00 

1 day, engineer 3.00 3.00 

S davs, carpenter 2.50 20.00 

5 days, helper 2.00 10.00 

15 days. Total $2.40 $36.00 

Framing and Erecting Bridge — 

30 davs, foreman $3.00 $ 90.00 

22 davs, engineer 3.00 66.00 

236 days, carpenter 2.50 590.00 

260 days, helper 2.00 520.00 

54 8 days. Total ' $2.30 $1,266.00 

Train Service — 

2 days, conductor $3.50 $ 7.00 

4 days, brakeman 2.50 10.00 

2 days, locomotive and crew 25.00 50.00 

Total .$67.00 

Miscellaneous — 

11 tons coal for hoisting engine, at $3 $ 33.00 

Repairs to hoisting engine 24.00 

Tools, etc 135.00 

Total . $192.00 

Bridge Materials — 

88,800 ft. B. M. timber, at $15 $1,332.00 

44.800 lbs. wrought iron, at 2 y, cts 1,120.00 

40,000 lbs. ca.st iron, at l.S cts 720.00 

Total $3,172.00 



BRIDGES. 1531 

Falsework Material — 

1,120 lin. ft. piles (28 piles, 40 ft), at 8 cts % 89.60 

30,000 ft. B. M., second hand, at $8.00 240.00 

500 lbs. iron, at 2^2 cts 12.50 

Total $242.10 

±'ile Ahxitments Material — 

1,600 lin. ft. piles (40 piles, 40 ft.), at 8 cts $128.00 

1.700 lbs. iron, at 2i/) cts 42 50 

7,600 ft. B. M., at $15 114.'00 

Total $284.50 

Pile Abutment Labor — 

5 days, foreman, at $3.00 $ 15.00 

5 days, engineman, at 3.00 15.00 

36 days, carpenter, at 2.50 90.00 

30 days, helper, at 2.00 60.00 



76 days. Total $2.37 $180.00 

STTMMAET. 

Labor — 

32 days, Ipading material, at .$2.34 $ 75.00 

214 days, loading engine 2.50 6.25 

2 days, loading pile driver 2.25 4.50 

17 days, fitting up pile driver 2.40 40.75 

15 days, driving falsework 2.40 36.00 

548 days, erecting bridge 2.30 1,266.00 

2 days, train service 67.00 

76 days, building pile abutments 2.37 180.00 

Miscellaneous supplies 192.00 



Total labor and supplies $1,867.50 

Materials — 

Falsework material $ 242.10 

Abutment material 284.50 

Bridge material — 

88,800 ft. B. M., at $15 1,332.00 

44.800 lbs., wrought iron, 2 1/-. cts 1,120.00 

40,000 lbs. cast iron, 1.8 cts." 720.00 



Total material $3,698.60 

Total labor and matei-ial $5,566.10 

The abutments were not protected by cribs, nor is any riprap 
included in the above cost. In subsequent issues we shall give 
costs of abutments protected by cribs and riprap. 
The cost per lineal foot of bridge was as follows: 
Labor — Per lin. ft. 

General labor, loading materials, etc. . . $ 162.50 $ 1.08 

Erecting bridge 1,266.00 8.44 

Train service 67.00 0.45 

Building pile abutments 180.00 1.20 

Miscellaneous supplies 192.00 1.28 

Total labor $12.45 

Material — 

Falsework $ 242.10 $1.61 

Abiitment 284.50 1.90 

Bridge 3,172.00 21.15 

Total material .$24.66 

Total labor and material $37.11 



1532 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

It will be noted that the cost of fitting up the pile driver ($40.75) 
was excessive ; but, on the other hand, the cost of driving the pile 
falsework ($36) was low. 

The cost of framing and erecting the bridge ($1,266) includes the 
cost of erecting the upper falsework. 

The labor on the pile abutments ($180) was high, considering 
there were no cribs. 

Cost of Two Howe Truss Bridges of 120-ft. and 130-ft. Span, In- 
cluding Falsework and Pile Abutments.* — The following data relate 
to a through Howe truss bridge 130 ft. long over all, for which 
a contract was let for the labor of erecting the bridge. The con- 
tractor paid bridge carpenters $2.75 a day and helpers $2.00 

The bridge was designed for a live load of engine and tender 
weighing 112 tons, followed by a train of 3,000 lbs. per lin. ft. The 
dead load was 1,650 lbs. per lin. ft. 

The cost of the bridge to the railway company was as follows : 
Falsework — 

840 lin. ft. piles (20 piles) delivered at 8 cts. . .$ 67.20 

840 lin. ft. piles driven at 12 cts 100.80 

24,000 ft. B. M. timber delivered at $15 360.00 

24,000 ft. B. M. timber framed and erected at $7.50 180.00 
400 lbs. iron at 25 cts 10.00 

Total, $5.52 per lin. ft. bridge $ 718.00 

Pile Abutments — 

1,400 lin. ft. piles (40 piles, 35 ft.) delivered at 

8 cts $ 112.00 

1,400 lin. ft. piles, driven, 12 cts 168.00 

1,700 lbs. iron, 2.5 cts 42.50 

7.600 ft. B. M. timber delivered, $15 114.00 

7.600 ft. B. M. framed and erected, $7.50 57.00 

Total for two abutments $ 493.50 

Howe Truss Bridge — 

29,000 lbs. cast iron, at 2 cts $ 580.00 

34,000 lbs. wrought iron, 21/2 cts • 850.00 

71,700 ft. B. M. timber, at $15 1,075.00 

130 lin. ft. bridge framed and erected, at $7.50... 975.00 

Total $3,480.00 

Train service 50.00 

Total $3,530.00 . 

Summary — 

Falsework, materials $ 437.20 

Falsework, labor (by contract) 280.80 

Pile abutments, materials 268.50 

Pile abutments, labor .' 225.00 

Howe truss bridge, materials 2,515.00 

Howe truss bridge, labor 975.00 

Train service 50.00 

Grand total, 130 lin. ft., at $36.50 $4,751.50 

It will be noted that there was no crib, crib filling or riprap pro- 
tection for the abutments. It would not be excesive to add 400 cu. 
yds. of riprap and rock in cribs, at $1.50 per cu. yd., and 24.000 ft. 

*Engineering-Contracting, 3v\y 3, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1.j33 

B. M. (or 2,000 lin. ft.) of hewed timber for two cribs to protect 

the abutments. A common contract price in the West is 15 fcts. per 
lin. ft. of crib timber in place. 

The full cost of the timber for the falsework in this bridge is 
charged against the bridge, but, since most of it possesses a sal- 
vage value, not to exceed half the cost of the timber (half of 
?360) should be so charged. 

It will be noted that the contract price of framing and erecting 
the bridge was $950, which is equivalent to about $14 per M. ft. 
B. M. in the bridge, exclusive of the falsework. The falsework 
cost $718, which, if added to the $975, gives a cost of $1,693, or $ia 
per lin. ft. of bridge. 

The piles for the falsework were driven in bents about 11 ft. 
apart, two piles to the bent. While this is a sufficient support fcr 
the dead load of a Howe truss bridge, it is evidently insufficient 
to support any trainload during construction. In rebuilding an old 
bridge, without interruption to traffic, it is evident that the false- 
work would be much more expensive than in this case, which is 
typical- of new construction rather than of reconstruction. 

The following costs relate to a Howe truss bridge 120 ft. long, 
and the remarks concerning the 130-ft. bridge apply also to this 
one : 

Falsework — 

540 lin. ft. piles (18 piles) delivered at 8 cts..$ 43.20 

540 lin. ft. piles driven, 12 cts 64.80 

28,000 ft. B. M. at $15 420.00 

28,000 ft. B. M. framed and erected, $7.50 210.00 

400 lbs. iron, 2.5 cts 10.00 

Total at $6.23 per lin. ft. bridge $ 748.00 

Pile Ahutments — 

Same as for previous bridge $ 493.50 

Howe Truss Bridge — 

63,000 ft. B. M. at $15 $ 945.00 

28,400 lbs. wrought iron at 2.5 cts 710.00 

25,400 lbs. cast iron at 2 cts 508.00 

120 lin. ft. framed and erected, $7.50 900.00 

Total $3,063.00 

Train service 50.00 

Summary — ■» 

Falsework, materials $ 4 6 3. 20' 

Falsework, labor (by contract) 274.80 

Pile abutment, materials 268.5(^ 

Pile abutment, labor 225.00 

Howe truss bridge, m.aterials 2,163.00 

Howe truss bridge, labor 900.00 

Train service '. 50.00' 

Grand total, at $36.20 per lin. ft $4,344.50 

As previously stated, no protection cribs, rock filling, or riprap 
are included in the cost of the abutments. 

Cost of Constructing Six Crib Piers, Three Howe Truss Spans and 
Ona Steel Draw Span.* — Crib piers for railway and highway bridges 
possess the great merit of making it unnecessary to build coffer 

*Engineering-Contracting, July 24, 1907. 



1534 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

dams, and, on this account, have always been popular with West- 
ern engineei'S. During recent years, however, concrete piers, built 
within coffer dams, have become more common than crib piers. 
Nevertheless, there are many places where the crib pier is still the 
most economic pier that can be designed. 

The bridge to be described in this article consists of three Howe 
truss spans of 150-ft. each, and a steel draw span almost 300-ft. 
long. It crosses a Washington river near its mouth, where the 
tidal currents cause a daily rise and fall of several feet. The 
river is 19 ft. deep at extreme low tide, and the top of the piers 
is 40-ft. above the river bed. 

With the exception of the pivot pier, which will be described sep- 
arately, the piers were crib piers resting on piles. A description 
of the construction of one of these five piers will serve for the rest. 
Crtt) Pier. — Bach pier is supported by 52 piles driven 3 ft. o. to c. 
to a depth of 30 ft. Piles 60 ft. long were necessary, due to the 
depth of the water at high tide, and were sawed off 7 ft. above the 
bottom of the river, or 12 ft. below extreme low water. The 
driving was very hard, the bottom being of sand in which the 
average penetration of the pile was only 2 ins. under the blow of 
a 2,200-lb. hammer falling freely 20 ft. For sawing off the piles, 
a cii-cular saw on a 40 ft. vertical shaft was used. The shaft was 
rotated by an engine mounted on a carriage movable in any direc- 
tion on two tracks at right angles to each other, one track being 
above the other. 

While the piles were being driven for a pier, the crib was con- 
structed. Each crib consisted of a bottom, or floor, made of three 
solid courses of 12 x 12 -in. timbers drift-bolted together, and on top 
of this bottom was built the crib proper. The bottom was built 
on shore and then launched. Then the crib was built of 12 x 12'3 
log-house fashion, on top of the "bottom" until it reached a height 
of 12 ft. The crib was then floated over the rest of foundation 
piles, and arrangements made to lower it upon the piles. To insure 
a steady and even lowering of the crib, without risk of capsizing, 
it was necessary to lower the crib by means of blocks and tackle 
fastened to two bents of guide piles, one bent on each side of 
the crib. Rock was dumped into the crib, and it was sunk until it 
rested on the piles. This left the upper course of timber above the 
level of low water, and in readiness to continue the building up of 
the crib to the desired height. The cribs were designed so that 
the load of the bridge came directly upon the rock filling in the 
crib, the intention being to build masonry upon the rock fill after 
the crib timbers above the water level have rotted out. 

In this connection it is interesting to note that the crib timbers 
were compressed nearly 1-16 in. per ft. of height, after the load 
came upon the piers. Part of this compression was doubtless due to 
shrinkage of the timber upon drying. 

We would offer a suggestion as to a possible improvement in this 
form of crib pier construction. Let the foundation piles and the 
crib be built, in the manner above described, up to the low water 
level. But from that level to the top of the pier, substitute rein- 



BRIDGES. 1535 

forced concrete "timbers" in place of wood. These concrete "tim- 
bers" could be cast on shore, and made so as to interlock, forming 
a solid and durable outside wall. Loose rock filling and gravel 
could then be deposited inside this wall, thus giving the necessary 
stability to withstand the impact of ice and drift. A pier of this 
sort would be far cheaper than a solid masonry pier, but would 
possess sufficient stability and a durability equal to that of solid 
masonry. In pier building, it should be remembered, the engineer 
seeks to secure a mass that will resist impacts rather than a mono- 
lith of great strength. 

Returning now to the methods used in this crib pier construc- 
tion, one feature is worthy of particular note. A crib having a 
height two or three times greater than its width is very "cranky" 
when floating in the water. It tends to turn over, and this 
tendency is made serious where the tides are rising and falling. It 
Was necessary to have one man in constant attendance day and 
night, tightening or loosening the g"uy-lines with the changes 
of water level. 

Before placing the crib pier over the piles, riprap was deposited 
between them, and leveled off by a diver. After the crib pier was 
in place, riprap was piled all around the pier to a depth of 6 ft. 
above the river bottom. 

The Pivot Pier. — This pier differed from the piers just described 
in that it was a stone masonry pier resting on a timber grillage on 
top of piles. There were 121 piles, driven 3 ft. c. to c, forming 
a square 32 ft. on a side. The piles were sawed off only 18 ins. 
above the river bottom. 

Sawing them off so close to the bottom was a mistake, for it en- 
tailed a great deal of trouble in placing the grillage upon the 
piles. This was due to the fact that dirt lodged upon the tops of 
the piles after they were sawed off, making it necessary for a 
diver to clean the piles off. The driving of the piles 3 ft. c. to c. 
caused the bottom to rise 6 to 12 ins. Then the eddies formed 
by the projecting pile heads and by the draw protection caused 
the floating sediment in the river to deposit around and on top 
of the piles. To add to the difficulty, the contractor had unfor- 
tunately deposited some of the riprap iinmediately after driving the 
piles, and many of the stones had lodged on top of the piles. 

In this connection we recall a similar experience arising from 
the deposition of sand around the piles while they were being sawed 
off, dulling the teeth of the saw and adding greatly to the ex- 
pense of cutting off the piles. The eddj^ caused by the piles of 
the drajiv protection was largely accountable for the trouble. 
Pinally a V-shaped wing dam of boards was built in the draw 
protection immediately above the site of the pier, and it served 
to divert the stream of sand and gravel that is constantly rolling 
along the bottom of a swiftly flowing river. 

The lesson learned by such experiences is simple : Do not cut 
off piles less than 2 ft. above the bottom of a river, unless there is 
some excellent reason for so doing. 



1536 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The grillage built for this pivot pier was 32 ft. square and 
15 ft. high, made of 12 x 12-in. timbers laid solid and drift-bolted 
together, except in the three upper courses where the timbers were 
laid 2 ft. apart, and the space filled with concrete. 

At the bottom of the grillage, two timbers in each course pro- 
jected beyond the others, so that guy lines could be fastened to 
them, by which the pier was kept balanced during construction 
While floating on the rising and falling tides. The guy lines were 
fastened to two pile bents, one on each side of the pier, which, to- 
gether with the pile bents of the draw protection, formed a square 
enclosure in which the pier was guided to the bottom. 

Of course the grillage sank under the weight of the masonry 
which was built on top of it. This masonry was laid inside on 
"open caisson" built on top of the grillage, the "caisson" being 
octagonal in shape, made of 3-in. plank, and 16 ft. high. The 
plank was beveled on the outer edges to provide caulking seams. 
Two small gates were provided in the "caisson," so that, when the 
pier had set properly on the piles at low tide, water could be let 
into the "caisson" and left there until the pier was finished. Then 
the gates were again closed, the water pumped out, and the 
masonry was painted. 

Cost of the Piers. — The labor cost records were not kept in as 
great detail as one might wish, yet they possess considerable value. 
The quantities of materials and contract prices, however, will serve 
as an excellent guide, and are as follows : 

3,120 lin. ft. piles (52) delivered at...$ 0.08 ? 249.60 

3,120 lin. ft. piles driven at 0.20 624.00 

54,000 ft. B. M. delivered at 15.00 810.00 

54,000 ft. B. M. framed and placed 11.00 549.00 

4,000 lbs. iron at 0.03 120.00 

8 guide piles delivered at 3.00 24.00 

4,000 ft. B. M. falsework at 15.00 60.00 

190 cu. yds. rock (crib fill) 2.00 380.00 

580 cu. yds. riprap at 2.00 1,060.00 

5 cu. yds. concrete at 8.00 40.00 

Total $3,961.60 

This is equivalent to $100 per lin. ft. of height of pier, since the 
piers were 40 ft. high above the bed of the river. 

Cost of Pivot Pier. 

7,260 lin. ft. piles (121) delivered at. $0.08 ? 440.80 

7,200 lin. ft. pile driven at 0.20 1,452.00 

162,800 ft. B. M. delivered at 15.00 2,442.00 

162,800 ft. B. M. placed at 8.00 , 1,302.40 

7,200 lbs. iron at 0.03 216.00 

16 guide piles at 3.00 48.00 

13,200 ft. B. M. falsework at 15.00 198.00 

318 cu. yds. masonry at 15.00 4,770.00 

570 cu. yds. riprap at 2.00 1,140.00 

Total $12,009.20 

This is equivalent to .$300 per lin. ft. of height of pier. 
The contract price for driving the piles, 20 cts. per lin. ft., was 
high, considering the length of the pile, for it amounted to $12 per 



BRIDGES. 1537 

pile. But the driving was very hard, and the price for driving 
included cutting off tlae piles below water. It required 26 days to 
drive the 121 piles in the pivot pier and 10 days more to cut them 
off. Had a water jet been used the driving would have cost much 
less. The average rate and wages paid by the contractor for the 
pile driver crew was |2.50 per day. If a crew of 6 men, a pile 
driver engineman and a foreman were reciuired, the wages and 
fuel amounted to $25 a day. Hence if 5 piles Avere driven per day 
the cost Avas $5 a pile. Since 12 piles were sawed off per day the 
cost of sawing was more than ?2 per pile. No detailed records of 
the actual cost to the contractor are available further than that it 
required 3,800 days' labor at $2.50, or $9,500, to drive the piles, 
frame and place the timber, place the crib, fill the riprap for all 
the piers and lay the masonry. The stone for the masonry was de- 
livered cut ready to lay. The riprap was delivered on scows and 
measured on the scows before placing. 

The Howe Truss Spans. — Three Howe truss spans, each 150 ft. 
long, and one steel draw span, 293 ft. long, were built as follows: 

These Howe truss bridges were erected on a pile falsework, each 
span having six bents of three 60-ft. piles to a bent. The out- 
side piles of each bent were drawn in 4 ft. at the top and well 
braced to withstand the action of the deep swift river. 

To protect the falsework against drift wood a temporary log 
boom was placed on the upstream side of the bridge during 
erecting. 

After the bridge was erected, the falsework piles were broken off 
at the bottom of the river. 

The railway company furnished all the material for the false- 
work, as well as for the bridge. The contract price of $9 per lin. 
ft. of bridge covered the labor cost of erecting and removing tha 
falsework, as well as framing and erecting the bridge. The cost of 
each of the 150-ft. Howe truss bridge spans was as follows: 

88.600 ft. B. M. in bridge at $15 ....$1,329.00 

45,600 lbs. wrought iron at 3.5 cts 1,576.00 

38,800 lbs. cast iron at 2.5 cts 970.00 

1,080 lin. ft. piles (18) in falsework at 8 cts 86.40 

4,000 ft. B. M. in falsework at $15 60.00 

Erecting 150 ft. at $9 1,350.00 

Total $5,391.40 

This is equivalent to $36 per lin. ft. of bridge, exclusive of the 
piers and abutments. 

There was no profit to the contractor at the $9 per lin. ft. for 
erection, for it required 400 man-days per span. The average 
wages paid were $3.30 per day. Hence the labor cost $1,320 to 
erect the falsework and the Howe truss span. In our issues of 
June 26 and July 3 we have given in detail the labor cost of erect- 
ing similar bridges where the cost of erection was considerably less 
than in this instance. (See pages 1529 and 1532.) 

The Steel Draw Span. — The span was 293 ft. long, and weighed 
265 tons. The steel was unloaded from cars into a material j'-ard 
and conveyed on scows to the "draw protection," where it was 
erected by means of a traveler. 



1538 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The draw protection was built in the usual manner, consisting 
of pile bents 10 ft. apart, three piles to the bent, each pile being 
70 ft. long. A log boom was built entirely around the draw 
protection, the opposite sides of the boom being held together by 
cross logs between the 2d and 3d bents and between the 6th and 
7th bents. The boom was made of sticks 60 ft. long, held together 
with %-in. chains and shackles. 

The cost of the draw protection was as follows : 

5,180 lin. ft. piles (74) at 8 cts ? 414.40 

40,900 ft. B. M. timber at $15 '. 613.50 

2,800 lbs. iron at 3 cts 76.00 

680 lin. ft. of boom sticks at 8 cts 54.40 

3,900 ft. B. M. timber wasted and in staging 

at $15 58.50 

Driving 74 piles at $6.00 444.00 

Framing and placing 40,900 ft. B. M. at $8 327.20 

Total $1,988.00 

After the erection of the draw protection and the traveler and 
falsework, it required 3 8 days to erect tlie steel draw span. - 

In order to make sure that the panel sections of the top and 
bottom chords would come together before riveting, both ends of the 
draw bridge were jacked up after being erected and while tem- 
porarily held togetlier with bolts. This brought all the joints of 
the top chord together, and, after riveting the entire top chord, the 
false work was knocked out, and in a suspended position the bot- 
tom cliord was forced together and riveted. However, wlien the 
bridge was swung, it was found that the dead load was sulflcient 
to cause the ends of the draw to sag to such an extent that they 
were 1 ^4 ins. below the proper level. This made it necessary to 
lower tlie pedestals on the rest piers a corresponding amount. 

The cost of the draw span was as follows: 

530,000 lbs. steel at 4.3 cts $22,802.90 

21,100 ft. B. M. ties and guide rail $15 316.50 

Paint 380.00 

Laying timber deck, 100 days, at $3.30 330.00 

Erecting bridge, including materials and labor on 

falsework (by contract) 1,750.00 

Total $25,579.40 

This is equivalent to $87 per lin. ft. of bridge, not including 
the cost of tlie piers and the draw protection. 

The timber deck was laid as an "extra work job" by force -ac- 
count, and the labor cost at least twice what it should have cost, 
as can be seen by reference to costs of similar work in our issues 
of April 17, May 8, and May 29. (See pages 1501 and 1506.) 

The contractor received only $1,750 for erecting this 2fi5-ton 
bi'idge, or $6.60 per ton. It actually cost him nearly $8.15 per 
ton for labor alone, for it took 800 man-days at $2.70, or $2,160, 
to erect the traveler, the falsework, and the bridge. It took 60 
man-days to paint the bridge, at $3.30 per day, or $198, which is 



BRIDGES. 1539 

equivalent to 75 cts. per ton, making a total of $S.90 per ton for 
tha labor of erecting and painting. 

No record of t!ie cost of falseworlt for this draw span is avail- 
able, but it was a comparatively small item, for no lower false- 
work is necessary where a draw bridge is erected on the draw 
protection. 

Cost of the Frazer River Bridge. — The Frazer River bridge at 
New Westminster, B. C, was built in 1902. It is a double deck 
bridge, the upper deck for wagon traffic and the lower deck for 
steam and electric traffic. The spans are as follows: One 225 ft., 
one 380 ft., and one swing span 380 ft., five spans 159 ft. each, 
making a total of 1,780 ft. On the north end there are three ap- 
proaches, two for railway tracks and one for highway, the length 
of approach averaging about 300 ft. The clear roadway is 16 ft. 
wide, making the trusses 18 to 19 ft. c. to c. The weight of steel 
is 6,854,000 lbs., and there are 765,000 ft. B. M., and 15,000 lin. ft. 
piles in approaches. The contract price for substructure and super- 
structure was 1750,000. 

Estimates of the Cost of Combination and All-Steel Highway 
Bridge of 190-ft. Span.— Mr. H. G. Tyrrell gives the following: 

The bridge in question was a single span structure designed for 
the Pacific Coast. The trusses were to be pin-connected with 10 
panels of 19 ft. each, and inclined top chord. The principal dimen- 
sions and specified loads were as follows: 

Span, 190 ft. c. to c. 

Roadway, 24 ft. 

Two walks, each 6 ft. wide. 

Total width of bridge, 41 ft. 

Depth of trusses, 27 ft. to 33 ft. 

Floor, 4-in. wood block paving on 3-in. plank, laid on wood joints. 

Uniform live load on floor, 100 lbs. per sq. ft. 

Concentrated load on floor, 15-ton roller or two electric cars on 
each track. 

Live load, per lin. ft. of bridge, 3,300 lbs. 

Dead load, per lin. ft. of bridge, 2,345 lbs. 

For the "combination" design, hard pine was used for top chords, 
web posts, portals, lateral struts, floor -beams and joists. The 
remaining parts were of steel. 

The estimated quantities for this case were : 

Bye-bars ." 42,180 lbs. 

Cast-iron joint blocks 19,720 

Lateral rods 5,810 " 

Machined work 5,940 " 

Shoe plates 5,200 j^ 

Loops ^'^^n "• 

Hangers 1,240 

Total 83,250 lbs. Cost $ 3.130 



1540 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Hard pine chords and posts 17,500 ft. B. M. 

Hard pine lateral struts 3,080 " 

Floor plank 19,740 " 

Floor joists 22,240 " " 

Floor beams 14,800 " 



Total 77,360 ft. B. M. Cost $ 2,400 

Paving 504 sq. yds " 750 

Fence, 400 lin. ft " 200 

Erection " 1,200 



Total cost of combination span = about $1 

per sq. ft. of total floor Cost ? 7,680 

For the all-steel design the quantities were : 

Steel, 180,000 lbs Cost $ 7,360 

Floor plank, 19.74 M; wood joist, 22.24 M " 1,435 

Fence, 400 lin. ft " 200 

Paving, 504 sq. yds " 750 

Erection " 1,200 



Total cost of steel span, .about $1.43 

per sq. ft. of total floor Cost $10,945 

The above estimates are for the entire superstructure in each 
case. If we compare now the cost of the substituted parts only, we 
have in the combination design, the top chords, web posts, portals, 
lateral struts and floor beams contain : 

Hard pine, 35.3 M, at $35 M $1,220 

Cast iron joint blocks, 19,700 lbs., at 3 cts 591 



Total $1,811 

For the all-steel design the same parts contain : 

Steel, 118,200 lbs., at 4 cts $4,720 

Summarizing, we have: 

Combination bridge Cost $ 7,680 

Steel bridge " 10,945 

Combination chords, etc " 1,811 

Steel chords, etc - " 4,720 

Hence, we say roughly that the combination bridge cost one- 
third less than the steel one. Also that the comparative cost of 
wood (including necessary cast-iron blocks), and steel for top 
chords, web posts, portals, lateral struts and floor beams, is as 
1 to 3. 

Cost of a 300-ft. Highway Drawbridge. — A highway drawbridge 
across the Harlem River, 3d Ave., New York city, was begun in 
1893 and finished in 1896. The span is 300 ft. long; the width is 
87% ft. over all. There are four lattice trusses. The three car- 
riage ways are each 20 ft. wide, and the twq sidewalks are each 
9 ft. wide carried on cantilever brackets. The floor is of buckle 
r-lates covered with concrete and asphalt pavement. The bridge 
weighs 2,500 tons, and is carried on a 50-ft. turntable. The time 
required for a full opening is 2 mins. and 2 mins. more for closing 
and locking. A 50-hp. engine does the work, but a duplicate power 
plant is provided. 



BRIDGES. 1541 

The contract price was $1,111,000 for the bridge complete, which 
is $47 per sq. ft. of roadway and sidewalks. This is a very high 
cost. The total cost, including lands, was more than $2,000,000. 

The following are some of the important quantities and bidding 
prices : 

Unit prices. 
107,500 ft. B. M. yellow pine in temporary bridge. .$40.00 
200,000 ft. B. M. hemlock in temporary bridge.... 30.00 
5,000 cu. yds. pneumatic caissons including con- 
crete filling 29.00 

Portland cement concrete, cu. yd 9.00 

Natural cement concrete, cu. yd 5.40 

Granite Ashlar facing below low water, cu : yd 14.00 

Oranite Ashlar facing above low water, cu. yd 20.00 

Granite caps, cu. ft 2.50 

Granite coping, cu. ft 3.00 

Granite columns, capitols and bases 2.00 

Granite dimension, in rough bases 0.50 

Rough pointing, sq. ft 0.40 

Fine pointing, sq. ft 0.50 

Pour-cut axing, sq. ft 0.50 

Six-cut axing, sq. ft 0.60 

Bight-cut axing, sq. ft 0.70 

382,000 lbs. rolled steel and iron in turntable.... 0.048 

1,692,000 lbs. rolled steel and iron in draw span... 0.039 

1,386,000 lbs. rolled steel and iron in deck spans.. 0.087 

4,200 lbs. corrugated plates, deck spans 0.034 

357,000 lbs. buckle plates, draw spans 0.032 

282,000 lbs. steel plate girders 0.033 

420,000 lbs. steel rolled beams 0.026 

117,800 lbs. castings in wheels 0.07 

126,000 lbs. castings hub and bed plates 0.05 

2,000 lbs. other iron castings 0.025 

35,000 lbs. steel plates or angles 0.025 

Cost of a Steel Arch Bridge. — The Cambridge Bridge across the 
Charles River (Boston) was built in 1901. It is a highway bridge, 
1,768 ft. long, consisting of 11 spans of steel arches (of 12 ribs 
each), having spans varying from 101 to 188 ft. The height at the 
center is 48 ft. above low water. The bridge is 105 ft. wide be- 
tween railings. From the bottom of the piles to the surface of the 
roadway is 100 ft. The construction involved 80,000 cu. yds. 
dredging, 85,000 cu. yds. concrete, 20,000 cu. yds. granite, 25,000 
piles and 16,000,000 lbs. steel. The estimated cost is $2,500,000, or 
$1,400 per lin. ft., or $14 per sq. ft. 

Cost of Red Rock Cantilever Bridge. — Mr. S. M. Rowe gives the 
following data relative to this bridge, which was built in 1889 
across the Colorado River in Arizona for the Atlantic and Pacific 
R. R. Co. (See p. 1616 for the cost of the caisson.) 

The bridge was designed for a live load of two engines, each 
weighing 188,000 lbs. (including 74,000-lb. tender), concentrating 
46 tons on a wheel base of 11 ft. 9 ins., followed by a train of 
3,000 lbs. per ft. 

The length of the cantilever bridge is 990 f t. ; the span between 
the piers being 660 ft., and each anchor arm being 165 ft. 



1542 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following is the weight of metal in the bridge : 

Lbs. 

Bast anchorage, exclusive of floor beams 78,435 

West anchorage, exclusive of floor beams 92,488 

Floor of anchor and cantilever arms 271,510 

Two anchor arms 969,870 

Two cantilever arms 969,870 

Metal over piers (posts, etc.) 178,790 

Expansive panels (chords and X posts) 128,170 

Temporary members (wedges, reinforced bars) . . 76,040 

.Suspended span 701,975 

Total 3,416,618 

About 70% of this was steel and 30% iron. 
The cost of this superstructure was as follows: 

Iron and steel erected (including freight) $^13,537.83 

Timber 1,684.68 

Tools and materials 625.58 

Fuel and water 1,340.94 

Local and train service 1,202.78 

Labor in addition to contract work 2,138.79 

Engineering 9,624.14 

Total $230,154.74 

The cost of the substructure was as follows : 

Caisson (see page 1617 for details) $128,263.19 

Masonry piers and abutments 80,267.65 

Preparatory 23,748.10 

Total $232,278.94 

Grand total $462,433.66 

This is equivalent to $463 per lin. ft. 

The "preparatory" work consisted of the following items: 

Soundings $ 7,808.79 

Trestle and tracks to caisson 6,238.17 

Track to quarry 7,313.58 

Freight 525.15 

Demurrage 900.00 

Engineering 962.41 

Total $23,748.10 

The cost of this bridge was unusually high. 

Estimated Cost of a Cantilever Bridg.e and of a Suspension Bridge 
Across the St. Lawrence. — In 1896 the Montreal Bridge Company 
received competitive plans and estimates for a proposed bridge 
across the St. Lawrence River at Montreal. The bridge was speci- 
fied to be one channel span of 1,250 ft., two side spans of 500 ft. 
each, 15 steel viaduct spans on south approach of 250 ft. each, 18 
viaduct spans on north approach of 60 to 240 ft. each, the clear 
headway in the channel span to be 150 ft. The bridge was to be 
for a double track steam railway, two street railway tracks, a car- 
riageway and two sidewalks. The piers of the cantilever were to be 
of masonry. 

The prize plan was submitted by Edward S. Shaw of Boston. 
He increased the side spans to bOO ft. The bridge was designed 



BRIDGES. 1543 

to be 80 ft. wide, with four trusses. The stone sub-piers are each 
30x110 ft. in plan on top, 60 ft. above low water, surmounted by 
steel piers 230 ft. high. The middle roadway is 26 ft. wide and is 
for the double track railway; the two side roadways are each 21% 
ft. wide ; flanked by 6-ft. sidewalks on brackets. The estimated 
weight of structural steel was : 

Lbs. 

Main cantilever and central span 39,460.000 

South viaduct approach 26.340.000 

North viaduct approach 8,200!000 

Total 74,000,000 

Estimated cost of superstructure $3,514,000 

This is about 4% cts. per lb. It would appear from one of the 
estimates made by another competitor that custom's duty of 1 ct. 
per lb. of steel ready for erection would be required. 

A suspension bridge design was submitted by Mr. C. C. Went- 
worth, M. Am. Soc. C. E. It was to be a stiffened suspension bridge 
of 1,300 ft. span, with two 500 ft. side spans supported from the 
cables, giving a total length of 2,300 ft. There were to be 4 cables, 
each of 17% ins. diameter. The two stiffening trusses were to be 
52 ft. apart on the clear, leaving the roadway for the railway and 
electric lines. The carriageways and sidewalks were to be on 
brackets outside the trusses. 

The estimated cost was as follows: 

11,000,000 lbs. riveted steel center span, at 4.25 cts $ 467,500 

20,000,000 lbs. steel in towers, side spans and anchorage, 

at 31/2 cts 700,000 

30,000,000 lbs. steel in viaduct spans and towers, at 3 cts 900.000 

8,000,000 lbs. wire in cables ,at 6 cts 480,000 

Copper covering on cables 20,000 

Timber floors and ties 81,000 

600 tons steel rails 18,000 

Hand railing 25,000 

60,000 cu. yds. anchorage masonry 360,000 

Total for superstructure and anchorage $3,051,500 

It will be noted that if the same unit prices for steel had been 
assumed in both styles of bridge, the cost would have been more 
nearly equal, although about 7 per cent less for the suspension 
bridge. 

Cost of the Brooklyn Suspension Bridge. — The Brooklyn Bridge 
across East River, New York City, was begun in 1870 and finished 
in 1883. Work was suspended at times due to lack of funds, so 
that the actual building required only 10 of the 13 years. 

The roadway is 86 ft. wide, divided into five sections, two outside 
for vehicles and trolley cars, two inner for electric trains, and the 
middle one (12 ft.) for pedestrians. Height of bridge above high 
water in center, 135 f t. ; height of masonry towers above high water, 
272 ft. The Manhattan tower contains 46,945 cu. yds. of masonry. 
The Brooklyn tower contains 38,214 cu. yds. The depth of the Man- 
hattan tower foundation below high water is 78 ft. The depth of 
the Bpooklyn tower foundation below high water is 45 ft. Di- 
mensions of towers at high water line, 59 x 140 ft. 



1544 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of the bridge and approaches was $9,000,000, or about 
$1,500 per lin. ft., or a little more than $17 per sq. ft. The cost 
of real estate and terminals was about $6,000,000 additional. 

Comparative data as to the Brooklyn and Williamsburg bridges 
are given below. 

The weight of the 1,545 ft. of main span of Brooklyn bridge be- 
tween end suspenders is as follows : 

Lbs. 

Cables 3,226,000 

Suspended superstructure (steel work) 5,930,000 

Timber flooring, track, etc 2,380,000 

Hauling, electric feeder, cables and line sleeves. . 220,000 

Pneumatic tubes 262,000 

Suspenders and connections 356,000 

Over-floor stays (vertical loads) 386,000 



Total fixed load on main span 12,760,000 

Cost of the Williamsburg Suspension Bridge — Tlie Williamsburg 
bridge, across East River, at Delancy St., New York City, is the 
longest suspension bridge in the world, and its main span is ex- 
ceeded only by the Forth cantilever bridge in Scotland. It wa.^ 
begun in 1896 and finished in 1903. The roadway is double deck, 
distributed as follows : 

2 footwalks. each lOVa ft 21 ft. 

2 bicycle patlis, each 7 ft 14 ft. 

2 elevated railway tracks 22 ft. 

4 trolley tracks 40 ft. 

2 roadways 40 ft. 

Equivalent width single-deck bridge 1 3 7 ft. 

The width of the main span is 118 ft. over all. 
The comparative dimensions of tlie Williamsburg bridge and the 
Brooklyn bridge are given in Table II. 

Table II — Comparative Dimensions of "Williamsburg and Brooklyn 
Bridges, New York City. . 

Bridges. 

Length : Brooklyn. Williamsburg. 

Main span C. to C. of towers 1,595' 6" 1,600' 0" 

Land spans, tower — anchorage 930' 0" 596' 6" 

Brooklyn approach 971' 0" 1,865' 0" 

Manhattan approach 1,562' 6" 2,606' 2" 

Total of carriage way 5,989' 0" 7,264' 2" 

Height : 

Clear, above M. H. W. at center 135' 0" 140' 4%" 

Same, 200' each side of center 135' 0" 

Above M. H. W. to center of cable at 

tower 272' 0" 332' 8%" 

Above M. H. W. to roadway in center 

of span 138' 3" 145' SVa" 

Same, at center of tower 119' 3" 125' 7%" 

Of tower above roadway 159' 0" 210' 0" 

Width of bridge 85' 0" 118' 0" 

Grade of roadway in 100 ft 3' 3" 3' 0" 

Max. grade of roadway in 100 ft 3' 9" 3' 41/2" 

Foundation below M. H. W. : 

Brooklyn 45' 0" S. 91.9' N..107.5' 

Manhattan 78' 0" S. 66.0' N. 55.0' 



BRIDGES. 1545 

Size of Caissons: 

Brooklyn 168x102' (2) 63x79' 

Manhattan 172x102' (2) 60x76' 

Size of anchorages : 

At base — Brooklyn 129 x 119' 177 x 158' 

At base — Manhattan 129x119' 173' 41/," x 

A. . 151' 9" 

At top 117x104' 149' X 127' 5" 

Diameter of cables 15% 18% 

Number wires in each cable 5,2«6 7 700 

Length of wire weighing 1 lb 12' 10'' 3" 

Weight of one cable per lin. ft 500 lbs. 770 lbs 

Total miles of wire in 4 cables 14,361 17,432 

Versine at mean temperature 128' 178' 

Ultimate strength each cable, tons.... 12,200 24,500 
Permanent weight suspended : 

Prom main span cables, tons 6,780 13,740 

From shore span cables, tons 7,900 ' 

The main towers of "Williamsburg Bridge are of steel, 310 ft. high 
from top of masonry to center of cable over the tower. 
The quantities of the principal materials were as follows : 

Lbs. 

2 towers .' 12,192,000 

2 end spans 12,280,000 

1 main suspended span 15,544,000 

Cables and suspenders 10,000,000 

Brooklyn viaduct approach 12,170,000 

New York viaduct approach 21,100,000 

In anchorages 6,200,000 

Total 89,486,000 

Concrete, cu. yds 60,000 

Stone masonry, cu. yds 130,000 

Excavation, cu. yds 125,000 

Timber, ft. B. M 8,000,000 

The cost of the bridge was $11,000,000 (exclusive of land), and 
some of the items were as follows : 

Anchorages, Brooklyn side $ 771,778 

Anchorages, Manhattan side 797,770 

Tower foundation, Brooklyn 485,082 

Tower foundation, Manhattan 373,462 

Suspended span 1,123,400 

Brooklyn viaduct approach 947,000 

New York viaduct approach 1,464,000 

Cables 1,398,000 

Cost of Two Pneumatic Foundations for the Williamsburg Bridge. 

— The following data were given by Mr. Francis L Pruyn in 
Engineering-Contracting , Aug. 8, Aug. 15, and Aug. 22, 1906 : 

The work here described consisted of sinking two large caissons, 
63 X 79 ft. in size on the Brooklyn side of the "Williamsburg Bridge 
to bed rock, in one case 86 ft. and in the other 110 ft. below mean 
high water, filling same with concrete and building masonry piers 
upon this foundation inside of coffer dams up to elevation plus 
23 ft. above M. H. "W. All work was done by contract during the 
years 1897 to 1899. 

The caissons were constructed of yellow pine timber at the site 
of the work, launched, floated into place and sunk to the river 



1546 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bottom, which was about 55 ft. below M. H. W., by filling them 
with concrete. 

Compressed air was then turned on, and the caissons were sunk 
to bed rock. The material encountered, consisting of river mud, 
sand, clay and rock, was excavated either by means of Moran 
patent material locks or by wet blow out ; finally the working 
chamber was filled with concrete. While the caissons were being 
sunk, the coffer dams, which were attached to the caissons, were 
added in order to keep their tops above water, and inside of these 
coffer dams the masonry piers were built. During the sinking 
process the masonry was built only in sufficient quantity to give the 
weight necessary for sinking the caissons. After the caissons were 
sealed and the air taken off, the shafting and piping were removed, 
the spaces occupied by them filled with concrete, and the pier car- 
ried up to its final elevation. The coffer dams were then removed. 

The costs recorded were kept by daily engineer's force account, 
and are as accurate as is possible by that method. The plant 
charges were obtained by a careful inventory, to which prevailing 
prices were affixed. Depreciation was charged oft at about 40 per 
cent, which is perhaps 10 per cent too low. The general expense 
was 10 per cent of the total cost of materials and labor and in- 
cluded bond, interest on money invested, office and dock rentals, 
superintendent and field office salaries, watching, etc. No allow- 
ance was made for maintenance of main ofllce. 

Cost of Two Caissons. — The caissons were 63x79 ft. in size ; the 
south one was 39 ft. high and the north 53 ft. high. They were 
built one at a time, directly at the site of the work ; the launching 
ways extending back from the bulkhead line. A fioating pile 
driver fitted with a 70-ft. boom was used to build them. This 
served its purpose well, as the heel of the boom could be raised 
as the caissons were built up. When the caisson walls were 20 ft. 
high the caissons were launched and towed to site, where they were 
completed. The framing and building was done under the direc- 
tion of a very capable foreman, who obtained good and rapid work 
from his carpenters. All framing was done by hand ; a steam 
auger was used where practical for boring bolt holes, and a steam 
hammer was used part of the time for driving drift bolts. The 
sides and roof of caisson were built up of two courses of 12 x 12 
timber, the outside was sheathed with two courses of 3 -in. tongue 
and groove plank. There was also two courses of 3-in. plank in the 
roof. Above the caisson roof a cribwork of 12 x 12-in. timbers 
divided the space inside the walls into pockets 6 ft. Square. This 
cribwork was trussed by means of 3-in. plank spiked on ; it served 
to keep the weight of concrete and pier masonry off the roof. 

The working chamber, which was 7 ft. high, was divided by suit- 
able bulkheads. In order to secure air tightness the seams were 
calked with two strands of oakum well forced in. The chamber 
was then lined with 3-in. plank, the joints of which, as well as the 
spikes used in fastening same, were also treated with two strands 
of oakum and afterwards painted with white lead. 



BRIDGES. 1547 

The labor prices paid per 10-hour claj' were as follows: 

Foreman $5.00 

Sub-foreman 3.00 

Carpenter 3.00 

2.50 

Riggers 2.00 

Hoist Runners 2.50 

Steam Fitters 3.00 

2.50 

Blacksmith and Helpers... 4.00 

Laborers 1.50 

Calkers 3.25 

It will be noted that these rates are from 20 to 50 per cent 
lower than the present rates, which are now based on an 8-hour 
day for municipal work. 

The south caisson was built first, and the difference in cost be- 
tween it and the north caisson was brought about by the better 
organization on the second caisson, and by the larger quantity 
of the cheaper kind of framing in the cobwork and walls above 
the roof. The cost of material and labor is given in Table IIT. 

Figures 1 and 2 show the general construction of the caissons, 
method of framing, etc. [The figures are given in Engineering- 
Contracting, but omitted here on account of their size.] It is of 
Interest to note the increase in prices of yellow pine timber and 
other materials that had taken place since this work was done. 

The South Caisson was begun Aug. 13th, launched with walls 
20 ft. high Oct. 19th and finished to 39 ft. high Nov. 17th. 

The North Caisson was begun Oct. 20th, launched Nov. 30th and 
finished to 53 ft. high Feb. 8th, 1898. 

Launching Ways. — The caisson as launched 20 ft. high weighed 
954 tons and drew 11% ft. of water. The ways, four in number, 
were placed one under each outside wall and one under each bulk 
head. They consisted of two 12 x 12 timbers bolted side by side, 
sliding on two similar timbers fastened to the caisson. Three-inch 
plank were bolted to the outside of the ways to serve as guides. 
They were sloped I14 ins. to the foot, and extended 5 ft. below 
M. H. W. The pressure on the ways was 255 lbs. per sq. in. and 
they were lubricated with a mixture of tallow and graphite. 

Cost of Two Coffer Dams. — Cof£er dams 50 ft. high were attached 
to the caissons in order to allow sinking to proceed independently 
of, and without waiting for, the construction of the masonry, and 
also to keep the pressure on the cutting edge of the caisson under 
perfect control. The coffer dams were attached to the caissons 
by removable bolts, and built up in three sections 17 ft. high. The 
thickness of the walls diminished from 12 ins. on the bottom sec- 
tion to 6 ins. on the top and the interior horizontal bracing pro- 
vided for 13 ft. pockets for setting the masonry. The bracing was 
trussed with 3-in. plank in the same manner as the caissons, but so 
arranged that it could be removed as the pier masonry was built up. 

The coffer dams were built at night to avoid interference with 
other work. The cost of the material and labor is given in 
Table IV. 



1548 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



•4-J 


oooooo 


o 


OOO 


OOO 


o 


oo 


a 


oooooo 


o 


ooc:> 


ooo 


o_ 


oo 


s 


OOOt^ (MOCO 


o 


c^ioo 


C^icOr-H 


c-^ 


ojt-^ 


o 


C<1 CO 00 tH CO Tj^ 


03 


t^OiOi 


CO GO CO 


tH 


COU5 


■ S 


rHi-lrH 


va 


(MCOCO 


oococq 


CO 


lot- 














< 


00 CO 


rH 


IM 


COtH-tH 


N 


t-co 


iH 


cq 


tH 


iH 




CO 




t/3- 


ee- 


ee- 


«^ 


60- 


««► co- 




OOOOCOIO 


o 


OrHO 


T-HoqCO 


00 


co 


lOOlrtOO C-] 


o 


LO !:-'*< 


COrfC^l 


CD 


00 




CO lo c<i -^ o c^i 


c-i 


N 


CO^tH 


e-j 


CO 


T-ieo 


C-l 


tH 


rH 






as- 


60- 


6?- 


««■ 


««■ 


v^ 



5 M <U W . M 



g g 



g ^ § 






o 


O 


00 


OO 


C5 


cri 



U 

o 

o 



Amount. 

$14,140.00 

2,679.00 

137.00 

12.00 

60.00 

41.00 


$17,069.00 

$10,372.00 
690.00 
211.00 


$11,273.00 
1,2.50.00 
1,425.00 


o 
o 
uo 
c- 

CO 

ffl" 

6«- 


OO 

oo 

T-HO 
Ot-H 

rt'co' 
CO 



s u 



o . OOOOCOIO 
jQ 0) LOOUOOOM 
.J£ ■Jj GOlOMTjioN 



^THlH I CO I 



o 

H 
to 
o 

u 

o 

Eh 

I 



n 



3 

o 



to . 

W 0) 03 .03 



uo CO m CO o 00 

CO t-lO OiH 



O 

.4-> (h 

§ s 



H,i3 






d d 



oS t. ;7 



o O.S.S.C 

£ X! IS ^ " 

J S 3 ^ 



§ g S 



01 

he 

ai O 
o d 



c a 



01 
03 

C 

a 

01 



BRIDGES. 



1549 



c 
o 

a 

.< 
s 

fi . 

!§« 

o 

O 



in COO 

COoOtH 



OOO \^ OtHCOC 
d m (I<J I CO tOCDiH 



m 0) 

!2l 



? 3,704.00 

1,461.00 

394.00 

220.00 


oo 
t-io 


oo 
oo 

00,.; 

o^ 

iH 
V3- 






00 


oo 


o 


o 


N 


N 



3 dodo 

fl OOOOtH 



3 

Q . OOO r o 

" aj ooio 

o 
U 



oooo 
oooo 


oo 

oo 


Oo 
Oo 




THod 

COTf 


dcJ 


69- 


»3- 


69- 






m 
Eh 



o h I 



I5i 



55 O5-*00 
2, O (M Tt* 
G' CO 





® o • 




.St^ : 




D, • 




CQ • 




^5 • 




o 2 • 




^■^ • 








* » ■ 




tH W ■ 


m 


'^'O • 




o • 






d 


.Q ■ • 3 





bJO 
C 






H-SS^ So 



ss 



o 
Eh 



d 5 5 5 ,^ 



^ 



02 



C 
d 

d 
"u <s 

d « 
K ^ 

d 

-Mr-H 

o d 



1550 HANBBOOK OF COST DATA. 

It was found after the south coffer dam was built that the 
walls were unnecessarily heavy. This was corrected in building the 
north coffer dam, which accounts for its increased cost per 
M. ft. B. M. 

Figure 3 [not reproduced here] shows the general design and 
details of the coffer dam construction, as well as method of tem- 
porary attachment to caissons. 

Concrete in Caissons.— After each caisson was built it was towed 
to its proper site, where it was held in place by temporary pile 
dock built completely around it. On these docks the concrete 
was placed ; a 2 cu. yd. cubical mixer of the usual pattern being 
used for mixing. The concrete materials, consisting of sand, stone 
and cement were handled direct from barges alongside, into the 
mixer. The concrete was placed by a derrick located in the center 
of the caisson, which was a bad feature as the caisson was usually 
out of level and considerable difficulty was experienced in swing- 
ing the derrick. On the south caisson % cu. yd. bottom dump 
buckets were used in placing the concrete, on the north caisson the 
size of these was increased to 1% cu. yd. which reduced the cost of 
placing 15 cts. per cu. yd. There were placed in the south caisson 
3,827 cu. yds. in 32 days of actual working time — 120 cu. yds. per 
day of 10 hrs. The gross time was 2 months. On the north caisson 
5,693 cu. yds. were placed in 46 days worked — 124 cu. yds. per 
day. The gross time was 4 months. See Table V. 

The rates of labor were as follows per 10-hour day: 

Foreman $5.00 

Assistant foreman 2.50 

Holsters 2.50 

Fireman 1.60 

Laborer 1.50 

Proportions concrete were 1 : 2.5 : 6. 

The low price of sand in the north caisson was brought about 
by the finding of good building sand in the excavation for the 
anchorage, which work was done by the same contractor. 

When the caissons had been sealed the iron material shafts 
were removed. This left holes 5 ft. x 6 ft. extending from the 
roof of the caisson up to M. H. W. which were filled with con- 
crete. These shaft holes were 80 ft. deep on the south caisson and 
100 ft. deep on the north caisson. They were partially filled with 
water and the concrete had to be placed with considerable care. 
Wooden chutes were used on the south caisson ; they rested on the 
caisson roof, were filled with concrete and then raised allowing 
concrete to flow out at the bottom. The shaft holes were too deep 
on the north caisson for chutes and 20 cu. ft. bottom dump buckets 
were used. They had to be lowered to bottom of shaft each trip 
before dumping, a slow operation, which greatly added to the 
cost. Proportion for concrete 1 : 2.5 : 6. See Table "VI. 

The proportion for concrete in working chamber was the same 
as for all other concrete. The specifications called for 6 ins. of 
mortar, of 1 part of cement to 2% parts of sand and between the 
concrete and all bearing areas ; that is, under the cutting edge and 



BRIDGES. 



' 1551 



• oooo 

r-^ g OOOO 

. 5 o" in 

3 ^ ri 



CO 

en . t-oo 



.■a -a 






'iH I (M 



ooo 

OOO 


O 
O 


oo 
oo 




-5< 




60- 


D3 


CO 
69- 






I oco 

CO TJ^ 

I ^ " 






J-" p t>-co» 
O g oeoeo 



C<Ico 

coco 



o 
n 

<>^ 

to 

;? 

o 



u 

o 
?: 

H 
«■ 
O 
15 
O 

U 
o 

E-i 

o 
U 






jj oooo 

g oooo 

'^ 13 -^ CO Cvi CD 

02 O c? r^ CO CO 

iQ g OC-i-l 

>> ^ C-" in 

o 

t^ . t-oo 

CM 0) laco"^ 

CO p^ e«- 



to . >4>5 

■r-4 . to 

1^ !*> 7! -; r4 

n -t-> rS P P 

iS 3 OOOtH 

"5 2 0000O3 

o % -^J^y^ 

Tf) ^^ ^rH ^^ CO 






® 

o 

+-> 

CO 

* 

mPQf 



OOo 
OOo 

eo'oeq 

COOO-<1< 

■*cqt- 
co'cq 



o 


OO 


o 


oo 


C<J 


05C0 


C-1 


CO'* 


o 


■*03 






CO 


OiiH 




rH 


6& 


e«- 



-a 



to to ID to 

Ti re's 'O 

■3 3 3?) 



C^lC-1 

oooo 



.s 

'3 

d 
ato 

3 ajp 

i^-r: 3 3 



feS 



cS d 



o d 
Eh s- 

3 
O 



1552 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

directly under the roof of the working chamber. The concrete 
was mixed in the cubical mixer and dumped on the bottom door of 
the material lock, the top door of the lock was then closed, the 
bottom door opened and the concrete fell through the shaft to the 
working chamber. It was then shoveled by the sand hogs into 
place. A 6-in. space was left below all bearing surfaces into which 
damp mortar was tightly rammed. Concreting the south caisson 
took 10% working days of 24 hours, the gangs working night and 
day in twelve 2 -hour shifts; 1,566 cu. yds. of concrete and mortar 
were placed, or at the rate of 140 cu. yds. per 24 hours. The gross 
time including Sundays was 14% days. The sand hogs worked in 
shifts of 2 hours each and received $3.50 for the two hours work. 
The twelve foremen received $1 more; the average gang consisted 
of 12 sand hogs. 

On the north caisson the organization was much better, owing to 
the experience gained on the first caisson ; and in spite of the fact 
that the sand hogs, on account of the increased depth, received 
?4.00 for 1% hours work, or an increase of $22.00 per man per 
24 hrs. over that on the south caisson, the work was done for less 
money. There were placed 1,566 cu. yds. of concrete in 7 working 
days of 24 hrs., or at the rate of 224 cu. yds. per day. The gross 
time was 11% days including Sundays. The average number of 
men in the sand hog gangs was 18, with one foreman, who re- 
ceived $5 for 1% hours work. See Table VII. 

Cost of Sinking Caissons. — The cost of sinking caissons has been 
subdivided according to the materials encountered and also with 
reference to the depth of cutting edge, as the price paid the 
pressure men varies with the depth. The following were the 
union rates paid to "sand dogs," or workmen : 

From to 50 ft. below M. H. W $2.50 for 8 hours 

55 to 70 ft. below M. H. W 2.75 for 6 hours 

70 to 80 ft. below M. H. W 3.00 for 4. hours 

80 to 90 ft. below M. H. W 3.25 for 2 hours 

90 to 100 ft. below M. H. W 3.50 for 1 hour 

100 to 110 ft. below M. H. W 3.75 for 1 hour 

When connecting chamber, the price was increased 25 cts. per 
shift. 

Compressor engineers received $3.60 per day,- foremen $2.60 and 
coal passers $2. The superintendent in charge of the pneumatic 
work received $6 per day and his night assistants $5. 

The present "sand hog" rates have increased 20% over these 
figures. 

The air plant consisted of three 100-hp. vertical boilers, 3 Laid- 
law-Dunn-Gordon Duplex Compressors, 16-in. steam and 18-in. air 
cylinders with 18-in. stroke, and two high pressure force pumps. 
One 6-in. pipe supplied air to the caissons, and one 5-in. pipe 
supplied the water. There were also three 4-in. blowout pipes, six 
3-ft. material shafts and one 6-ft. man shaft with elevator. Docks 
were built around the caissons to hold them in position while 
sinking ; on one of these the compressor plant was located. The 
clay encountered was a very hard stratified material and difficult 



BRIDGES. 



1553 



jj ooo 
^ ooo 

C 05 LO 



£3 

O . t-oo 

CD (I) K5Tl-rH 

SC+J . • . 



c? 



3 tM t-CsI 



m 

6 o . t-oo 
O 3 



aj >i!>i 



H 
n 



C<1 COM 






fl Cl O 
O C3-M 

UCOM 



00 CTS 
02 C- 






tH t:^=« 



-a 



cpo as 
csco 



o 
c 

u 



w to 

■CO 



coco 
c-c- 



toc~ 
t^co 

«OM 



to 03 



O o3 



^ 






co-^c^joo 



"5 d 



.« . to m 



'<A >. 

CO "t; 

H tl t^ 
« O 3 

<^ 

K 

Eh 

I- 
7\ to . 

r9'3 >> 



O 



to to 

'D'O 






ir:)Oooa5 

T-H(M«Oa5 

CO t:^ c^l C3 



,-( I M 



IB to 

^^^^ 

33 3 3 

COO^OtH 
COLOt^-CO 



S 043 

to (h t. O 

'^ S oj d t- 



tJOrfO 

CiOi 00 
rHCOTH 



t-OSiH 

O Tj^ 



a^' 



ooint- 



o 

o 


oo 
oo 




CO OS 
OS CO 

coco 


so- 


tH 



■a 



•a 






3 • " 

X O o 



01 



^h" o o 

CO 3 e 
'^ o 3 o 



oj 






I'm 

.+_» 4_) -f- ^ Co 

O 3 cS 4) 3 






to 


CO 


to 


CO, 


lO 


LC" 


tH 


^ 



o 


oo 


o 


oo 


[-^ 


CDC-^ 


o 


t-co 


oo 


coco 






M 


COrt 




iH 


e«- 


6^ 



t— CO 1 CO 






lO 


lO 


CO 


COs. 


■* 


^'" 


tH 





^ 



O o3 

Eh ^ 

^ OJ 

3 

o 



o 



1554 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to excavate. The rock was the ordinary New York gneiss and was 
drilled by hand. The cost of plant was estimated from inventory 
taken, as the prices paid for it were not available. The supplies 
also had to be estimated, and the charge for them, as well as the 
plant are, probably 10 to 15% low. 

Cost of Sinking South Caisson — 

(1) Sand with boulders, 3 gangs per day at S 
hours each. Elevation — 53.5 ft. to — 56.25 ft. 

Labor sinking $1,583.00 

Temporary docks. 88.00 

Plant .' 867.00 

Supplies 489.00 

Total ?3, 027.00 

General expenses, 10% 303.00 

Total, 509 cu. yds., at $6.55 $3,330.00 

(2) Sand with boulders, 4 gangs per day at 6 
hours each. Elevation — 56.25 ft. to — 66.7 ft. 

Labor sinking $ 6.828.00 

Temporary docks 236.00 

Plant 2,310.00 

Supplies 1,307.00 

Total $10,681.00 

General expenses, 10% 1,068.00 

Total, 1,929 cu. yds., at $6.10 $11,749.00 

(3) Clay and Stratified Clay. Elevation — 66.7 
to — 71.25 ft., 4 gangs per day at 6 hours each. 

Labor sinking $3,763.00 

Temporary docks 110.00 

Plant 1,083.00 

Supplies 613.00 

Total $5,569.00 

General expenses, 10% 557.00 

Total, 839 cu. yds., at $7.31 $6,126.00 

(4) Stratified Clay, 6 gangs per day at 4 hours 

each. Elevation — 71.25 to — 80.19 ft. 

Labor sinking $ 9,462.00 

Temporary docks 191.00 

Plant 1,876.00 

Supplies 1,063.00 

Total $12,592.00 

General expenses, 10% 1,259.00 

Total, 1,648 cu. yds., at $8.42 $13,851.00 



BRIDGES. loS5 

(5) Sound Gneiss Rock, 6 gangs per day at 4 
hours each. Elevation — 80.19 to — 81.25 ft. 

Labor sinking $ 4,595.00 

Temporary docks 96.00 

Plant 937.00 

Supplies 530.00 

Explosives 81.00 

Total $ 6,239.00 

General expenses, 10% 624.00 

Total, 195 cu. yds., at $35.20 ? 6,863.00 

(6) Stratified Clay — Stripping Rock. Elevation 
^81.25 to — 83.3 ft., 12 gangs per day at 

7 hours each. 

Labor sinking .? 8,15 8.00 

Temporary docks 102.00 

Plant 1,010.00 

Supplies 42.00 

Total .? 9,312.00 

General expenses, 10% 931.00 

Total, 380yo cu. yds., at $26.90 .?10,243.00 

(1) Work Incidental to sinking South Caisson. 

Recaulking chamber $ 9C4.00 

Blocking in chamber 1,228.00 

Total ?2,132.00 

Cost of Sinking North Caisson — 

(1) Material — -Mud, Sand and Gravel. Elevation 

— 51.7 to — 56.8 ft., 3 gangs per day at 

8 hours each. 

Labor sinking $2,351.00 

Temporary docks 80.00 

Plant 854.00 

Supplies 383.00 

Total $3,668.00 

General expenses, 10% 367.00 

TotEtl, 1,714 cu. yds., at $2.35 $4,035.00 

(2) Material — Fine Sand. Elevation — 68.6 to 
— 73.3 ft., 4 gangs per day at 6 hours each. 

Labor sinking $3,133.00 

Temporary docks 88.00 

Plant 931.00 

Supplies 413.00 



Total $4,565.00 

General expenses, 10% 456.00 



Total, 2,175 cu. yds., at $2.31 $5,021.00 



155.6 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



(3) Material — Clay and Stratified Clay. Eleva- 
tion — 68.6 to — 73.3 ft, 4 gangs per day 

at 6 hours each. 

Labor sinking $2,230.00 

Temporary docks 81.00 

Plant 853.00 

Supplies 378.00 

Total $3,542.00 

General expenses, lO'/i- 354.00 

Total, 866 cu. yds., at ?4.50 $3,896.00 

(4) Material — Stratified Clay. Elevation — 73.3 

to — 81.4 ft., 6 gangs per day at 4 
hours each. 

Labor sinking $7,500.00 

Temporary doclvs 140.00 

Plant 1,480.00 

Supplies 655.00 

Total $9,775.00 

General expenses, 10% 977.00 

Total, 1,493 cu. yds. at $7.20 $10,752.00 

(5) Material — Stratified Clay. Elevation — 81.4 

to — 89.8 ft., 12 gangs per day at 
2 hours each. 

Labor 'sinking $11,130.00 

Temporarv doclis 154.00 

Plant . . : 1,630.00 

Supplies 724.00 

Total $13,638.00 

General expenses, 10% 1,364.00 

Total, 1,621 cu. yds. at $9.25 $15,002.00 

(6) Material — Sound Gneiss Rock "Benching." 
Elevation — 83.5 to — 91.25 ft., 12 gangs 

per day at 2 hours each. 

Labor $4,753.00 

Temporary docks 74.00 

Plant 776.00 

Supplies 345.00 

Explosives 35.00 



Total $5,983.00 

General expenses, 10% ■ 598.00 



Total, 84 cu. yds. at $78.40 $6,581.00 

(7) Material — Stratified Clay. Elevation — 91.25 

to — 95.00 ft., 14 gangs per day 

at 1% hours each. 

Labor $9,770.00 

Temporary docks 88.00 

Plant 932.00 

Supplies 414. 00 



Total $11,204.00 

General expenses 1,120.00 



Total, 702 cu. yds. at $17.55 $12,324.00 



BRIDGES. 1557 

(8) Materials — Sound Gneiss Rock Benching. 
Elevation — 91.25 to — 95 ft., 14 gangs 

per day at 1% hours each. 

Labor ' $13,303.00 

Temporary docks 101.00 

Plant 1,165.00 

Supplies 516.00 

Explosives 105.00 

Total $15,190.00 

General expenses 1,519.00 

Total, 2,534 cu. yds. at $65.80 per 

cu. yd $16,709.00 

(9) Materials — Stratified Clay, Stripping Rock. 

Elevation — 95 to — 110 ft., 14 gangs 
per day at % hours each. 

Labor $9,232.00 

Temporary docks 66.00 

Plant 698.00 

Supplies 310.00 

Total $10,306.00 

General expenses, 10% 1,031.00 

Total, 453 cu. yds. at $25.00 $11,337.00 

(10) Recalking chamber cost $ 715.00 

The cost of stripping and cleaning up rock is excessively high, 
but this work is necessarily slow, the quantity of actual excavation 
small and the labor rate of from $1.75 to $1.87 per hour is about 
10 times that for similar work above ground. The fixed plant and 
overhead charges are likewise heavy. 

The same explanation applies to the high rock excavation cost, 
besides which very small charges of powder had to be used owing 
to danger of injuring the caisson, as well as the danger of blow- 
outs under the cutting edge. Therefore holes had to be drilled 
close together. 

All drilling was done by hand ; power drills would have greatly 
reduced the cost. The delay caused by blasting is expensive in this 
class of work ; the whole gang has to go up ia the airlock at 
almost every shot. 

Cost of Pier Masonry. — The masonry was begun at the elevation 
of the top of the caissons and carried up to elevation 24 ft. above 
M. H. W. in courses varying from 2 ft. 6 ins. in thickness at the 
bottom to 2 ft. at the top. The pier was built of limestone up to 
4 ft. below M. L. "W., above which the facing was of rock faced 
granite with the backing of limestone. The two top courses, as well 
as the pedestals, were built entirely of granite, all exposed sur- 
faces of which were 6-cut. All other face stones, whether of lime- 
stone or granite, were of rock faced with %-in. beds and joints. 
The backing was built of roughly squared stones with %-in. beds, 
and 3-in. joints. Spalls were used in filling the joints. See 
Table VIII. 

Cramps and dowels were used in the two top courses of granite. 

The plant consisted of derricks surrounding each pier. The 
limestone was unloaded direct from barges. Two extra barges 
rer<i kept continuously at the site for storage purposes. The 



1558 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



+-> O OOCDOOC-IAOCO 

S oo o CO 00 lo ir3 1^ o-^ 

P C^ OS Tf t— tH lO CO <M 

. 2 t-^cqocOi-H''^'' 



e/3- 



g . lO OS 00 O O lO TJi 

00 ri 6^-rtcgN 



ae-so- 60- 



ooo 







tn CO 03 BJ m 03 oj 

TD 'd f^ fO 'd'O 'O 




m m 

'CO 


o 


03 




o 


. 3 3 3 3 S S D 
>, OOOUOOo 

•;3 in c- o 


01 


gg 


3 

o 




'A 


d oi M l>^ O r-H lO ^ 
3 tH M CO rH ■* 05 05 
C rH CO (m" 


o 

CO 

o 
1—1 


00 00 

ooco 
eo'co 


u^ 


00 
CD 
00 

to" 


o 















01 M 

■CO 
3 3 



CO 

-a 
>. 

3' 
o 



00 00 


cj: o; 


00 oo 


«D!0 



OOOOOOOOOO I 
_jj OOOOOOOOOO 

fl c— o o o o oi o irio CO 
D GO GO CO 00 in ^ ^ OTf* 

■ O 1-1 lA "Tj^ t— 1-H CO CO M 



t< 



O ^ O CO T-* -^ 
tHC^Ii-I IH 



3 . int— 05-*-*i:~oo •* 

'-^ O lAC^OOCOCOlO^O o 

j^ 5j 00 tJ5 lO CO CO tH I-! 

00 ^^" 

to 



t~o 
c t- 



CTli-l 







pa 



01 03 CO to 02 "W 

"O ^3 "a 'O 'O ^j . 

>)>>>.>>>> 02<l-l 3 

3 3 3 3 3-2 3w ^ 



C OOJ[-OtHCOOU5 
p T-IOOcOi-t-^t^CO 
C rH CO m" 



01 03 

'O'C 
3 3 



coco 

CCOO 
CO 00 



bJO 

.S 3 i>S 
o o oil 3 bj) 

CH i2 -^ r-^ "-H 

., „ rf C^ O 

3 3 

O (C <D 01 j_, 

01 ai ."ti .ti ."tij 3 t-i 01 --^ 

2 2 c 3 3 S^oSs g 
SSggg§3^rf| 



1^ S 

■*-) 01^ 



^ t-H r-i .^_) f2 

■2 CM g cJ d 






3 3 



coco 
oooo 
oooo 



^ 



O C -H 



e 



3 



BRIDGES. 1539 

granite was unloaded, cut and stored on adjacent docks rented for 
the purpose. The mortar was mixed by the concrete plant in pro- 
portions, 1 of cement to 2 Va of sand, and handled in buckets by the 
derricks. 

The interference on this class of work is great, and the organiza- 
tion that can be attained where masonry work alone is carried 
on, is not possible. The coffer-dam braces interfere with the 
progress, as well as the fact that the quantity of masonry which 
can be set while the caisson is being sunk depends on the weight 
required on the cutting edge and not on the efficiency of the 
masonry gang. The first pier was built in 122 gang days, or at the 
rate of 56 cu. yds. per day; the. second one was completed in 77 
gang days, or at the rate of 90 cu. yds. per day. This increased 
performance was made possible by the more rapid sinking of the 
second caisson as well as by better organization. 

In the total masonry for both piers up to the coping courses 
the voids were — in backing 12%, in face stone 6%. In the coping 
courses the voids were 3%%. 

The labor rates were as follows per 10-hour day: 

Per day. 

Foreman $5.00 

Aslstant foreman 4.50 

Masons 3.20 

Stone cutters 3.00 

Hoister runners 2.75 

Laborers 1.50 

Cost of Erecting the Brooklyn Towers and End Spans of the 
Williamsburg Bridge, New York City. — The following data were 
given by Mr. Francis L. Pruyn in Engineering-Contracting , Oct. 
24, 1906: 

The work consisted of the erection complete in place, of a steel 
tower 310 ft. high on the tower foundations, the erection of truss 
596 ft. long, the connecting of the same with the cable anchorage, 
and the construction of an intermediate tower about 100 ft. high 
supporting the center of the end span. 

Main Tower. — The main tower consisted of eight heavy columns 
braced laterally in all directions. At the floor level they were 
provided with a system of heavy girders to support the end of the 
land truss as well as the end of the suspended structure, the main 
span of the bridge. At the top of the tower another system of 
heavy girders was provided on which rested saddles for the cables 
of the suspended structure. 

The actual erection of falsework for the main tower began in 
January, 1900, and the erection and painting of steel work was 
finished in November, 1901. The falsework consisted of a heavy 
flooring resting on seven 60-ft. trusses extending between 
the masonry piers. On the floor was placed the boil- 
ers and engines which were used for raising all steel work for 
the tower. The main falsework, consisting of a heavily braced tim- 
ber tower, was put up in three sections. The first section extended 
to the roadway level, and was about 100 ft. high. On top of this 



1560 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

were erected two heavy A frame derricks for hoisting the steel 
and two smaller derricks for handling the lighter parts. The 
steel work was then erected up to the roadway level. On top of 
the roadway the second section of timber tower was erected about 
107 ft. high, the derricks were transferred to its top, and the steel 
work erected as far as possible. The first section of falsework 
tower below the roadway was then wrecked and re-erected on top 
of the second section, the derricks again transferred, and the erec- 
tion of tower completed. After steel tower was erected a heavy 
timber gallows frame was built on top of it for hoisting the cable 
saddles into place. 

In the erection of falsework, steel work, etc., the Bridgemen's 
Union was employed. The rate of wages for its members was $3.20 
for eight hours at the start of the work ; later the rate was in- 
creased to ?3.76 per day. The general rate of wages for the 
erection of falsework for main towers for an eight-hour day was 
as follows : 

Foremen $5.00 

Sub-Foremen 3.50 

Carpenters and steel men 3.20 

Hoisters 3.50 

Laborers 2.00 

The cost of erecting the falsework for the main towers is shown 
in Table IX. 



Table IX. — Cost of Erecting False Work for Main Towers. 

Cost of First Section, Including Trusses Between Piers, Floor, En- 
gine House and A Frame Derricks. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount. 

Yellow pine timber 74.6 M. ft., B. M. $24.45 $1,823.00 

Iron and steel 42.4 Tons 77.00 3,261.00 

Labor 74.6 M. ft, B. M. 53.00 3,959.00 

Total $9,043.00 

Cost of Second Section of False Work and Raising Derricks on Top 

of Same. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount. 

Yellow pine timber 42 M. ft, B. M. $26.40 $1,110.00 

Iron and steel 19.6 Tons 73.00 1,427.00 

Labor 42 M. ft, B. M. 61.80 2,601.00 

Total $5,138.00 

Cost of Third Section of False Work, Consisting of Wrecking First 
Section and Re-Erecting Same. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount. 

Yellow pine timber 26.4 M. ft., B. M. 

Iron and steel...; 11% Tons 

Labor 26.4 M. ft, B. M. $77.50 $2,047.00 

Total $2,047.00 



BRIDGES. 1561 

Cost of Gallows Frame Erected on Top of Tower. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount, 

Tellow pine timber 8.1 M. ft. B. M. $15.00 $122.00 

Iron and steel 1/2 Ton 80.00 40.00 

Labor 8.1 M. ft, B. M. 104.00 943.00 

Total $1,105.00 

Cost of Wrecking Second and Third Sections of False Work as Well 
as Staging Between Masonry Piers. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount. 

Yellow pine timber 

Iron and steel 

Labor 124.7 M. ft, B. M. $26.65 $3,325.00 



Total $3,325.00 

Total Cost of Erecting and Wrecking False Work, Complete. 

Quantity. Rate. Amount. 

Yellow pine timber 124.7 M. ft, B. M. $24.50 $3,055.00 

Iron and steel 62.5 Tons 75.80 4,728.00 

Labor 151.1 M. ft, B. M. 85.25 12,875.00 

Plant 1,314.00 

Plant, labor 1,2 85.00 

General expenses. 10% 2,326.00 



Total $25,583.00 

The total weight of the tower was 3,071 tons, therefore the 
falsework cost $8.32 per ton. It should be noted that no salvage 
has been allowed on timber or iron. 

False Work for End Span. — The false work for the end span 
consisted of a heavy timber structure about 575 ft. long and aver- 
aging about 90 ft. in height. The bents were made up of 12 x 12-in. 
yellow pine timber fastened together with iron fish plates and %-in. 
bolts and braced with 6 -in. sway bracing. The portion from the 
main towers to the bulkhead, about 190 ft., was built on a pile 
trestle in 50 ft. of water. A 40-ft. truss spanned Kent Ave. A 
traveler was built on top of the false work by means of which the 
steel work was erected. 

Cost of Pile Dock. — The pile dock was built in 50 ft. of water, 
where the current ran at times 6 miles an hour. The river bottom 
was hard and the piles did not penetrate over 10 ft. For these 
reasons it was built much more carefully than is customary with 
this class of temporary structures. The piles were of Norway pine, 
70 ft long with 18-in. butts. The capping was of 12 x 12-in. yellow 
pine timber carefully framed and heavily bolted. The whole was 
braced by 12 x 12-in. and 4 x 12-in. timber. 
The labor rates for a 10-hour day were : 

Foremen • $5.00 

Dock builders '■ 2.25 

Holsters 2.50 



1562 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The dimensions of the trestle were 190 ft. x S9 ft., making a total 
of 16,900 sq. ft. 

Driving 226 Bearing Piles. 

Per Pile. Total. 

Labor $3.25 $ 735.00 

Piles, at $18 18.00 4,068.00 

Pile driver 1.21 275.00 

Total, 226 piles, at $22.46 $5,078.00 

Driving Land Bent. 

Per Pile. Total. 

Labor $7.57 $197.00 

26 to 20 ft. piles 10.00 260.00 

Pile driver 2.69 70.00 

Total, 26 piles, at $20.26 $527.00 

Driving 36 (70 ft.) Spar Piles. 

Per Pile. Total. 

Labor $ 5.36 $193.00 

36 piles, at $18 18.00 576.00 

Pile driver 2.22 80.00 

Total, 36 piles, at $25.58 $849.00 

Driving 36' (60 ft.) Fender Piles. 

Per Pile. Total. 

Labor $3.80 $137.00 

36 piles 16.00 576.00 

Pile driver 1.11 40.00 

Total, 36 piles, at $20.91 $773.00 

Total cost of driving $7,227.00 

Cost of Framing and Bracing Pile Trestlt'. 

Labor $1,112.00 

93 M. ft, B. M., Y. P. capping 2,568.00 

19 tons iron 1,081.00 

Pile driver 220.00 

$5,781.00 

Erecting. 

Total cost of pile dock $13,008.00 

Cost of wrecking 665.00 

Grand total $13,673.00 

General expenses, at 10% 1,367.00 

$15,040.00 

There were 16,900 sq. ft. of dock, which, therefore, cost SO cts. 
per sq. ft. 

False Work Trestle for End Span. — The false work for the canti- 
lever span, which extended from the intermediate tower to the 



BRIDGES. lo63 

anchorage, consists of 17 bents 20 ft. apart, and from 60 ft. to 90 
ft. high and included tlie truss across Kent. Ave., wliicli was made 
up of nine trusses 48 ft. long and 1.5 ft. deep. After the cantilever 
span was erected, seven bents were moved forward to serve as 
false work for the connecting span and the remainder of the steel 
work erected. The timber bents were erected stick by stick in 
place, and not, as is customary, by building on the ground and 
erecting the bent as a unit. 

The steel work was erected by means of a traveler running on 
tracks on top of the false work. It was 45 ft. square by 47 ft. 
high, and was furnislied with four 10-ton derricks, which were 
mounted on top of it. A 20-ton derrick was set up on tlie extreme 
end of tlie false work for raising the steel from the groimd to cars 
on top of the false work. As in the case of the false work for the 
towers, all labor had to be furnished by the Bridgemen's Union. 

Total Cost of Erecting 17 Bents and Moving For- 
ward 7 Bents and Kent Ave. Truss. 

Labor, building and wrecking 17 bents. $12,636.00 

Labor, moving and wrecking 7 bents... 2,843.00 

Materials for 17 bents: 

Yellow pine, 469 M., at $27.50 12,910.00 

Yellow pine, 31 M., at $20 632.00 

Iron bolts, etc., 39,501 lbs 1,351.00 

Materials for truss : 

Yellow pine, 10.8 M., at $27.50 297.00 

Rods, 21,100 lbs 740.00 

Plant total 2,000.00 

Total . .$33,409.00 

General expenses, 10% 3,341.00 

Grand total $36,750.00 

Total Cost of Traveler. 

Labor, building and wrecking 3,895.00 

Yellow pine," 46.4 M., at $27.50 1,278.00 

Iron bolts, etc.. 14,740 lbs 420.00 

Rods. 5,500 lbs., at 31/. cts 193.00 

Tackle, 20,000 lbs., at "4 cts 800.00 

Plant 340.00 

Total $6,926.00 

General expense, 10% 693.00 

Grand total $7,619.00 

Total Cost of 20-Ton Derrick. 

Labor, building and wrecking $047.00 

Materials 600 00 

Plant 50.00 

$1,297.00 
General expenses, at 10% 129.00 

Total $1,426.00 



15G4 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Total Cost of False Work for End Span Con- 
taining 2j63G Tons of Steel. 



Per Ton Steel 



Pile trestle 

Timber false work. 

Traveler 

20-ton derrick 



rectecl. 

$5.70 

13.94 

2.90 
.54 


Total. 

$15,040.00 

36,750.00 

7,629.00 

1,426.00 



Total $23.08 $60,845.00 

The total weight of steel erected in intermediate tower and end 
span was 2,636 tons; the false work, therefore, cost $23.08 per ton 
of steel. 

It should be noted that no salvage has been allowed for timber 
and iron, as there was no means of determining what was tlie ulti- 
mate value of this material. 

Cost of Erection of Main Towers. — Erection of main towers was 
begun Feb. 1. 1900, and was completed, with the exception of 
placing the saddle on top of the tower on Oct. 1st of the same 
year. The last saddle was set Dec. 14. The first section erected, 
wliich extended up to tlie roadway level, or to elevation 125 ft. 
above mean higli water, contained the heaviest members, and 
shovild have been the cheapest to erect. The delivery, however, 
was slow and the organization not yet perfected. The second 
section erected extended to elevation 232 ft. above mean high 
water, and contained a great deal of light and intricate cross 
bracing, which accounts for its higlier cost. In the top section the 
steel was delivered promptly, and the construction was simple and 
free from detail work. 

The prices paid to labor, per day of S hours, were as follows: 

Foremen $5.00 

Sub-foremen . . 3.75 

Hoisters 3.50 

Steelmen 3.50 

Laborers 2.00 

Tlie plant consisted of two 40-hp. 10-ln. x 12-in. boilers, one 
25-lip. S-in. X 10-in. double-cylinder, 4-drum engine, and one small 
donlvey engine. Charging these off at 50%, the total plant charge, 
including steel cable, rope, small tools, coal, etc., was $5,000. 

Tlie cost given in Table X does not Include the cost of riveting, 
which is treated separately. 

The incidental expenses were as follows : 

Preliminary work $ 637 

Fitting steel at top of towers, chipping 

roller beds, etc 1,221 

Placing anchor bolts 45 

Diamond-drilling 32 anchor-bolt holes 4,000 

Rust joints materials 931 



Total $6,814 



BRIDGES. 1.jG5 

Erecting End Span. — This work consisted of erecting tlie intei-- 
mediate tower and the land truss, wliicli extended from the main 
towers to the anchorage, a distance of 600 ft. Tlie truss was 40 ft. 
deep by 67 ft. wide, with a roadway 25 ft. in width extending 
beyond the truss on each side. The span was made up of two 
lieavy trusses, divided into 20-ft. panels, and complicated with a 
multitude of details owing to the various kinds of trafRc that had 
to be taken care of on this bridge. 

The intermediate tower on which the cantilever span resteil was 
90 ft. in height, and rested on two masonrj^ piers 67 ft., center to 
center. Each pier supported four steel columns, with diagonal 
bracing and connected across at the top with heavy beams. All 
material was brought' to the site on floats, and was unloaded by 
means of a derrick situated at the main tower. The material was 
placed on flat cars, which ran on a trestle a.bout 6 ft. above mean 
high water, and was pushed by hand to the foot of the false M^oi-k 
extending just beyond the intermediate towers. Here it was 
hoisted to cars running on top of the false work and placed under 
the traveler, which erected it in position. 

The erection of the intermediate tower was begun in April, 1900. 
The erection of the end span was finished in March, 1901. The 
cost of labor was the same as for the main tower, with the ex- 
ception of the hoisters, runners and steelmen, whose rate was in- 
creased to $3.76 per day of eight hours. 

The plant consisted of three second-hand 25-hp. engines, double- 
cylinder S in. X 10 in., with six drums and boilers, and cost, at 
50%, $1,500. The cost of rope, small tools, etc., was $1,300, making 
the total cost $2,800. The total cost of erection is given by 
Table XI. 

The incidental expenses were : 

Preliminary work $ 500 

Rust joints 150 

Adjusting errors in steel work 696' 

Removing steel for cables 1,006 



Total $2,352 

Riveting on Main Towers and End Span. — The riveting was done 
with pneumatic riveters ; from four to eight guns were generally 
in use. Four men, including the rivet heater, constituted a gang; 
each man received $3.76 per day of eight hours. Compressed air 
was furnished at about 80 lbs. pressure by two compressors, with 
a combined capacity of about 300 cu. ft. per minute. The rivets 
used on the intermediate tower were short and easily driven, as 
indicated by the cost given in Table XII, while the heavy sections 



1566 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA 







3 


ooooo 
ooooo 






o 


5C CO O O ■* 
COCnOOrH 

OS eg o -^ CO 




m 




th CT) urs thco" 


^ 


o 




B3- 




00 

o 

CO 


o 
Eh 


«>OCO-=t<CO 

o to I-! ■ M 



. o o o o o 
"^ oo o oo 
-*-" t>- as O rj^ o 





o 


CI 
O 


EH ■S'rH O lOCX) 


01 


0) 


H 




H 




o 




O 


■a 

CO 


CO 


O CO lO CD -^ti (M 


H 




rH 


H d N rH eg 


^ 






.« 


< 






n. 






. ooooo 








^ ooooo 


t 










O iM "^ O CD t- 




d 




g^ t^lOCO cot- 


u 


_o 


, 


Mi-T r^ 






CQ 

a 


as- 


H 


0) 


o 




m 


EH 




fe 




lo 


S tHuo CO CD CO 


o 


'O 


Ol 


O 05^ CO ^IM 


03 
O 

a 


eg 


t- 


E^ d -^ tH 'eg 



Oo 
Oo 

d^' 

rt»o 
003 



Oo 
C50 

cod 
o; CD 

COt- 






^ OOOOO 

^ oo o oo 

"q oo CO O Cvf -rl^ 
rT '^O um CD ^ 

S , f t- cr- CD -^ M 

.2 2 0,-rH- e^- 

t5 o ^ 
a> E-i 

-w 00 fl 

M I3j O CO ■* [^ CD t- 

•H fn i^ CD CO •* eg 
t, o eg tH 'eg 



C 

a 
c 

bJO 






SbD"^5 

cS '13 -1-1 +j ^ 
O o S c'O 
•ggrtd'o 



:^ 



• 02 

• <U 
. CO 

• S 
. <S 

• a 
,— « 

-f-»i— < 



® 



o 
Eh 



BRIDGES. 



1567 



. o 



ooooo 
oo o o o 
o coo ooq 

L0 5JSOO10 

00 CO CO Tt^ ;^:) 

tH COC<l rHCq 






03 

02 
Q 

Q 



o 

Eh 

< 
w 
Q 

H 

H 
Eh 

;? 

M 

U 

P4 
M 

O 

O 
U 






t— O O lO 00 



X 



1-5 

E-i 



&J0 • 

O 05 
O 



ooo oo 
ooo oo 

C^ 050 LOCO 
Tf^ LO i-H O -TJH 

lo loo moo 



O Oi 

lO to 
to t:^ 



OO 
OO 



ee- 





ooo 


co 




OOO 


oo 




-3 ^<S~, 

S, --HOrH 


Thc^i 




(Meo 




Q '-;^:o 


"^ 




f-l oJVfaj' 


■*-<iI 




CO 


■^ 


in 


&9- 


&5- 


.-I"^ 






ojoo 








> M 'M lO 


•r-J 




Oh thoo I 


•o 




t< o ■ ■ 


[o 




© 60- 


."so- 



50 05 10 cq t^ 
lOCOO lOOO 



ooo 
^ ooo 

^ T— (lo o* 

■*:; cotoco 






a 
. o 

%^ 



ooo Oo 
^ ooo oo 

ri rH Cvi 'sH O- -tH 
■JlJ O Oi LO t^^ (M 
° CI 00 -* C- cq 



IOOt 



69- 



ooo 
Oslo 

-^ CO 



g oc-osj^cq 
P ocoo^tm 

CD as- 
Oh 

ooo Co 

OOiO "^o 

"3 t- oq CO °o cvi 

" OtHCO^OoO 



t. o 



05 O 



Oo 

oo 



rH OS 05 O CO 



CO CO 05 LO 00 



o 

^ OC1 

Ph 



M 

Eh 

M 

o 



o 

u 



Eh 






5 OLOIO 

;^ io o ^ 

~> tHOO 



oo o 
ooo 



cd 



O^i -rfH LO 
_I O CD cr; 
O ^ CO 



£, O '^ Q l-O CO LO 

- r — I ^ 00 o -n^ 
• o 



Oo 
00^ 
COio 
lOc-l 

m" 






> ooo 



C4 



J3 

bo ^ 



a 

-3 
c 

C w 

"O o 

n33 



ooo 

ooo 

"3 '*'-!io 

S t-t^"-! 

Q oo O CO 
Eh lo'cq^" 



O CO 

COLO 
L0 03 



o 

^i1 ^ 



6? 



^o- 

nj a> coi-Hco 

y > LOC^lM- 

f=5 . rj rHOO 



Q 



!-< &3- 



(In 



:^ 



2 S « s2 
c £ oj =« 3 



O cti 

a 



o 



2 
„o 



CS O C 

o csiS 



fl 


, 


IB 


« 


■ a 


» 


X 




"— ' (D 




SZ 


aj 




-u 


olS 


O 


^fe 


B 


fl 




0) 




c; 





1568 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



on the main tower and end span required long heavy rivets, which 
were very difficult to drive. The plant consisted of the following : 

2 boilers, at 50% ? 300 

2 compressors, at 50% 1,300 

9 pneumatic rammers, at 50% 1,800 

15 forges, at 50% 250 

W. I. pipe 200 

Coal 1,1?.0 

Steel, tools, scaffold, etc 1,350 

Plant, labor, miscellaneous 3,290 



Total $9,610 

Painting Main Toiver and End Span. — The cost of the first coat 
of paint on the main tower and end span was about double what it 
should have been on account of the bad condition of the shop coat, 
"Which had to be scraped off in many places before the first coat 
could be applied. A fair average would be to figure painters em- 
ployed one-half time in preparing the surface. 



Table XIII. — Cost of Painting Structure. 



Pirst coat... 

Second coat 60 



Main Tower, End Span. 

3,071 Tons. 2,636 Tons. 
Per Ton. Total. Per Ton. Total. 
$1.03 $3,163 $1.99 $ 5,235 



Total labor $1.63 

Materials 52 

Plant 31 



1,847 

$5,010 

1,600 

960 



.88 



$2.87 
.52 
.31 



2,325 

$ 7,550 

1,363 

815 



Total. 
5,707 Tons. 
Per Ton. Total. 
$1.47 $ 8,398 
.73 4,172 



$2.20 $12,570 
.52 2,963 

.31 1,775 



Total $7,570 

General exp., at 10%. .$0.25 757 



.. . $ 9,738 
}.37 974 



. .. $17,308 
.30 1,731 



Grand total $2.71 $8,327 $4.07 $10,712 $3.33 $19,039 

Painters received $2.25 per day of eight hours, but painted only 
the first coat on the main tower. After that steelmeen were em- 
ployed at $3.76 per day. Table XIII shows the cost of painting. 
The cost of the plant was as follows : 

Brushes, pots, etc $ 214 

Scaffolds, ladders, etc 313 

Anchorage protection ". 345 

Miscellaneous plant labor '903 



Total $1,775 

General Expense. — The general expense on this work includes the 
resident engineer, draftsman, superintendent, timekeepers, office 
help and watchman; and figured out 10% to the cost of the total 
labor and materials employed at the site of the work. 

As previously noted, the large cost for falsework is brought about 
on account of not crediting salvage on the materials on this item. 
Table XIV gives the total cost of the completed work. 



BRIDGES. lo69 

Table XIV. — Total Cost of Completed 'Work, 

Main Tower. End Span. Total Cost Per 

3,071 Tons. 2,636 Tons. 5,707 Tons. Ton. 

Falsework $25,583 $ 60.845 ? 86,428 S15.19 

Erection 26,892 23,941 50,833 8.95 

Riveting 24,816 23,940 48,756 8.55 

Painting 8,327 . 10,712 19,039 3.31 



Total $85,618 $119,438 $205,056 



Cost per ton $28.05 $45.30 $36.00 $36.00 

The materials used in painting main tower and end span were 
as follows : 

28 bbls. No. 500 National Paint Works $1,640 

24 bbls. No. 20 National Paint Works, Spec. 1,103 

Turpentine 60 

Linseed oil 160 

Total $2,963 

Cost of the Brooklyn Anchorage of the Williamsburg Bridge. — The 
following data were given by Mr. Francis L. Pruyn, in Engineering- 
Contracting, Jan. 30, 1907 : 

The Brooklyn anchorage of the Williamsburg Bridge consisted 
essentially of a block of masonry 150 ft. long, 182 ft. wide and 
114 ft. high. Its function was to furnish sufficient weight to hold 
down the cables when the main span of the bridge was fully load- 
ed. Fig. 1 [too large for reproduction here] shows the main fea- 
ture of the design; which included an excavation 40 ft. deep, a pile 
and timber grillage foundation, over which was spread a 14-ft. 
layer of concrete. Prom this point to the elevation of the ground, 
a distance of 25 ft., limestone masonry was placed, and from this 
elevation to the top of the anchorage the masonry consisted of 
limestone backing with granite face-stone. 

The interior of the anchorage contained three timnels extend- 
ing from top to bottom in which were placed the steel anchor 
chains. These chains were fastened at the bottom of the anchor- 
age to a heavy steel grillage which was firmly imbedded in the 
masonry. The anchorage also contained two large wells situated 
between the lines of anchor chains, which were necessary in order 
to obtain an equal load distribution on the foundation. The main 
items in this contract were as follows: 

Earth excavation 34,000 cu. yds. 

Yellow pine piles 432 

Yellow pine timber 120,000 cu. ft. 

Concrete 10,885 cu. yds. 

Stone masonry 44,597 oxi. yds. 

Steel anchor chains 1,553 tons. 

Cost of Excavation. — The anchorage was situated about 360 ft. 
from the Bast River bulkhead line and a trestle was constructed to 
carry the excavated material across the intervening street to a 
dumping-board, where it was loaded directly into scows and cai . 
ried away to sea. Tracks were laid on this trestle and cars which. 



1570 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

were actuated by an ingenious form of cable haul handled the ex- 
cavated material. This trestle and hauling device also served to 
handle all the material for grillages, concrete, stone masonry, steel 
work, etc. 

The excavation was done by pick and shovel into skips, which 
were elevated and placed on the cars by means of eight derricks 
arranged around a framework, which was maintained at the orig- 
inal ground level. Long piles were driven before the framework 
was erected to support it as the excavation proceeded, and these 
piles were braced and spliced as the ground level receded. This 
feature of the plant was very expensive, as the proper support of 
this heavy framework kept a large gang of men continually at work. 
Derricks placed around the edges of the excavation would have 
proved much more economical, not only on account of needing less 
maintenance, but also because they would have covered the entire 
work whereas the derrick frame could not reach the area directly 
under itself. The derricks were designed without bull wheels so 
that tag men had to be used throughout. This feature added 6 
per cent to the cost of excavation for labor alone, and probably 
added as much more through loss of time in swinging derricks. 

On two sides of the excavation 10 x 12-in. yellow pine sheet pil- 
ing 30 ft. long was driven to protect sewers, water pipes, etc., in 
the adjoining streets. The driving was exceedingly difficult and 
hard, it being through sand and gravel. The piles were often 
broken in driving and the points of many were found badly broom- 
ed when uncovered. The following rates of wages were paid per 
10-hour day: 

Per day. 

Foreman $4-00 

Hoister 2.50 

Fireman 2.00 

Carpenter 2.50 

Riggers 2.25 

Laborers 1.75 

The average length of sheet piles was 30 f t. ; 8,000 lin. ft. were 
driven and 9,000 lin. ft. used. The total cost of the sheet piling 
was as follows, no salvage being credited : 

Total Cost per 

cost. lin. ft. 

Labor, driving $1,405 $0,176 

Labor, bracing 920 0.115 

Piles, 90 M at $20 1,800 0.225 

Bracing, 100 M at $13 1,300 0.163 

Plant 234 0.029 

Steam 133 0.016 

Total $5,792 $0,724 

>iter the sheeting was driven the excavation was covered down 
,io the required depth of 40 ft. below the elevation of the ground. 
About one-half the material excavated was sand, and the remain- 



BRIDGES. 1571 

der was made up of clay and hard pan. About one-quarter was 
hard pan and very hard digging. All excavation was done by hand, 
the material being shoveled into skips, which were then raided by 
the derricks and placed on flat cars which ran through the der- 
rick frame. The cars were then run to the dump about 400 ft. 
distant by a cable device, the material being dumped down an in- 
cline chute into scows, to be dumped at sea. Building sand, sufH- 
cient for all concrete and masonry on this work, was secured 
from the excavation and stored on the work. The rates of wages 
paid per 10-hour day were as follows: 

Per day. 

Hoisters $2.75 

Signalmen 2.00 

Tagman 1.50 

Trackmen 1.75 

Laborers 1.60 

The labor cost of excavating 42,000 cu. yds. was as follows: 

Labor. Amt. cu. yd. 

Loading skips ? 8,000 ?0.19 

Loading on cars 2,184 0.05 

Dumping 2,879 0.07 

General foreman 875 0.02 

Total ?13,938 $0.33 

The total cost of excavation was as follows: 

Quantity Total Cost per 

cu. yds. cost. cu. yd. 

Labor 42,000 $13,938 $0,332 

Pumping 42,000 1,176 .028 

Steam 42,000 1,763 .042 

Plant 42,000 11,140 .265 

General expenses 42,000 5,585 .133 

Dumping at sea 22,000 3,300 .105 

Total $36,900 $0.90 

The cost of pumping, steam, plant and general expenses were 
figured for the entire work and distributed through each item sep- 
arately, as is shown further on. The best month's run constituted 
16,351 cu. yds., working 67 ten-hour shifts, which is equivalent to 
246 cu. yds. per 10-hour day. The average output for the entire 
period of excavation was 184 cu. yds. per 10-hour day, which is 
equivalent to 218 working days for this portion of the work. It 
will be noted that the plant charges are exceedingly high, and in- 
clude the sheet piling given above as well as its proportionate 
charge of derrick frame, trestle, etc. 

Foundation Piles. — After the excavation was completed, founda- 
tion piles were driven in three clusters under the steel grillages. 
There were 423 piles in all, and as the bottom consisted of pure 
sand saturated with water they could not be driven more than an 
average of 9 ft. below cut-off. The cost of driving these piles is 
excessive owing to the great difficulty encountered in driving un- 



1572 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

der the der/ick frames, which were dh-ectly over about 20 per cent 

of them. 

Cost 
Total cost, per pile. 

Labor, driving ? 731 $1.73 

Piles, 13 ft. long 634 1.50 

Pumping 376 0.87 

Steam 35 0.08 

Plant 213 0.50 

General 348 0.82 



Total ?2,337 $5.50 

Timber Grillage. — Over the entire foundation and around the 
heads of the piles was deposited a 2-ft. layer of concrete in which 
was imbedded the first course of timber that constituted the gril- 
lage, covering the entire area of foundation and consisting of four 
thicknesses of 12 x 12-in. yellow pine timber. The timber was 
sized top and bottom and drift bolted every 6 ft. with 1%-in. drift 
bolts. The top course of timber consisted of alternate rows of 
8x12 in. and 10x12 in. to bond with the concrete. The cost of 
the timber grillages was as follows, there being 1,394 M ft. B. 
M. of timber: 

Total Per M ft. 
Labor. Amount. B. M. 

Delivery to anchorage .? 1,660 $ 1.19 

Placing 2,437 1.75 

Drift bolting 920 0.66 

General foreman 490 0.35 



Total I 5,507 ? 3.95 

Total Per M ft. 

Total cost. Amount. B. M. 

Labor ? 5,507 ?3.95 

Yellow pine 25,090 18.00 

Iron 3,900 2.80 

Pumping 1,394 1.00 

Steam 83 .06 

Plant 1,990 1.43 

General 2,092 1.50 



Total ?40,056 .?28.74 

Concrete. — A layer of concrete varying in thickness from 6 to 
10 ft. and covering the entire foundation was deposited above the 
timber grillage. About 8,200 cu. yds. was required, the mixture 
being about one part cement to two parts of sand to five parts 
broken stone. The concrete was mixed in a 2 cu. yd. cubical mixer 
situated directly beneath the derrick frame, so that the materials 
could be dumped from cars into the mixer hopper. Broken stone 
came to the site in barges and was shoveled into skips, and after 
the required amount of cement was spread on the stone, the skip 
was lifted by a derrick onto cars situated on the trestle. The car 
was then hauled by cable to the mixer and dumped, with the re- 
quired amount of sand for a batch. The mixed concrete was run 
into buckets and deposited in the work by derricks, where it was 



BRIDGES. 1573 

spread and rammed in 12-in. layers. A batch consisted of 2^4 
barrels of cement, 19 cu. ft. of sand and 47 cu. ft. of broken stone 
and made 1.8 cu. yd. in place. The maximum output for 10 hours 
was 111 batches or 200 cu. yds. ; the average output for the entire 
time of concreting, or 67 days, was 68 batches, or 122 cu. yds. 

The average force was 51 men divided as follows: 15 hauling 
materials, 12 placing, 3 mixing; the rest were holsters, runners, 
signal men, car men, etc. The rates of pay were the same as those 
previously given. The cost of 8,169 cu. yds. of concrete was as 
follows : 

Labor. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Handling materials ? 2,660 $0.32 

Mixing 348 0.04 

Placing • 3,003 0.38 

General foreman 512 0.06 

Total ? 6,523 $0.80 

Total cost. Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $6,523 $0.80 

Cement, at $1.50 per bbl 15,930 1.95 

Sand, at $0.50 per cu. yd 1,630 0.20 

Stone, at $1.25 per cu. yd 9,800 1.20 

Pumping 1,553 0.19 

Steam 490 0.06 

Plant 4,495 0.55 

General expenses 2,460 0.30 

Total $42,881 $5.25 

The concrete was of large mass and was easily placed. The 
plant was well designed and the job well managed. The plant 
charge of 55 cts. per cu. yd. was high ; one-half of it was charge- 
able to the derrick frame. This part of the plant, as before stated, 
was expensive to maintain and the proportion chargeable to con- 
crete was therefore large. 

Masonry. — The stone masonry, consisting of a total of 44,000 cu. 
yds., was for the most part in large masses; at the same time the 
tunnels for the anchor chains and the various wells required a 
good deal of careful setting. The masonry from the concrete up 
to about ground level consisted of a face of rock-faced limestone 
with limestone backing. At the ground level came several courses 
of six-cut granite facing 16 ft. in height, above this came rock- 
faced granite facing up to the coping courses, which were of six- 
cut granite. All backing was of limestone, roughly squared, in 
thickness equal to the face stones of the same course and with ver- 
tical joints that averaged 3 ins. The vertical and horizontal joints 
of all rock-faced ashlar was % in. ; for six-cut work it was % in. 

The stone was unloaded from barges at the dock onto cars,, 
which were hauled by cable to the site of the work. The mortar 
"was mixed by machine in the concrete mixer. 

The cost of labor in setting masonry was high and was due to 
the dengn of the derrick frames, which were directly over the 
work. They had to be jacked up for each course above the ground 
level, which was expensive, and being located over the center of 



1574 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

this work, setting stone beneath them was difficult and costly. Tag- 
men were used to swing tlie derricks ; as the design did not permit 
bull wlieels ; they added 15 cts. per cu. yd. to the cost of setting. 
Stone masons worked an 8-hour day, all other labor a 10-hour day. 
The labor rates were as follows : 

Per day. 

Foreman $.5.00 

Masons .'^.20 

Signal men 2.00 

Laborers 1.50 

The total labor cost of setting 44,053 cu. yds. of masonry was: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Delivering stone ? 9,!'i.?5 $0.23 

Mixing and delivering mortar. . . 8,792 0.20 

Delivering spalls 905 0.02 

Setting stone 41,141 0.94 

Total $60,8.33 $1.39 

In the following cost of the various kinds of masonry, the labor 
was taken at $1.39 per cu. yd., as above given; there was no 
means of obtaining the cost of setting the various classes of 
inasonry. Likewise the percentage of mortar was taken at a fixed 
percentage of the total masonry. Actually the mortar varied from 
15 per cent in backing to 6 per cent in rock facing, to 2 per cent 
in six-cut work. The difference in cost of mortar, however, is more 
than balanced by tlie extra cost of setting the facing and six-cut 
masonry. The cost of mortar per cu. yd. of masonry was : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.4 bbl. cement at $1.50 $0.60 

. 0.12 cu. yd. sand at $0.50 0.06 



$0.66 



The cost of limestone backing 34,200 cu. yds. was: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $47,538 $1.39 

Mortar 22,572 0.66 

Stone, $5 at 85% 145,350 4.25 

Steam 4,788 .14 

Plant 26.340 .77 

General expenses 16,760 .49 



$263,348 ■ $7.70 
The cost of limestone facing 3,500 cu. yds. was: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $ 4,860 $1.39 

Mortar 2,310 .66 

Stone, $7.25 at 94% 23,805 6.80 

Steam 490 .14 

Plant 2,695 .77 

General expenses 1,715 .49 



$35,875 $10.25 



BRIDGES. 1575 

The cost of granite facing 3,523 cu. yds. was: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Labor $ 4,900 ? 1.39 

Mortar 2.325 .66 

Stone, i?16.66 at 957c 55.170 15.66 

Steam 494 .1 4 

Plant 2.715 .77 

General expenses 1,730 .49 

Total $67,334 $19.11 

The cost of granite backing 7 00 cu. yds. was: 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

L.abor $ 973 $ 1.39 

Mortar 462 .66 

Stone, $14.47 at SS'/r 8,925 12.75 

Steam 98 .14 

Plant 639 .77 

General expenses 343 .49 

Total $11,340 $16.20 

The granite knuckle stone, 300 cu. yds., cost: 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor $ 1.39 

Mortar 

Stone : 17.68 

Steam 14 

Plant 77 

General expenses 49 

Total $20.47 

The six-cut granite, 1,640 cu. yds., cost: 

Per cu. yd. 

Labor $ 1.39 

Mortar 66 

Stone, $28.67 at 98% . . 28.05 

Steam 14 

Plant 77 

General expenses 49 

Total $31.50 

Cost of Erecting Steel. — The steel work consisted of a heavy 
grillage made up of beams 5 ft. 6 ins. deep by 36 ft. and 24 ft. long, 
riveted together to form an anchorage for each set of anchor 
chains, and of four chains made up of 2 -in. eye-bars from 10 to 
14 ft. long. Each chain extended from the top to the bottom of 
the anchorage and was made up of two rows of 20 eye-bars and 
fastened together with 6-in. steel pins. The steel was delivei'ed 
in the same manner as the other materials and set in place by 
derricks. Each pin rested on a heavy casting or steel girder, 
which rested upon knuckle stones, cut to the proper angles and set 
in the masonry. The joints between the knuckle stone and the 



1576- HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bearing girders were rust joints. The total weight erected was 
1,583 tons, and the cost of erection was as follows: 

Labor : 

Delivery and erection $3:337 

Riveting 1,384 

Painting 962 

Drilling for bolts 349 

Rust joints 282 

Foremen 675 

_____ I 

— — I 

Total labor i?6,989 — ?4-42 per ton j 

Steel 65.00 per ton 

Plant 2.06 per ton 

Steam .06 per ton 

General expenses .44 per ton 

Total $71. 98 per ton 

Steam Production. — The cost of fuel and labor for steam produc- 
tion for the whole work is as follows. The boiler battery consisted 
of four old Manhattan Elevated locomotive boilers of 30 hp. each. 
They were located near the dock and the steam was piped to the 
anchorage. 

Foreman, day, 251/0 mos. at $85 ?2.170 

Foreman, night. 251/. mos. at $60.. 1,530 
Helper, 25% moc. at $40 1,020 

$ 4,720 

2,340 long tons soft coal at $2.25 $5,360 

1,525 long tons hard coal at $4.00.. 6.100 

$11,360 

$16,080 

This cost has been distributed through the different classes of 
work 

Pumping. — Pumping was done during part of the time that ex- 
cavation, pile driving, concreting and timber grillage work was 
being done, a total of 235 days. The cost was -as follows: 

Engineers, 466yo days at $2.85 $1,330 

Laborers, 2021/0 days at $1.50 303 



Total , $1,633 

Steam 3,964 

Plant 990 



Total cost S6.587 



BRIDGES. 1577 

Plant. — The plant cost foi- the various kinds of plant and ma- 
chinery described under the different classes of work were as fol- 
lows ; no salvage has been credited : 

Materials. Labor. Total. 

2 Derrick frames, complete ip 8. 538 ? 8,052 $16,590 

2 Derrick frames, repairs 8,-321 11.574 19,895 

Trestle and track 4,11 7 1,626 5,743 

Boiler, battery 1,140 134 1,274 

Pumping 990 268 1.258 

Pile driver 2.590 2,590 

Mixer and ti'estle 612 426 1,038 

2 Derricks at bulkhead 2.321 448 2,769 

1 Howe truss 480 517 997 

1 Derrick for sand 703 52 755 

Sewer 120 158 278 

Gutter 35 28 63 

Electric light 2,000 .... 2,000 

^Vater for motor 500 500 

Water for steam 1.280 1.280 

Waterproofing 260 260 

Total $33,817 $24,563 ?5S,380 

General Expenses. — The general expenses were made up as 
follows : 

Office force and watchman, 21 nios., at $922.50 $19,395 

Making bid, say 500 

Money invested, say $50,000, at 5%, for 21 mos.. 4,400 

Bond, $350,000, at 1% 6.125 

Insurance, $140,000, at 3% 2,800 

Traveling expenses, say 500 

Office rent 1,825 

Building office and storeroom 800 

Office fixtures 400 

Office stationery, telephone, etc 1,000 

Total $37,745 

Labor Cost of the Foundations of City Island Bridge, New York.* 

Before giving the figures of the cost of labor in the construction 
of the foundations of the City Island Bridge, it will be well to give 
a brief description of the bridge itself. The City Island Bridge 
connects City Island and Pelham Bay Park at Rodman Neck, 
Bronx Borough, New York. It is about 1,500 ft. long, including 
approaches, and 50 ft. wide over all. There are six masonry piers 
and two abutments, all sunk to rock or hard material at a maxi- 
mum depth of 40 ft. below high water, and they support tlie steel 
superstructure. The superstructure proper consists of a 180-ft. 
draw span and five 80-ft. spans. The pivot pier, which has a maxi- 
mum diameter of 35 ft., is protected by a longitudinal crib, 228 ft. 
long and 51 ft. wide. The pier has 45 degree cutwater ends and is 
sheathed with 4-in. yellow pine vertical planks, 14 ft. long, which 
extend from 1 ft. below mean water level to the top of the crib, 5 
ft. above mean high water. The pivot pier occupies a rectangular 
space, 63 ft. long and 37 ft. wide. The bridge was built for the 
Department of Bridges, New York City, the superstructure being 



Engineering-Contracting, May 16, 1906. 



1578 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

constructed by the King Bridge Co., and the substructure by John 
F. O'Rourke. 

Cofferdams. — A subcontract for the construction of the coffer- 
dams was let by John P. O'Rourke, the contractor for the founda- 
tions, to Warren Rosevelt, New York. The material used was yel- 
low pine. The lower sections of the cofferdams, which remained 
in the permanent work, were constructed upon ways and launched. 
The upper section was then constructed. Several pile driving 
scows were used on the work. In the placing of the cofferdams, 
the plant was furnished by Mr. Rosevelt ; but Mr. O'Rourke fur- 
nished the laborers for loading bags of gravel to sink and place 
them. In the summary. Table XV, which gives the time for con- 
structing the cofferdams and the amount of material used, it will 
be noticed that the dam for abutment No. 1 was constructed in 
a less period than any of the others. This was due in a measure 
to better facilities for handling the material. The higher cost for 
building the cofferdam for Pier No. 3 (pivot pier) was due to 
the fact that it was built in an octagonal form. No data were ob- 
tained of the cost of setting the cofferdam for pier No. 3. 

Masonry. — According to the specifications, the masonry was 
classified in two grades : ( 1 ) Foundation masonry and ( 2 ) pier 
masonry. Blue gray limestone, or other dark stone of compact 
granular structure without lamination, was to be used in both 
cases. The backing of the abutment masonrJ^ to mean high water, 
was to be concrete in the proportion of 1 : 2 : 4. Above mean high 
water the proportion of concrete was to be 1 : 3 : 5. The founda- 
tion masonry was to be laid to the elevation of mean low water, 
and was to consist of first-class quarry-faced ashlar bedded in 
Portland cement mortar with %-in. joints, and well rammed con- 
crete backing of 1 : 2 : 4 concrete. Work was to be laid in i-egular 
courses, 24 in. to 30 in. in depth, with thickness progressively 
diminishing upward. All stones were to be cut to line on their 
natural beds, and the top surface had to be parallel with its bed. 
Beds were to be dressed the entire width of the stone and vertical 
joints cut back not less than 12 in. Courses were to break joints 
with each other at least 12 in., and headers were to be arranged so 
as to come over underlying stretchers. Not less than one header 
to every two stretchers was to be used. The concrete backing was 
to be leveled up with each course of stone. The stones for the 
pier masonry were to be cut to dimension, and laid with joints not 
exceeding % in. The hearting or backing was to consist of 1 : 2 : 4 
concrete for abutment to elevation of mean high water ; 1:3:5 
concrete was to be used above that elevation. The coping was to 
consist of selected limestone or light colored granite, quarry faced, 
laid with %-in. joints. 

As a matter of fact, the stone used for the masonry was Cobble- 
skill limestone facing with concrete backing. Tlie coping was gran- 
ite from Maine. The masonry work was done by John F. O'Rourke, 
the contractor. The plant consisted of two derrick scows and stiff 
leg derrick, the latter being used on abutment No. 1 and pier 
No. 3. One of the scows was used mainly in depositing concrete 



BRIDGES. 



1579 



<0 1> 
< « 

■ S o 
rati. 2; 



O 



C<l C'i Cq OS C<» i-H 



8 



CO C<1 CQ '^ 1-^ c^ 



JCOOC^O OS 



OcSO'-t OO-^ COt}< 



S3 






,03 



O H ■ 

^r o 






(M 






•Q o 



■^ :0 cvi Tf O CO O 
•>s< 00 :-! oj 00 CO c^i 
-^cc t^cs t^oo 






c^ »o "3 r- <© cc 

t-f i-H --« Cv| T-4 C^ 



O5 00Ob*C^Oi 
1-H C^J OS <M T-( 



O t^ GO «5 U3 1-< (M 



_n O w t^ ^ o CO CQ 



O 



pj 






CO 1- c 
^C E 3.>;g ^ ^ 



•1 -^ogt^t^oeooscsim 
P3<| t« «« 



S.Sd d 

Vh ^, ^ CO 00 CO CD CO tH CO CO t^ 

Q ^ 

o.-, o 



o 

6» 



-UJ3 O 

tail 0) ■ 



OOOiHOOOI^O 






COt^t^-^COWOJS 



o 

■Sad 

O 

0-^0 



SI 



+3 ^^ 

ij . cc»o»co -oo^o 



:3 

O 1 



C3 H«HNHw 

■+r »0 t>(M t^ O 00 CD O CO 






^ d '""'Sg 







>: 



Pi 



u 

3- 
o- 



o 






'-; (M lo CO irs 
i3 t^t-coo 



h CO CO 00 t^ 

o i--.*"oo'"<M'~i>r 



t, U5'«cOCO 
0) iCOOOOOi 
O. OS'*!-!-* 

^ eq'oo"oo''oo" 



13 

■ S^ 00 



a^S5? 



(v; C^ "^ ■-' i-* ^ 



fe 



en 

o 
o 



bi >. >. si 



o 

+JMCO-* 

K . . . 

JJ o o o 

3 V. Ih »-i 



1580 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



V 6 

> M 









^6 
<Z 

£<- • 

bc (u'o 



•oi »- ■ c-j 



3 >- 






>rtt CO CO O 



-— 05 03 IC t^ OS C<1 o> 



o 



.s o 



o loooo >£; 

CO t^C<J o oo o 
■rj< ^^ OO O 00 



>. c.„ o 

■< O 1) • 



> 



CO ™ 



rt U5 



^M 









S2 



s§ 



UD3 



hSOODL'5 



eo 00 CO <M -^ O 



g 






-*J< CO CCO500 GC 



10 lOCCOO b- 



E.2 6 
So 

5z 



SOO -^ t^ O C'l ■ o 
00 (M -^ O ^- ■ — 
,-H CO CM t^ i-H 



-d 



h 6 






a h 



« n » u5-«>t01« 






^ OS O 05 t>» 

a>00 ^ ^ OO+i 
CC'"' o o P o 

oc<o 



o 

C . . . 
u O O O 

':i u u u 

<CllPL,(l| 












BRIDGES. 



1581 



backing. The foregoing table of cost for masonry worli is for 
building the masonry after the material was loaded on the scows, 
and does not include the handling of material, placing stone from 
yard on scows and cement from the storehouse. 

The higher cost of the construction of masonry of pier No. 2 
and pier No. 4 will be explained by an examination of the Sum- 
mary Table, which shows the proportion of backing and face 
stones. 

Granite Gutting. — In this work the material was furnished by Mr. 
O'Rourke, but the labor was done by a sub-contractor. The granite 
was brought by vessel from Maine and was used in coping, bridge 
seats and abutment steps. Beds were peenhammered and the faces 
rock faced. A total of 7,052 cu. ft. was cut. Eight hours consti- 
tuted a day's work. 

In the table . below is given the labor cost of cutting the granite 

Total Cost of Cutting Granite. — (7,052 Cu. Ft.) 

Number of Hours. Cost of Labor. 

Per Per Per Per 

Workmen. Rate. Total, cu. ft. cu. yd. Total, cu. ft. cu. yd. 

Foreman 60 517 .07 1.98 ? 310.20 .f0.04 ? 1.19 

Stonecutters 50 4,718 .67 18.10 2,359.00 .34 9.05 

Carpenters 25 8 .00 .03 2.00 .01 

Laborers 20 984 .14 3.78 196.80 .03 .76 

Blacksmith 25 286 .04 1.10 71.50 .01 .27 

Engineman 30 443 .06 1.70 132.90 .02 .51 

Total $3,072.40 ?0.44 ?11.79 

for coping and steps. This work was included in the tabic that 
precedes this paragraph, but as the details were obtained from a 
different source of infbrmation, it has been thought well to give it 
here. 

Labor of Stonecutters Only. 

Hours Cu. Ft. Cost Per Cost Per 

Cu. Ft. Worked. Per Hour. Cu. Ft. Cu. Yd. 

Abutment No. 1 . 1,041-10 in. 511 2.042 $0,245 % 6.62 

Pier No. 2 462- Sin. 341 1.358 .368 9.94 

Pier No. 3 625- 6 in. 394 1.589 .354 9.55 

Pier No. 4 446- 2 in. 312 1.432 .349 9.42 

Pier No. 5 454- 5 in. 286 1.592 .314 8.48 

Pier No. 6 121- in. 99 1.222 .408 11.04 

Pier No. 7 121- in. 98 1.235 .405 10.93 

Abutment No. 8* 734- 5 in. 409 1.795 .297 7.54 

Total 4,007- in. 2,450 1.636* $0,305* $ 8.25* 

Cu. Ft. Cu. Yd. 

Average cost Abutment Steps and Bridge Seats.. $0,262 .^7.08 

Average cost Pier Coping 0.366 9.89 

* Average. 

Concrete. — The concrete was deposited under water in the open 
cofferdams, a 2 cu. yd. bucket, which dumped as it struck the 
bottom, being used for this purpose. The concrete was mixed in 
the proportion of 1 : 2 : 4, gravel being used in place of broken 
stone. Portland cements — Victor, Ironclad and Navarite brands — 



1582 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






^1 



ac3j|S 



wa ■ 

HH ^ 4J 

la" 



bo ic *-( 

g OlMOOOSO 



Q 

2: 



+J ^* »0 (M 00 CD T-H »-< 



nj 
ij , CO 



O. 



O -^OC^tOO • Tit 



• - O NO 






COr-4 O 
Oi CO 



gs 



rt 00 O O IM -* OS 
O IC « 






1-^ o '^ 



CO 



uj "SIOOIN 



S : 



<^ 



CO 

Pi 



0) c t/J i^ TO 

5 *? rt C ciJ.5 



to u 
> ^ o 



'O I.'' OS 
1h (U ^ • 



"SN 



J3 
3-S O O 

U* (u ... 

+j^ o o 

o ■^ 

O.^^ coo» 
,Q ° d 

— ; CO »-( 
°* -h'co 



„ lOOO us 

CO e^i o 



o a. 
■eft- 



s ggs 

ri o6-»»< CO 



Oco 



•s o 






gg 



•{5 OO m 



O 
. H 

3 ►- . 
O « o 

2" 6 



O O O 1/3CC 

'fB'S ^ oiM 

^ O O 00 IM 



o-<a< o OO 

t— I lO •* O T-H 



N-* CO Ttl^ 
CO U5 c^j 



t^OO 00 OO 

F^ O ,-H 



<' 



Tti O "^ IC o 

C-40 "O ooo 

^ "5 CO 



4-J Otr2 OO 



000€ 



c « 
3 

wet, 



tS 



M C ■ 

c.S 



>; oitoo-oo 

K*^ ^1 ■ - • • 

3 COOTtiN'^H 

o O>ncocoo> 



"S ■ • 
•52 o u p 3 



30s IN(MCO 

hrO> . . ^ 

»J 00 .J 60 BB >. 

■n'^u 3 S-g 



PQ 



o<;<;^ 



Q.S 



< 
s 
s 



o 

a . . . 

0; O O O 

g t. V- 1-, 



BRIDGES. 1583 

were used. The mixing was done by a rectangular horizontal ma- 
chine mixer. Tiie concrete was deposited continuously, working 
day and night, except in the case of pier No. 2, where an accident 
to the cofferdam sides caused an interval of several weeks. 

Table XVII of costs for cleaning and repairing is for the work 
of the diver in removing with hoes, shovels and pumps the silt 
which had been deposited on the foundation site. The foundations 
had been cleaned by the dredge several months before, the work 
of the diver being to remove the silt which had afterwards been 
deposited. There was much soft material in abutment No. 1, 
owing to the proximity of the embankment. At pier No. 3 the 
cofferdam rested upon a rock, which had to be drilled and blasted. 
Little work was required at pier No. 4, as the site was compara- 
tively clean. In the table for concreting, the high cost of the work 
on pier No. 2 was due to the fact that the concrete was improperly 
deposited and had to be removed. In the same table, the higher 
cost for the work under abutment No. 1, was probably due to the 
fact that the abutment was so long and narrow that it was difflcult 
to handle the bucket. 

Weight and Cost of the Washington Bridge. N. Y. City.* — In his 
book entitled "The "Washington Bridge," Mr. William R. Hutton 
gives the following data : 

The Washington bridge, across the Harlem River, was built in 
1886-1888 by contract. It consists of two steel arch spans of 510 ft. 
each, and six masonry arch approach spans of 60 ft. each. The 
width of the carriage way is 50 ft., and each of the two sidewalks 
is 15 ft. wide. The rise of the steel arches is 92 ft., the spring 
line being 41 ft. above M. H. W. The center pier rests on a 
caisson sunk 40 ft. below M. H. W. The other two main piers 
reqviired no caisson work. The masonry of these three main 
piers was carried up to the floor level of the bridge. The main 
piers are 40 ft. thick at the spring line and 98 ft. long. They are 
of concrete, faced with granite. Above the stone back they are 
cellular. The total length of 4;he bridge between abutments is 
1,550 ft. In addition to this there are approaches, consisting of 
embankments supported by retaining walls, at each end of the 
bridge. 

The two steel arches required 1,500,000 ft. B. M. timber for the 
falsework (one span rested on piles), and the six masonry arches 
required 1,500,000 ft. B. M., including timber used in trestles for 
landing materials. Each of the steel arches consists of 6 steel ribs 
of 13 ft. deep. 

The superstructure of each 510 ft. long weighs 13,086 lbs. per 
ft. of span, and is designed for a live load of 8,000 lbs. per ft. 
of span. The cost of this bridge was : 

Paid to contractors $2,648,785 

Enginering, etc 162,400 

Commissioners' office 40,500 

TotAl $2,851,685 

*Engineerinff-Contracting. July 14, 1909. 



1584 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This is equivalent to $23 per sq. ft. of roadway between the abut- 
ments. Some of the principal quantities and cost were as follows : 

8,358 cu. yds. granite in piers (dressed) $203,101 

2,300 cu. yds. cornice and parapet 201,245 

15,491 cu. yds. arch voussoirs 248,393 

16,545 cu. yds. facing 174,762 

29,348 cu. yds. granite concrete 161,052 

31,219 cu. yds. earth excavation 80,048 

26,504 cu. yds. rock 29,211 

12,815 cu. yds. embankment 7,538 

4,052 cu. yds. caisson 182,354 

151,078 sq. ft. flagging (sidewalk) :.. 49,577 

13,742 sq. yds. asphalt roadway 62,782 

7,549,606 lbs. steel in arch ribs and bracing 777,359 

5,927,816 lbs. iron in posts, bracing and floor 777,359 

1,233,874 lbs. cast and wet iron in cornice and 

balustrade 132,260 

The caisson foundation of the center pier contained 7,726 cu. yds. 
of timber and concrete for the 40 1/2 ft. below the highwater line, 
which cost the city $30.64 per cu. yd. 

The contractor paid the following wages: Laborers, $1.75 ; masons 
and stone cutters, $3.50 ; drillers, $2 ; enginemen, $2.50 ; carpenters, 
$3 ; painters, $1.75. 

Portland cement was. substituted for Rosendale for about 40 per 
cent of the amount of cement used, adding $32,000 to the cost above 
given. 

Cost of a Bridge Foundation Excavation and Cofferdam, — Mr. 
Walter N. Frickstad gives the following data on bridge founda- 
tion work, done by force account, by tlie Southern Pacific R. R. in 
Nevada, year 1902-3. In crossing the Humboldt River the line 
made a very sharp angle with the river, but a skew bridge was not 
used. There were two abutments and one pier. To build the east 
abutment an i-shaped cofferdam of sand bags, filled in between 
with earth, was used. The long leg of the L was 100 ft. long, and 
the short leg 40 ft. long. This enclosed a triangle of water, 
bounded by the two legs of the I/-shaped cofferdam and the shore 
line of the river. The sand filled sacks were wheeled to place and 
deposited by men provided with long-handled shovels and sticks to 
guide them to place ; but it was not found practicable to build 
the sacks up in tiers, for the air spaces in the sacks buoyed them 
so that they were easily displaced by the river current. It was 
intended to leave a 3-ft. space between two tiers of sacks, to be 
filled with puddle, but this space became choked with sacks. It 
was found impossible to pump out this dam with a one-man sewer 
"deluge" pump, so a bank of earth was deposited outside of the 
dam of sacks. Where the current was swiftest, the earth was 
rushed to place with a steady stream of wheelbarrows, the coarsest 
gravel being used as a riprap on the loam and sand ; and, in spite 
of current of 5 ft. per second, the embankment held its place. Then 
with 4 men on a shift, two working while two rested alternately in 
15 -minute periods, the dam was pumped dry in 2 days and 3 nights, 
at a cost of $19 per 24 hrs. To reduce the area, to be kept pumped 
out, a cross- wall of sacks, 30 ft. long, was put in. About 2,230 
sacks were- used, all told. 



BRIDGES. 



158o 



This work cost as follows : 

Building L-shaped dam, 53 days, at $1.50 $ 79.50 

Filling its slope with earth, 32 days, at $1.50 48.00 

Building cross-wall of dam, 30 days, at $1.50 45.00 

Excavating mud and loose rock, 24 days, at $1.50.. 36.00 
Pumping until masons were above water line, 85 

days, at $1.50 127.50 

- Foreman, 9 days, at $3 27.00 



Total $363.00 

While the masons were at work on the east abutment the coffer 
dam of the center pier was built in a manner that proved to be the 
•cheapest and requiring the least equipment of all the methods of 
cofferdamming used. * To get to bed rock there were 2 ft. of silt, 
7 ft. of gravel and boulders and 5 ft. of boulders. Tests with long 
drills had led the engineers to believe that solid rock was 5 ft. 
nearer the surface, the boulders being mistaken for solid rock. 
The pier was of masonry with a sharp nose at each end, so the 
cofferdam was made of similar shape and with a length of 55 ft. 



Concrete Fooh 




Fig. 9. — Plan of Cofferdam. 



from nose to nose, and an outside width of 16 ft. The cofferdam 
consisted of sheet piling driven by hand as fast as the excavation 
progressed inside, just as in ordinary sheeting of a sewer trench. 
The rangers, or waling pieces, to support the sheet piling were 
made of 8 x 17-in. Oregon pine, drift-bolted together to form a 
frame, as shown in Fig. 9. This frame was laid flat just above 
the surface of the water, being temporarily supported by a bar of 
river sand at one end and by a pair of wooden horses (4 ft. high) 
near the other end. These horses were built and sunk in the 
stream, and planks laid out from the sand bar, upon which to push 
the frame to place on 1^/4 -in. gas pipe rollers by four men using 
pinch bars. About one-third of the frame overhung these horses, 
and the water was 7 ft. deep at the outer nose of the frame. 
Holes were dug 2 ft. deep under the three corners of the frame 
that rested on the sand bar, and temporary posts set in these holes 
to support that end of the frame. Then excavation was begim, 
S-ft. lengths of sheet planking or piling being driven, starting at 
the nose of the frame. A heavy wooden maul was used to drive the 
sheeting. Wlien 12 of these 3 x 12-in. sheeting planks had been 
driven down a short distance, earth and manure were piled out- 
side. Then the lines of sheeting were continued out into the river, 



1586 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



using longer plank. Finally several of the sheeting planks were 
temporarily spiked to the frame, the horses removed, and plank 
driven to close the gaps. Earth and manure were banked vip out- 
side the sheeting. It was found necessary to deflect the river cur- 
rent, which was washing away this earth and manure, and to do 
this a wing dam of sacks filled with sand was built, and coarse 
gravel and sand-filled sacks used to riprap the outer end of the 
earth and manure fill. The water was readily pumped out, and ex- 
cavation begun. It was found that the sheeting was sloping in- 
ward, so a second frame was built of 6 x 12's inside the excavation 
and at the bottom of the sheeting; then the driving of the sheet- 
ing was continued and this second frame was lowered as the ex- 
cavation progressed. Once the gravel caved and two sheet planks 
were forced in, but quick work with brush, manure and earth 




Fig. 10. — Section of Cofferdam. 

closed the hole. When the excavation was 7 ft. below the water 
surface, and rock was not encountered, it was decided to build a 
third frame and drive a second tier of sheet plank inside, and slop- 
ing outward, as in Fig. 10. This was begun when the flow of water 
became so great that a 6-hp. Fairbanks, Morse & Co. combined 
gasoline engine and pump was installed, and no further difficulty 
occurred in getting down to bed rock. The cost of this pier ex- 
cavation by force account was as follows : 

Labor excavating, etc., 324 days, at $1.50 $ 486.00 

Labor pumping, 136 days, at $1.50 ' 204.00 

Engine-runners, 50 days, at $3 150.00 

Four-horse team, 6 days, at $6 36.00 

Carpenter, 8 days, at $3 24.00 

Foreman, 24 days, at $4 96.00 

115 gallons gasoline, at 15 cts 17.25 

300 sacks, at 15 cts 45.00 

10 M. of pine, at $30 300.00 

Total $1,358.25 

Salvage value of 5 M of pine removed 150.00 

Total for 280 cu. yds. excavation, at $4.30. . .$1,208.25 



BRIDGES. 1587 

I have assumed the prices and rates of wages as above given, 
altliough in fact they may have varied slightly. The numher of 
days' work and the amount of materials is exact. It will be noted 
that half the timber in the cofferdam was recovered and used 
elsewhere. The cost of excavation was high, because no derricks 
were used, but the shoveling was done in stages ; moreover, there 
was a large quantity of boulders, and trouble with pumps caused 
considerable delay. 

The excavation for the west abutment, though much larger than 
for the pier just described, was done in the same manner. The 
cofferdam inclosed an i-shaped area, about 60 ft. long on each 
leg of the L, and about 20 ft. wide. The waling frames were built 
in place after the site had been excavated to the water level with 
drag scrapers, and the second and third frames in due course. In 
lowering the frames from time to time as the excavation pro- 
gressed, it was found almost impossible to drive them down with 
a 16-lb. sledge or a wooden maul. Even a 6-in. x 12-in. x 8-ft. wood- 
en rammer, operated by two men, failed to drive the frames. It was 
found that by loading the shoveling platforms, 2 ft. wide by 16 ft. 
long, with gravel, one platform being loaded on each side the sec- 
tion to be lowered, a slight tapping produced any desired amount of 
settling. The excavation was not carried to bed rock, but the abut- 
ment was founded on the gravel and boulders, at a depth of 12 ft. 
below the water surface. The cost of this work was as follows : 

Team on drag-scraper, 18 days, at $3.50 ? 63.00 

Laborers, 748 days, at $1.50 1,122.00 

Carpenter, 35 days, at $3.00 105.00 

Pump engineers, 140 days, at $3.00 420.00 

Foreman, 35 days, at $4.00 140.00 

45 tons coal, at $6.00 270.00 

150 gallons gasoline, at 15 cts 225.00 

22 M lumber, at $30 660.00 

Total $3,005.00 

Salvage value of 11 M lumber removed 330.00 

Total, 700 cu. yds., at $3.82 $2,675.00 

Cost of Coffer Dam.* — Maj. Graham D. Fitch gives the following: 
A cofferdam was built en the Upper White River, Arkansas, 
within which to build a lock. Common laborers received $1.50 per 
8-hr. day. The work was done by Government forces. 

The lock (No. 1) was founded on sandstone bed rock, and as 
the foundation bed afforded no foothold for piles, crib cofferdams 
were used. These were built and sunk in sections from 20 to 30 
ft. long, each section consisting of round oak logs 7 to 9 ins. in 
diameter, driftbolted together with %-in. round iron. The walls 
were tied together every 10 ft. by a transverse crib wall. Above 
the water the cofferdam was a continuous crib. The inside faces 
of both walls were sheeted with boards driven to a good bearing 
with hand mauls, a single row of 1-in. boards being used for the 
outer wall and double lap 1-in. and 2-in. boards for the inner wall, 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 6, 1908, p. 278. 



1588 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



The pens were filled with clay and the dam well banked on the 
outside. Tlie puddle, wliicla was taken from a bank nearby, was 
loaded by a dipper dredge on a barge and placed in the dam with 
shovels. The inside width of the cofferdam was 10 ft. 8 ins., and 
its length was 462 ft. It was built to a 9 ft. stage and had an 
average height of 17 ft. The dam was built in 6 weeks time and 
the pit was pumped out in about 11 hours with one 10-in. centrifugal 
pump. A SVa-in. pulsometer pump was used to keep seep water out 
of the pit. There was very little leakage except during rises, 
after which the dam always had to be repuddled, as much of the 
backing was washed away by tlae swift current. The cost of this 
cofferdam was as follows : 



COFFER'^AM (462 LlN. FT.). 



Materials i 



Logs, 30,560 lin. ft 

Timber, 32.8 M ft. B. M 

Iron, 8,139 lbs 

Straw, 12 loads 

Fuel 

Illumination, oils, etc 



Unit 




Per lin. ft. 


Cost. 


Total. 


Cofferdam, 


.0365 


$1,115 


$2.41 


10.90 


360 


.78 


.0289 


234 


.51 


1.75 


21 


.04 




177 


.38 


.... 


104 


.22 



Total materials 

Labor: 

Quarrying and placing break- 
water stone, 498 cu. yds $ 0, 

Excavation, 300 cu. yds 

Hauling lumber, 20 M ft. . . 

Placing logs, 30,560 lin. ft 

Placing timber, 32.8 M ft 1. 

Digging puddle, 7,860 cu. yds,.. 
Placing puddle, 7,860 cu, yds... 
Pumping pit 



562 

86 

02 

73 

062 

53 



Total 

Grand total 



$2,011 



f 388 

169 

17 

638 

57 

490 

4,179 

539 

f6,476 

68,487 



$4.34 



.36 

.04 
1.38 

.12 
1.06 
9.05 
1.17 

$14.03 

$18.37 



Some of the labor items may be still further summarized as 



follows : 

Work Labor time 

done, in days. 
Quarrying and placing 

breakwater stone.... 498 cu. yds. 248 

Excavation 300 cu. yds. 95 1/8 

Placing logs 30,560 lin. ft. 370 1/8 

Placing timber 32.8 M ft. 37 4/8 

Placing puddle 7,860 cu. yds. 2,392 6/8 



Work done 
per man 
per day. 

2 cu. yds. 
3.16 cu. yds. 
82.59 lin. ft, 
.863 M ft. 
3,284 cu. yds. 



The total labor time in constructing the 462 lin. ft. of cofferdam 
was 3,660% daj^s. The unit cost per linear foot of cofferdam was 
$18.37 and the work done per man per day was .126 lin. ft. 
About 90 lin. ft. of cofferdam was removed by dredge and men, at 
a cost of $161 ; the labor time being 86% days. The unit cost was 
$1,794 per lin. ft. 



BRIDGES. 1589 

In excavating for the foundation of the lock a 1% cu. yd. 
Bucyrus dipper dredge removed from the pit, before the cofferdam 
was closed, such material as it could handle ; but owing to the 
large boulders encountered most of the excavating was done by 
hand after the cofferdam! had been pumped out, the material — 
cla3^ boulders, and cemented gravel — being removed by wheel- 
barrows and derrick skips. The lockwall foundations averaged 6 
ft. in depth below the lock floor, the maximum depth being 6 ft. 
5 ins. Both the chamber and miter wall were founded on bed rock. 

The cost of excavation work was as follows : 

Excavation (3,635 Cu. Yds.). 

Unit Per cu. yd. 

Material: Cost. Total. Excavation. 

Dynamite, 600 lbs $0.14 $ 84 $0,023 

Fuel 9 .002 

Illuminating oils, etc 119 .032 

Total materials $ 212 $0,057 

Labor: 

Excavating, 3,365 cu. yds 151.49 $5,438 $1.49 

Cleaning lock pit 108 .029 

Total labor $5,546 $1,519 

Grand total $5,758 $1.58 

The total labor time in days for excavating was 3,138% days 
and the work done per man per day was 1.16 cu. yds. 

Cost of Placing Puddle In a Coffer Dam by Pumping.* — Mr. Will- 
iam Martin is authority for the following data : 

In building Davis Island Dam, several years ago, a cofferdam 
1,085 ft. long, containing 5,784 cu. yds. of puddle material, was 
built by pumping the puddle from an island. The cofferdam con- 
sisted of two rows of piles, the rows being 15% ft. c. to c. and the 
piles in each row being 21 ft. c. to c. The piles were 20 ft. long, 
and were driven 8 ft. Three rows of wale pieces or stringers 
were bolted to the piles, 12 ft. apart. A single line of vertical 
sheeting plank, driven 2 ft. into the gravel bottom, rested against 
the wales. The joints of the sheeting were covered with 1x6 in. 
strips to prevent leakage of the puddle. On each side of the 
sheeting, at the top, was spiked a 2 x 10 in. string piece, to form a 
bearing upon which a plank deck was laid. 

The plant, as finally developed, was .as follows : 

Tubular boiler, 36 ins., diam x 16 ft. long. 

Engine, 10 x 10 ins. 

Piston pump — steam cyl. 12 x 18 ins.; water cyl. 6% x 18 ins. 

Centrifugal pump, 3 in. discharges. 

Pipes, etc., of the following sizes were used : Delivery pipe, 4-in. ; 
clearing pipe, 2%-in. ; priming pipe, 1%-in. ; lubricator pipe, 1-in. ; 
steam pipe to engine, 2%-in. ; steam pipe to piston pump, 2-in. ; 
band wheel on engine shaft, 4 % ft. ; pulley on centrifugal pump 
shaft, 10 ins. ; width of driving belt, 10 ins. ; agitator hose, 1% ins. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 6, 1909. 



1590 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following pressures were obtained: Steam boiler, 100 lbs. per 
sq. in. ; gage on piston pump, 70 lbs. ; gage on delivery pipe, 35 lbs. 

The centrifugal pump for pumping the puddle was located on an 
island 900 ft. from the cofferdam. Beneath the pump was a tank for 
mixing the puddle, 8 ft. diameter and 4 ft. deep, sunk to a sufficient 
depth to secure a fall of water from a flume that tapped the river. 

The piston pump was connected to the delivery pipe by a wye 
connection, and was used for priming the centrifugal pump, and 
keeping the sand from packing, and for furnishing water for the 
steam boil6r and for the agitator hose, as hereafter described. 

The puddle, consisting of loam and sand, was obtained within a 
radius of 100 ft. from the pump by loosening with a plow and 
delivering close to the tank with drag scrapers. It was then 
shoveled by hand into the tank, a cost that could have been avoided 
had the scrapers dumped through a trap into the tank. The 
material was mixed with water in the tank and kept agitated by 
water from a hose in the hands of workmen, to prevent the earth 
from settling to the bottom. This puddle was taken by the feed 
pipe of the centrifugal pump and forced through the delivery pipe 
to the cofferdam, a distance constantly increasing as the work 
progressed. The delivery pipe was laid on the bottom of the river, 
and then rose by an easy ascent to about 1 ft. above the top of 
the cofferdam. 

The puddle occasionally became so thick as to clog the delivery 
pipe. In order to meet this difficulty, the following ingenious plan 
was devised. On the delivery pipe at the centrifugal pump was 
placed a pressure gage. Any clogging of the delivery pipe im- 
mediately caused the pressure to rise, whereupon the engineman 
slackened the speed of the centrifugal and opened the valve in the 
wye connection to the piston pump. This admitted a stream of 
clear water at high pressure from the piston pump and immediately 
cleared the congestion of puddle in the delivery pipe. The check 
valve in the delivery pipe between the wye connection and the 
centrifugal pump prevented a back flow into the centrifugal pump. 

At the bottom of the feed pipe in the tank was a screen having 
1-in. meshes. Above the screen, and in the same casing, was placed 
a foot valve for the purpose of holding the priming. 

One of the principal difficulties in working the centrifugal pump 
was the rapid wear of all its parts that came in contact with the 
sand. The casing, which was originally %-in. thick, wore through 
in 10 days, during which time not 2,500 cu. yds. of puddle were 
handled. This was replaced with a 1-in. casing which was still 
in service after the 13 days use which completed the job. 

The stuffing box wore rapidly until the following ingenious device 
was applied : A screw was cut in the chamber in the opposite 
direction to the motion of the shaft. A pipe was put in back of the 
packing and connected with the piston pump. Water was forced 
through this around the shaft, and, being under a greater pressure 
than the centrifugal pump, prevented the puddle material from 
getting into the stuffing box. Water thus applied performed a 



BRIDGES. 1591 

double duty, for it acted as a lubrication and prevented the shaft 
from heating. 

At the discharge end of the delivery pipe the puddle material 
was deposited in the cofferdam and flowed off for a distance of a 
few hundred feet, depositing in a hard and solid mass. The loam 
being lighter, remained longer in suspension and settled out on top 
")f the sand. 

In 23 days there were delivered 5,784 cu. yds. of puddle material, 
or 251 cu. yds. per 10-hr. day. Laborers received $1.75 to $2 a 
day, and mechanics $2.50 to $2.75. The cost was as follows: 
Plant: 

Pump $ 145 

Repairs, fittings, etc 382 

Pipe 364 

Total cost of plant $ 891 

Labor: 
Installing plant and pumping puddle, removing 

plant, etc $2,847 

Fuel: 
23 days fuel $ 38 

Total labor and fuel $2,885 

It will thus be seen that the cost of labor and fuel for puddling 
amounted to $265 per lin. ft. of cofferdam, or 50 cts. per cu. yd., 
including the labor cost of installing the plant. It is unfortunate 
that this item of installation and removal of plant was not kept 
separate, as it was evidently a large item. The fuel cost only 
$1.65 a day, or % ct. per cu. yd. The labor during the 23 day-s 
of pumping could probably not have exceeded 4 cts. per cu. -yd. 
for pumping and pipe laying. With a haul averaging about 50 or 
60 ft. for the drag scrapers, the cost of delivering the puddle along- 
side the tank probablj^ did not exceed 10 cts. per cu. yd. Shoveling 
it into the tank doubtless cost less than 10 cts. per cu. yd. This 
would make a total of not more than 25 cts. per cu. yd. for the 
puddle in place, exclusive of plant charges for interest, depreciation, 
j-epairs and installation. Apparently the installation and removal 
of the pumping plant cost at least $1,500. The plant itself cost 
$891, as above given. The exceptionally high cost of installation 
appears to have been due in part to the experimenting incident to 
developing the best way of handling the material, most of which 
cost can be saved by studying the finally adopted methods and 
devices above given. 

For comparative purposes it is well to add the following costs 
of filling another section of another cofferdam nearby by another 
method. The other section was 1,165 ft. long, and it cost $5.69. 
per lin. ft. for puddle in place, or practically $1.10 per cu. yd. of 
puddle. The method employed consisted in loading the material by 
hand into cars, hatiling it over a narrow gage track to the river, 
loading into boats and transporting to the cofferdam, shoveling by 
hand into place, and compacting with water. Wages were only 
$1.25 a day for laborers, and $2.25 for mechanics. 



1-592 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The Cost of Some Masonry Bridae Piers and Abutments.* — Some 
fairly complete data as to the cost of constructing bridge masonry- 
are given below. The work, which was done by contract for the 
Chicago & West Michigan Ry., consisted of tlie construction of a 
pier and abutment at New Buffalo, Ind., to carry the tracks of the 
above road over the Michigan Central R. R. Work was com- 
menced Aug. 24, 1891, and was finished Oct. 27, 1891, taking in all 
56 working days. 

The average working force and its wages per day were as 
follows : 

1 Foreman §2.50 

1 Bngineman 2.00 

4 Stonecutters 3.00 

1 Mason 2.50 

9 Laborers 1.50 

Prom this it will be seen that the total labor cost per day was 
$32.50, and the total cost for 56 days was $1,525. 
The cost of the labor was distributed as follows: 

Cost per 

Cu. yds. Cost. cu. yd. 

Excavating, abutment 868 $133 $0,153 

Excavating pier 232 45 0.194 

Cutting stone, abutment 281 514 1.93 

Cutting stone, pier 163 347 2.13 

Setting stone, abutment.... 281 197 0.70 

Setting stone, pier 163 152 0.93 

Unloading stone from cars. .444 50 0.11 

To the above should be added $86.50 as the cost of erecting 
and moving the plant. 

The total cost of the work to the contractor amounted to $1,863, 
as is shown by the following figures : 

Labor $1,525.00 

78 bbls. Louisville and Miller cement. ... 78.00 

8 bbls. Buckeye cement 30.00 

40 yds. sand 30.00 

10% of value of plant 200.00 

Total $1,863.00 

According to the estimate on which the contractor was paid he 
was to receive $6.50 per cu. yd. for masonry cut and placed, and 
$0.25 per cu. yd. for excavation. As 444 cu. yds. of masonry were 
constructed and 1,100 cu. yds. of earth excavated, the contractor 
received $3,148.50. His total expenses, as shown in the preceding 
paragraphs, were $1,863 ; therefore he made a profit of $1,285.50 
on the job. 

• The total cost of the Chicago & West Michigan Ry. was 
$5,884.65 ; this includes the estimate of $3,148.50 and the furnish- 
ing of 435 cu. yds. of stone, costing $6.29 per cu. yd. 

The stone used was Grafton sandstone delivered on cars at 
La Porte, Ind. It should also be added that the amount given for 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 30, 1906. 



BRIDGES. 1593 

use of plant covered the expense of repairng stonecutters' tools and 
the cost of fuel. 

Cost of a Masonry Bridge Abutment.* — We give herewith the cost 
of constructing the west abutment of a 60-ft. through girder bridge 
near Ionia. Mich., where the Detroit. Lansing & Northern R. R 
crosses Prison Road. The work was done by contract for the 
above-mentioned railroad. According to the terms of the contract 
the railroad company furnished the stone and free transportation 
of men and materials ; the contractor furnished all other material 
and labor, and in addition was paid for all timber left in the con- 
struction. His plant consisted of a steam hoist derrick with accom- 
panying tools, etc. The stone used was sandstone from Grafton, O., 
and was delivered f. o. b. Detroit. The average weight of a car- 
load of stone was 33,873 lbs., and the average carload contained 
203 cu. ft. The average weight per cubic foot, according to car 
weights and quarry measurements, was 166.8 lbs. Hanover Port- 
land cement was used, and on account of the low temperature 
when the work was done, it was necessary to add salt to the mor- 
tar. In the excavation, the removal of excavated matter was done 
almost entirely with wheelbarrows. The excavated material was 
sand and was wasted. The overhaul was only a short distance, the 
lead being but 75 ft. The work of excavating was commenced 
November 18, 1893, the first stone was laid December 5, and the 
last stone January 7, 1894 ; two days later the contractor finished 
removing his plant. As will be seen from the above dates, the 
work was done in the winter, and this accounts in a measure for 
the higher cost of stonecutting, etc. Indeed, it was necessary to 
use heated sand to remove the frost from the stone before it 
was cut. 

The tables below give the actual cost of materials and labor to 
the contractor : 

Materials. 

341/' bbls. Hanover Portland cement at $2.85 $ 98.32 

24 wagon loads sand at ?0.75 18.00 

2 bbls. salt at $1-00 2.00 

Coal for engine 20.00 

2 cords wood (heating sand) 3.50 



Total ., ?141.83 

Labor. 

Erecting and Removing Plant. 

Foreman 2.2 days at ?3.00 

Foreman 4.2 " 

Laborers 29.7 " 

Bngineman . 2.2 " 

Derrickman 2.2 " 

Total labor cost $65.65 



3.00 


? 6.60 


1.75 . 


7.35 


1.50 


44.55 


1.75 • 


3.85 


1.50 


3.30 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 30, 1906. 



1594 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Excavation. 

Foreman 8.9 days at $1.75 $15.58 

Laborers 64.8 " " 1.50 97.20 

Engineman 0.4 " " 1.75 .70 

Derrickman 0.4 " " 1.50 .60 



Total, 772 cu. yds. at .?0.15 $114.08 

Unloading Stone. 

Foreman 0.6 days at $3.00 $1.80 

Foreman 1.1 " " 1.75 1.93 

Laborers 3.7 " " 1.50 5.55 

Engineman 1.1 " " 1.75 1.93 

Derrickman 1.1 " " 1.50 1.65 

Stonecutter 1.3 " " 3.00 3.90 



Total, 165.6 cu. yds. at $0.10 $16.76 

Stonecutting. 

Stonecutters • 141.4 days at $3.00 $424.20 

Scabblers 11.1 " " 1.50 16.65 

Engineman 9. " " 1.75 15.7.T 

Derrickman 9. " " 1.50 13.50 

Labor heating sand 9.4 " " 1.50 14.10 

Blacksmith 15. " " 1.75 26.25 



Total, 181.2 cu. yds. at $2.81 $510.45 

Setting Stone in Abutment. 

Foreman 7.4 days at $3.00 $22.20 

Foreman 9.6 " " 1.75 16.80 

Mason 2.5 " " 3.00 7.5C 

Laborers 38.6 " " 1.50 57.90 

Engineman 5.7 " " 1.75 9.98 

Derrickman 5.7 " " 1.50 8.5R 



Total, 181.7 cu. yds. at $0.68 $122.93 

Laying Stone in Retainmg Wall. 

Foreman 1.4 days at $1.75 $2.45 

Laboi-ers 5. " " 1.50 7.50 

Engineman 0.5 " " 1.75 .88 

Derrickman 0.5 " " 1.50 .75 



Total, 16 cu. yds. at $0.72 $11.58 

Old Masonry of West Abntment Taken Down. 

Foreman 1 day at $1.75 $1.75 

Laborers 6 " " 1.50 9.00 



Total, 30.5 cu. yds. at $0.35 $10.75 

Preparing East Abutment for Bridge Seat. 

Foreman 1.2 days at $1-75 $2.10 

Laborers' 4. " " 1.50 6.00 



Total $8.10 

Pointing. 

Foreman 8 day at $3.00 $2.40 

Laborers 2.3 " " 1.50 3.45 

Total 5.85 



BRIDGES. 



lo95 



Backfilling. 

Foreman 2.4 days at $3.00 ? 6.80 

Foreman 6.3 " " 1.75 11.03 

Laborers 37.8 " " 1.50 56.70 

Engineman 3.6 " " 1.75 6.30 

Derrickman 3.6 " " 1.50 5.40 

Total, 380 cu. yds. at $0.23 $86.23 

The total labor cost to the contractor was $952.38, to this must 
be added $120.00 for depreciation and repairs to plant, and $141.83 
for the cost of materials, thus making the total cost to the con- 
tractor for material and labor amount to $1,214.21. 

The final estimate of work done by the contractor and the unit 
rate at which he was paid for it, were as follows: 

772 cu. yds. excavation at $0.25 

380 cu. yds. backfilling at 0.25 

1S1.7 cu. yds. masonry, cut and place at 6.15 

16 cu. yds. masonry (retaining wall) at 4.00 

30.5 cu. yds. old masonry taken down at 0.30 

Total paid to contractor, $1,478.73. 

As was .shown in the preceding paragraph the total actual cost 
of the work to the contractor was $1,214.21. His profit accordingly 
amounted to $264.52 or 21.8 per cent. 




Sec+ion . 



Plan o-f 
Bo-H-om Course. 

Fig. 11. 



The cost to the Detroit, Lansing & Northern R. R. was as 
follows : 

165.6 cu. yds. Grafton standstone at $6,021, $997.22 ; amount 
paid contractor, $1,478.73 ; total, $2,475.95. 

The cost per cubic yard' of masonry to the railroad company 
was as follows: 

181.72 cu. yds. of stone (wall measurement), total cost, $997.22; 
per cubic yard, $5.48; 181.72 cu. yds. of stone cut and placed, cost 
$6.15 per cu. yd. ; total cost per cubic yard of masonry is thei-e- 
fore $11,637. 

Labor Cost of a Bridge Abutment.* — The work was done by con- 
tract during the fall of 1893 for the Detroit, Lansing & Northern 
R. R., near Redford, Mich. Figure 11 shows plan of the abutment. 
According to the terms of the contract, the railroad company fur- 
nished the stone and free transportation of men and materials, and 
the contractor furnished all other material and labor, and in addi- 



* Engineering-Contracting, June 6, 1906. 



1596 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

tion was paid for all timber left in the construction. Tlie stone 
used was sandstone from Grafton, O., delivered f. o. b. Detroit, 
Mich. The average weight of the stone per carload was 41,900 lbs. ; 
the average number of cubic feet per carload was 'di'J. The average 
weight of a cubic foot of the stone as amputated from the car 
weights and quarry measurements was 174.4 lbs. It should be 
noted, however, that the true dimensions of the stone were con- 
siderably larger than the quarry measurements, and this accounts 
for the apparent large weight per cubic foot. 

Buffalo natural cement was used in the greater part of the work, 
but Dyckerhoff Portland cement was used for pointing and for joints 
in the face of the work as far as 10 in. back from the face. The 
sand was obtained from the property of the railroad company, the 
only cost to the contractor being for the loading and unloading. 
The material excavated was sand and clay, and was removed from 
the excavation by wheelbarrows and by boxes holding about 1% 
cu. yds., which were lifted out by the derrick. The greater part of 
the excavated material was removed by the latter method. 

The contractor's plant consisted of a steam hoist derrick and a 
hand derrick. For driving the sheet piling a small man-power 
driver was constructed. This was built with an oak driver weigh- 
ing 125 lbs., and having a drop of about 4 ft. The sheet piling 
was double and triple 1 in. x 12 in. oak, 10 ft. long, and was 
driven 8 ft. through clay and coarse gravel. The contractor began 
erecting his plant September 7, 1893. On September 11 excava- 
tion was started, and October 2 the first stone was laid; the last 
stone was laid November 19, and one week later the contractor 
finished removing his plant. 

Labor. 

Erect in fj and Removing Plant. 

Foreman .'i. 5 days at $2.50 $13.75 

Laborers 55.4 " " 1.50 83.10 

Engineman 1.8 " " 1.75 3.15 

Total $100.00 

Earth Excavation, Wet and Dry. 

Foreman 12.9 days at $2.50 $ 32.25 

Laborers 197.8 " " 1.50 269.70 

Engineman 9.8 " " 1.75 17.15 

Derrlckman 8.2 " " 1.50 12.30 

Water boy 9.9 " " 0.75 7.43 

Total, 1.6.32 cu. yds. at $0.21 , $338.83 

Pnmping Water. 

Laborer 6.3 days at $1.50 $9.45 

Making Sheet Pile Driver. 

Foreman 0.8 days at $2.50 $2.00 

Laborers 3.5 " " 1.50 5.25 

"Water boy 0.15 " " 0.75 .11 

Total $7.36 



BRIDGES. 



IWi 



Driving Sheet Filing. 

Foreman 4.4 davs at $2.50 .$11.00 

Laborers 165.2 " " 1.50 247.80 

Water boy 9.6 " " 0.75 7.20 

Total, 8,932 ft. B. M. at ?2.n8 $266.00 

There were 2,227 lin. ft. of sheet piling, so that the labor 
was 12 cts. per ft. 

Concrete. 

Foreman 5.7 davs at $2.50 $14.25 

Laborers 42 " " 1.50 63.00 

Bngineman 1.25 " " 1.75 2.19 

Derrickman 7.9 " " 1.50 11.85 

Water boy 2 " " 0.75 1.50 

Total, 57 cu. yds. at $1.63 $92.79 

Unloading Stone from Cars. 

Foreman 3.65 days at $2.50 $ 9.13 

Laborers 30.3 " " 1.50 45.45 

Engineman 3.6 " " 1.75 6.30 

Derrickman 3.6 " " 1.50 5.40 

Stonecutters 14.7 " " 3.00 44.1 

Total, 6571/2 cu._ yds. at $0.17... $110.3"8 

Stonecutting. 

Engineman 23.8 davs at $1.75 $ 41.65 

Darrickman 24.7 " " 1.50 37.05 

Stonecutters 284.9 " " 3.00 854.70 

Scabblers 28.4 " " 1.50 42.60 

Blacksmith 3.3 " " 1.75 58.28 

Water boy 14.7 " " 0.75 11.03 

Total, 6571/2 cu. yds. at $1.59 $1,045.31 

Setting Stone. 

Foreman 30.7 davs at $2.50 $ 76.75 

Mason 47.4 " " l.SO 71.10' 

Laborers 59.3 " " 1.50 88.95 

Bngineman 11.4 " " 1.75 19.95 

Derrickman 17.4 " " 1.50 26.10 

Water boy 9 " " 0.75 6.75 

Total, 6571/2 cu. yds. at $0.44 

Pointing. 

Mason 10 days at $1.50 

Loading Sand. 

Laborer 11.9 days at $1.50 

Backfilling. 

Foreman 1 day at $2.50 

Laborers 103.7 days at 1.50 

Engineman 6.5 " " 1.75 

Derrickmen 14.5 " " 1.50 

"Water boy 5.3 " " 0.75 

Total, 796 cu. yds. at $0.245 

Ditching. 
Laborers 2.5 days at $1.50 

Total, 27.2 cu. yds. at $0.14 $3.75 

Tear Down Old Abutment and Load. 

Foreman 4.3 days at $2.50 $10.75 

Laborers 33.2 " " 1.50 49.80 

Total, 90.4 cu. yds. at $0.67 $60.5.5 



cost 



$289.60 

$15.00 

$17.85 

$ 2.50' 

155.55 

11.38 

21.75 

3.98 

$195.16 

$3.75 



1598 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Of the 1,632 cu. yds. of earth excavation there wei-e 1,260 cu. 
yds. dry, and 372 cu. yds. wet. The dry excavation cost $2 53.08, 
or 20.8 cts. per cu. yd. Tlie labor of the wet excavation cost $85.75, 
or 23 cts. per cu. yd., to which must be added nearly 3 cts. for 
pumping and 73 cts. for the labor of driving the sheet piles, in- 
cluding the labor of making the pile driver. This makes a total of 
99 cts. per cu. yd. for the labor of the wet excavation ; taut in addi- 
tion to this there was nearly 9,000 ft. B. M. of oak sheet piling. 
Which at $14 per M (a very low price), would add another $180. 
or nearly 34 cts. per cu. yd., making the total cost nearly $1.33 per 
cu. yd. for the 372 cu. yds. of wet excavation. Had the sheet 
piling timber cost $20 per M, the total cost of the wet excava- 
tion would have been about $1.50 per cu. yd. 

The total labor cost to the contractor was $2,552.03. To this 
fimount must be added the following : 

10% value of plant for depreciation and repairs. . . .$140.00 

8,932 ft. B. M. oak piling at $14 125.00 

215 bbls. Buffalo cement at $0.85 182.75 

71/2 bbls. Dykerhoff cement at $3.00 22.50 

Coal for engine 55.80 

Coal for blacksmith 3.40 

Total $389.50 

Time work 95.57 

The total actual cost to the contractor for labor and materials is 
accordingly $2,552.03 + $389.50 + $95.57 = $3,177.10. As is shown 
in the succeeding paragraphs the railroad company paid the con- 
tractor $5,377.76 OH the final estimate of the work done, thus giving 
him a profit of $2,200.66. 

In the following table is shown the final estimate of the amount 
of work done by the contractor and the unit rate at which he was 
paid by the railroad : 

1,260 cu. yds. dry excavation at $0.25 

372 cu. yds. wet excavation at 75 

27.2 cu. yds. ditching at 25 

796 cu. yds. back filling at 25 

57 cu. yds. concrete at 3.75 

657.5 cu. yds. masonry at 6.15 

90.4 cu. yds. old abutment torn down at 1.00 

Total $5,273.63 

In addition the contractor was paid for the timber left in the 
structlon and for time labor, the imit costs being as follows : 

8,932 ft. B. M. oak sheet piling at $14.00 

8 days' labor night watchmen at 1.25 

41 days' labor night watchmen at 1.50 

2.8 days' labor changing braces at 1.50 

13.25 days' labor excavating at 1.50 

Total $95.57 

The contractor was paid 10 per cent of this last total, or $9.56, 
for use of tools, etc., making $5,377.76 as the total amount paid 



BRIDGES. 



1599 



him on the final estimate. As the raih^oad company furnished the 
stone the grand total cost of the work to it was as follows : 

600 cu. yds. stone at ?5.S9 |3,533.05 

74.5 cu. yds. broken stone at $1.177 87.71 

Amount paid contractor 5,377.76 

Total cost of work $8,998.52 

The cost to the railroad company of masonry per cubic yard was 
as follows: 657.5 cu. yds. stone (laid), cost $3,533.05, $5.37 per cu. 
yd. ; 657.5 cu. yds. stone cut and set, $6.15 per cu. yd. (contract 
price) J total, $11.52 per cu. yd. of abutment masonry. 

Base of f?ai! 



7 , Ik-^-fJ^-^-^-Hl 

I Grvove' 



i4--yr'' 



/4-0" 



Base of Pail 




Plan and Elovat/on of Piers 2,3 and^. p|j,„ ^„j Elevation of Pfers land 6 

Fig. 12. — Bridge Pier. 

Cost of Concrete Foundations for a Railway Bridge. — Mr. J. Guy 
HufE is authority for the following data. The original Calf 
Killer River bridge on the Sparta-Bon Air extension of the Nash- 
ville, Chattanooga, St. Louis Ry. consisted of two end piers, one 
middle pier, and a stem wall at each end, carrying Phoenix column 
deck trusses of the Warren type. The distance from base of rail to 
bridge seat was 25 ft. 1% ins. In 1905 the old superstructure was 
replaced by four spans of 75 ft. deck plate girders, two new con- 



1600 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Crete piers being constructed and the old masonry piers built up 
with concrete. Figures 12 and 13 show arrangement, plans and 
elevation of the piers. 

Briefly described, the method of construction was as follows : 
The end pieces were built up, the end vertical posts and end braces 
being encased, the latter being removed when the old structure was 
taken down ; the two new piers were finished complete, the bars of 
the lower chords of the old bridge being boxed around, and after 
the old bridge had been removed these slots were filled with con- 
crete ; on both sides of the old middle pier falsework towers suffi- 
ciently strong to support the ends of the new girders were erected, 
and after the old spans had been taken down and the new super- 
structure put in place, the pier was built up. 



-m. 



7 — T~- 



\K'._ 



I I 

9 I. 



Iil--l.l 



Pier No. 5 
Sf-one Boise 
■A'e/v Concrere Top 




JMI 




Concrete- Fbondatiot 
Bed 
Pier No. I. 
Shne Base 
Afeiv Concrete Top 



Fig. 13. — Bridge Piers. 



The old masonrj- was built up of concrete to the finish for 7-ft. 
deck plate girders, using vertical faces and not exceeding the size 
of the old piers. Tlie length of this top section on the old ma- 
sonry was 14 ft. on each of the piers, and the design of the new 
piers was similar in size and shape to the old mid-pier with its 
new top section. 

Mixing and Placing Concrete. — The sand and aggregate, consist- 
ing of blast furnace slag obtained from South Pittsburg, Tenn., 
were unloaded from cars to platforms on a level with the top of 
rail, placed about 100 ft. south from the south end of the bridge. 
A cubical form, 1-6 cu. yd. capacity, concrete mixer was used. This 
was operated by a gasoline engine, and was located on a platform 
about 50 ft. south of the south end pier. A tank near the mixer 
to supply water was elevated enough to get the desired head, and 
-was kept filled by a pump run by another gasoline engine located 



BRIDGES. 1601 

down bj' the river bank. The cement house was located between 
the mixer platform and slag pile. 

Slag and sand were delivered to the mixer by means of wheel- 
barrows. The mixer was so placed that it would dump onto a plat- 
form, and the conci'ete could then be shoveled into a specially de- 
signed narrow-gage car. This car ran on one rail of the main 
track and an extra rail outside. A turnout for clearing passing 
trains was provided at both ends of the bridge. The track over the 
bridge from the mixer had a descending grade of about 1 per cent, 
so that with a little start the concrete car would roll alone down 
to the required points on the bridge. Only in returning the empty 
cars to the mixer was it necessary to push it by hand, and then 
only for a distance of never more than 400 ft. 

Over the piers on the bridge in the center of the concrete car's 
track openings were sawed to let the concrete pass to the forms 
below. To get the concrete into the forms, there were used zigzag 
chutes with arms about 10 ft. long, which sections were removed 
as the concrete in the forms were increased. This chute was a 
convenience by its end alternating from one side to the other as 
the arms were removed in coming up. 

Cost Data on the Foundation Work. — The foundation work was 
built by the railway's masonry gangs, the work being commenced 
about June 20, 1905, and finished complete about Dec. 1 of the 
same year. The girders were furnished and placed by a bridge 
company. 

In Table XVIII the wages per day are the average rates. The 
men worked 10 hours each day. The concrete was mixed in a 
1:3:6 proportion. 

Table XVltl. 

Unloading Materials. 

Per cu. yd. 
Rate Total days Con- 

per day. worked. Total. crete. 

Foreman $3.40 5 $17.00 $0.04 

11 laborers 1.36 8/10 52 71.14 .15 



Total for unloading material $0.1!) 

Building Forms, Bins, Etc. 

Foreman $3.40 18 $61.20 $0.14 

9 carpenters 2.25 166 373.50 .81 

New lumber, 23.7 M ft. at $17.80 421.86 .92 

Old lumber, 6 M ft. at $8.33 49.98 .11 



Total for building forms, bins, etc $1.9 8 

Cofferdam Excavation (io Cu. Yds.) 

Foreman $3.40 8 $27.20 $0.06 

9 laborers 1.15 6/10 741/2 86 12 .19 



Total for cofferdam excavation $0.25 



1602 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cofferdam Concrete (S~ Cu. Yds.) 

Foreman $3.40 8 $27.20 $0.06 

11 laborers 1.36 3/10 79 107.68 .23 

Cofferdam lumber, 2.25 M ft. at 

$20.00 45 00 .09 

Total for cofferdam concrete $0.38 

Concrete Mixing and Placing. 

Foreman $3.40 30 $102.00 $0.22 

9 laborers 1.15 6/10 282 325.99 .74 

Cement, 452 bbls. at $1.55 701.50 1.52 

Slag, 437 cu. yds. at $0.20 87.40 .19 

Sand, 220 cu. yds. at $0.30 66.00 .14 



Total for mixing and placing $2.78 

Taking Down Forms and Clearing Up. 

Foreman $3.40 13 $44.20 $0.09 

11 laborer^ 1.17 143 107.31 .36 

Total for taking down forms, etc $200.00 $0.45 

Engineering and supervision 43 



Grand total, 460 cu. yds. concrete $6.46 

The cofferdam work was done in connection with the construc- 
tion of the fourth pier, this pier being the only one coming in the 
bed of the river to be built entirely new. The work on this was 
started in water about 6 ft. deep. The 37 cu. yds. of concrete are 
included in the total of 460 cu. yds. in the above tabulation. By 
itself the cost of the cofferdam work, not including cost of cement, 
sand and slag, was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 
Total. Concrete. 

Lumber $45.00 $1.21 

Labor, excavating 113.32 3.06 

Labor, concrete 134.88 3.64 



Total 37 cu. yds. concrete $7.91 

Cost of a Cofferdam and Concrete Pier on Pile Foundation. — 

The following was published in Engineering-Contracting, May 29, 
1907: 

This pier (Fig. 14) was built in water averaging 5 ft. deep. The 
cofferdam consisted of triple-lap sheet piling, of the Wakefield pat- 
tern, the planks being 2 ins. thick, and spiked together so as to 
give a cofferdam wall 6 ins. thick. The cofferdam enclosed an 
area 14x20 ft., giving a clearance of 1 ft. all around the base of 
the concrete pier, and a clearance of 2 ft. between the cofferdam 
and the outer edge of the nearest pile. The cofferdam sheet piles 
were 18 ft. long, driven 11 ft. deep into sand, and projecting 2 ft. 
above the surface of the water. 

The concrete base resting on the foundation piles was 12x18 ft. 
The concrete pier resting on this base was 7x13 ft. at the bottom, 



BRIDGES. 



1003 



and 5x11 ft. at the top. The pier supported deck plate girders. 
There were 100 cu. yds. of concrete in the pier and base. 

The cost of this pier, which is typical of several others built 
at the same time, was as follows : 

Setting Up and Taking Down Derrick and Platform — 

4 days foreman at $5.00 $20.00 

% davs engineman at $3.00 2,25 

% days blacksmith at $3.00 2.25 

% days blacksmith helper at $2.00 1.50 

22 days laborers at $2.00 44.00 

Total $70.00 

CO 




Fig. 14. — Bridge Pier on Piles. 



Cofferdam — 

7 days foreman at $5.00 $35.00 

4 days engineman at $3.00 12.00 

38 days laborers at $2.00 76.00 

1 ton coal at $3.00 3.00 



Total labor on 7.900 ft. B. M. at $16.00.$126.00 
7,900 ft. B. M. at $20.00 158.00 



Total for 58 cu. yds. excav. at $5.. $284. 00 
Wet Excavation — 

1.8 days foreman at $5.00 $9.00 

1.5 days engineman at $3.00 4.50 

9 days laborers at $2.00 18.00 

% ton coal at $3.00 1.50 



Total labor on 58 cu. yds. at 57c. 



.$33.00 



1604 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Foundation Piles — 

960 lin. ft. at 10c $96.00 

4 days setting up driver and driving 24 piles 

at $20 pep day for labor and fuel 80.00 



Total .$176.00 

Concrete — 

100 cu. yds. stone at $1.00 $100.00 

40 cu. yds. sand at $0.50 -. . 20.00 

100 bbls. cement at $2.00 200.00 

5 days foreman at $5.00 25.00 

50 days laboi-ers at $2.00 100.00 

5 davs engineman at $3.00 15.00 

2 tons coal at $3.00 6.00 



Total, 100 cu. yds. at $4.66 

8 days carpenters at $3.00 

2,400 ft. B. M. 2-in. plank at $25.00 
1,000 ft. B. M. 4x6-in. studs at $20.00 
Nails, wire, etc 



$466.00 

$ 24.00 

60.00 

20.00 

2.00 



Total forms for 100 cu. yds. at $1.06 . .$106.00 
Summary — 

Setting up derrick, etc $ 70.00 

Cofferdam (7,000 ft. B. M.) 284.00 

Wet excavation (58 cu. yds.) •... 33.00 

Foundation piles (24) 176.00 

Concrete (100 cu. yds.) 466.00 

Forms (3,400 ft. B. M.) 106.00 

Total $1,135.00 

Transporting plant 20.00 

20 days rental of plant at $5.00 100.00 

Total cost of pier $1,252.00 

Regarding the item of plant rental, it should be said that the 
plant consisted of a pile driver, a derrick, a hoisting engine, and 
sundry timbers for platforms. There was no concrete mixer. 
Hence an allowance of $5 per day for use of plant is sufficient. 

It will be noted that no salvage has been allowed on the lum- 
ber for forms. As a matter of fact, all this lumber was recovered, 
and was used again in similar work. 

Referring to the cost of cofferdam work, we see that, in order 
to excavate the 58 cu. yds. inside the cofferdam, it was necessary 
to spend $284, or nearly $5 per cu.' yd., before the actual excavation 
was begun. The work of excavating cost onlj^ 57 cts. per cu. yd., 
but this does not include the cost of erecting the derrick which was 
used in raising the loaded buckets of earth, as well as in subse- 
quently placing the concrete. The sheet piles were not pulled, in 
this instance, but a contractor who understands the art of pile 
pulling would certainly not leave the piles in the ground. A hand 
pump served to keep the cofferdam dry enough for excavating ; but 
in more open material a power pump is usually required. 



BRIDGES. 1605 

The above costs are the actual costs, and do not include the con- 
tractor's profits. His bid on the work was as follows: 

Piles delivered 12 ct. per ft. 

Piles driven ....$5 each 

Cofferdam $37 per M. 

Wet excavation $1.00 per cu. yd. 

Concrete $8.00 per cu. yd. 

In order to ascertain whether or not these prices yielded a fair 
profit, it is necessary to distribute the cost of the plant transpor- 
tation and rental over the various items. We have allowed $120 
for plant transportation and rental, and $70 for setting up and 
taking down the plant, or $190 in all. The working time of the 
plant was as follows : 

Per cent Prorated 
Days, of time, plant cost. 

Cofferdam 7 39 $ 74 

Excavation 2 11 21 

Foundation piles 4 22 42 

Concrete 5. 28 53 

Total 18 100 .$190 

As above given, the labor on the 7,900 ft. B. M. in the coffer- 
dam cost $126, or $16 per M. ; but this additional $74 of prorated 
plant costs, adds another $9 per M., bringing the total labor and 
plant to $25 per M., to which must be added the $20 per M. paid 
for the timber in the cofferdam, making a grand total of $45 per M. 
This shows that the contractor's bid of $37 per M. was much too 
low. 

The labor on the excavation cost 57 cts. per cu. yd., to which 

must be added the prorated plant cost of $21 distributed over the 

58 cu. yds., or 36 cts. per cu. yd., making a total of 93 cts. per cu. 

yd. This shows that the bid of $1 per cu. yd. was hardly high 

enough. 

The labor on the 24 foundation piles cost $80, or $3.33 each. The 
prorated plant cost is $42, or $1.75 per pile, which, added to $3.33, 
makes a total of $5.08. This shows that the bid of $5 per pile for 
driving was too low. However, there was a profit of 2 cts. per ft., 
or 80 cts. per pile, on the cost of piles delivered. 

The concrete amounted to 100 cu. yds. Hence the prorated 
plant cost of $53 is equivalent to 53 cts. per cu. yd. Hence the 
total cost of the concrete was : 

Per cu. yd. 

Cement, sand and stone $3.20 

Foreman (at $5 ) 0.25 

Labor (at $2) 1.00 

Engineman (at $3) 0.15 

Coal (at $3) 0.06 

Carpenters (at $3) 0.24 

Forms (at $23.50, used once) 0.80 

Wire nails, etc 0.02 

Prorated plant cost 0.53 

Total $6.25 



1606 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Since the contract price for concrete was $S per cu. yd., thert 
was a good profit in this item. 

It is doubtful whether many contractors analyze their costs in 
this manner, prorating plant costs and like, hut no other method 
is satisfactory. Such an analysis frequently discloses the economy 
of radically changing the method of doing the work. For example, 
on abutment work, and on some piers, it is often wise not to erect 
a derrick at all, but to build inclined runways iip which to wheel 
the concrete. As the pier or abutment rises in height, the run- 
ways are raised. The added cost of labor is more than offset by 
the saving in the cost of transporting and erecting a derrick where 
the yardage to be moved is small. 

In like manner the excavation of a small amount of earth from 
the cofferdam may be more economically accomplished by shovel- 
ing it out in "lifts," than by installing a derrick for the purpose. 

On the other hand, few contractors have given much study to 
economic piethods of erecting and moving derricks, etc. A little 
brains put into this end of the work, may abundantly justify the 
use of derricks even on small jobs. 

We urgently recommend the careful recording and analysis of 
the cost of erecting and shifting plants, as well as a similar an- 
alysis of all other costs. 

The foregoing analysis should make it clear to engineers that 
seemingly high bids on work involving one or more small units of 
construction, may, in fact, prove to be too low. 

Cost of a Pneumatic Caisson and Masonry Bridge Pier.* — The fol- 
lowing data relate to the cost of labor and materials required for 
three railway bridge piers built by the pneumatic caisson process. 
The work was done for the railway company in the state of Wash- 
ington, by a contractor working on a percentage basis, but the costs 
are the actual costs, not including the contractor's percentage. 

Borings were made along the line of the bridge and the bottom 
was penetrated with a 2-in. pipe to a depth of 34 ft. below extreme 
low water. The inaterial encountered was a very uniform bed of 
fine sand. 

Plant. — A scow 30 ft. x SO ft. x 4 ft. was built and was equipped 
with 3 boilers having an aggregate capacity of 125 hp. There were 
2 air compressors ; 1 air receiver ; 1 duplex Knowles pump, with 
12xl8-in. cylinders and 60-in. discharge; 1 small pump for sup- 
plying water into the receiver ; 3 air locks, 4 ft. diameter by 8 ft. 
high ; 8 sections main air shaft, 3 ft. diameter by. 8 ft. high ; 2 
hoppers, 3 ft. diameter by 2 % ft. high, for 1 8-in. supply shaft ; 
rubber hose, various iron pipes, etc. 

Pneumatic Caissons, Pier No. 2. — There were three caissons. Pier 
No. 2 was a pivot pier, supporting a single track draw bridge 240 
ft. long. Piers Nos. 1 and 3 supported the ends of this draw span 
and the two 70-ft. plate girder spans approaching it. 



"Engineering-Contracting, May 8, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1G07 

The caisson for this pivot pier was 30x30 ft. square and 15 ft. 
high. It was built of 12xl2-in. surfaced timbers, sheeted both out- 
side and inside with 3-in. surfaced plank, nailed vertically, and 
calked with oakum. The cutting edge was made of %-in. iron, 3 
ft. high, with shoulder 2 ft. wide, stiffened by brackets at inter- 
vals of 1 ft. to 2% ft. The 12x12 timbers were drift bolted to- 
gether with 1-in. bolts, and the whole structure tied with IVi-in. 
and 2-in. rods. The corners were protected by %-in. iron plates. 
The cutting edge of the caisson was sunk to a depth of 5.5 ft. be- 
low water level or 45 ft. below ground level, requiring the excava- 
tion of 1,500 cu. yds. 

"When the caisson was built up 10 ft. above the cutting edge, the 
inside and the outside linings were spiked on and calked. The 
bottom sections of the supply shaft and air lock were inserted and 
tightly fitted. A temporarily false bottom of 3-ln. plank, well 
calked, was made for the purpose of floating the caisson into 
place, after which the work of adding to its height was continued. 
Meanwhile 11 guide piles were driven to guide the caisson dur- 
ing sinking. 

The day after the caisson was in position the filling of the top 
part with concrete was begun, and lasted five days. Compressed 
air was introduced into the caisson the second day after it was in 
position, and on the third day three eight-hour shifts began work, 
the first work being the chopping out of the false bottom referred 
to above. By this time a cofferdam, 16 ft. high, had been con- 
structed on top of the caisson, so as to prevent floods from inter- 
fering with the work. 

It required just 29 days of 24 hrs. to sink the caisson 45 ft. after 
it was in place, although the actual time of sinking was 19 days, 
there being several delays. Then the working chamber was filled 
with concrete. Sections 2 ft. by 2 ft. were dug out under the shoul- 
der of the cutting edge, and successively filled with concrete. Hav- 
ing thus supported the caisson, the center portion was excavated 
and filled with concrete. The filling of the working chamber and 
lower air locks with concrete took 7 days. The compressed air 
was then taken off, having been used for 36 days. The depth sunk 
was 45 ft., or 1% ft. per day. 

The masonry on top of the caisson was finished 18 days after the 
compressed air had been turned off, so that 54 days after the cais- 
son had been floated to place the pier was ready to receive the 
bridge. 

The masonry on top of the caisson consisted of an annular cylin- 
der of cut stone masonry, 50 ft. high, having a thickness of 4i^ ft. 
at the base and 3% ft. at the top. This cylinder was filled with 
concrete. The outside diameter of the masonry cylinder was 25 
ft. at the top and 29 ft. at the base. The height of this masonry 
cylinder was 50 ft. The cost of the plant was as follows : 



1608 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The scow was 30x80x4 ft., provided with a boiler house, and its 
cost wat : 

30,600 ft., B. M., timber in scow at $15. .. .$459.00 

1.400 lbs. boat spikes at 4c 56.00 

800 lbs. bolts, screws, etc., at 3c 24.00 

2,000 lbs. oakum at 4c 80.00 

5 bbls. tar at $5 25.00 

Miscellaneous materials 20.00 

Total materials in scow $664.00 

22,000 ft, B. M.. in boiler house at $15 $330.00 

1,200 lbs. nails, etc 40.00 

800 lbs. tarred paper at 2 lAc 20.00 

1,000 brick 8.00 

1 bbl. lime 1.50 

Miscellaneous materials 10.00 

Total materials in boiler house $403.50 

Labor building scow and boiler house : 

15 days, foreman, at $4 $ 60.00 

240 days, carpenters, at $3.05 720.00 

50 days, laborers, at $2 100.00 

Total labor $880.00 

This labor cost is equivalent to $16 per 1.000 ft., B. M., of tim- 
ber in the scow and boiler house. The cost of setting up the boil- 
ers, compressors, etc., was as follows : 

12 days, foreman, at $4 ■? 48.00 

2 4 days, carpenter, at $3 72.00 

4 days, machinist, at $5 20.00 

3 days, blacksmith, at $3.50 10.50 

50 days, steam fitter, at $3.50 175.00 

24 davs. engineman, at $3.50 84.00 

270 days, laborer, at $2 540.00 

387 days. Total ..$949.50 

This cost is also excessive and indicates very poor management. 
The freight on this plant was $150. Summarizing, we have: 

Scow and boiler house $1,950 

Setting up boilers, etc 950 

Freight 150 

Total $3,050 

Charging this $3,050 to the three piers according to their size, 
we may assign 50 per cent, or $1,525, to Pier No. 2, and $762 to 
each of the other two piers. 

The three boilers, two air compressors, pumps, etc., were worth 
about $4,000, and a very liberal allowance for their use on this job 
would be $2,000, charging 50 per cent, or $1,000, to Pier No. 2, and 
$500 to each of the other two piers. This $1,000 added to the 
$1,525, makes $2,525 charged for plant. The cost of erecting a 
platform and derrick at Pier No. 2 was $100. About 250 ft. of 
4 -in. pipe and 70 ft. of 1%-in. pipe and fittings, costing $130, were 
left in the caisson and not recovered. 

About 36,000 lbs. of iron were required for the air locks, shafts, 
etc., of the three piers. About half of it, or 18,000 lbs., was left 



BRIDGES. 1609 

in the piers, for which a charge of 5c per lb. was made, or $900, 
or $300 per pier. 

The cost of materials in the caisson (30x30x15 ft.) was as fol- 
lows : 

71,000 ft. B. M. in caisson at $20 $1,420.00 

4,400 ft. B. M. in false floor at $20 88.00 

3,400 ft. B. M. in Inside curbing at $20. . 68.00 

9,000 ft. B. M. in cofferdam 180.00 

15,000 lbs. cutting edge at 4i/„c 675.00 

1,400 lbs. corner plates at 4c 56.00 

5,200 lbs. rods at 21/30 130.00 

4,000 lbs. drift bolts at 2 1/20 100.00 

3.000 lbs. boat spikes at 2c 60.00 

800 lbs. cast washers at 2c 16.00 

1,000 lbs. lag screws, etc., at 4c 40.00 

20 bales (2,000 lbs.) of oakum at $4 80.00 

100 lbs. rubber packing at 70c 70.00 

Total materials $2,983.00 

There were 78,800 ft. B. M. in the caisson, exclusive of the 9,000 
ft. B. M. in the cofferdam. The cost of framing and erecting the 
caisson was as follows : 

45 days, foreman, at $4 $ 180.00 

320 days, carpenters, at $3 960.00 

90 days, laborers, at $2 180.00 

14 days, blacksmiths, at $3.50 49.00 

10 days, engineman, at $3.50 35.00 

7 days, machinist, at $5 35.00 

486 days, total, at $2.96 $1,439.00 

This is equivalent to $18.25 per 1,000 ft. B. M., which is a very 
high cost for this kind of work. 

The cost of building the cofferdam on top of tlie caisson was as 
follows : 

6 days, foreman, at $4.00 $ 24.00 

60 days, carpenters, at 3.00 180.00 

10 days, laborers, at 2.00 20.00 

3 days, blacksmith, at 3.50 10.50 

79 days, total $2.97 $234.50 

Since there were 9,000 ft. B. M. in the cofferdam, the labor cost 
$26 per 1,000 ft. B. M. 

The cost of sinking the caisson, which included tamping the con- 
crete in the working chamber of the caisson also, was as follows : 
34 days, foreman machinist, at.. $5. 00 $ 170.00 
16 days, general foreman, at 6.00 96.00 

80 days, sub foreman, at 5.00 400.00 

64 days, top lock tender, at 2.25 144.00 

720 days, pressure men, at 3.50 2,520.00 

72 days, enginemen, at 3.50 252.20 

72 days, firemen, at 2.75 198.00 

32 days, coal passers, at 2.50 80.00 

40 days, wipers, at 2.00 80.00 

50 days, steam fitters, at 3.00 150.00 

4 days, blacksmith, at 3.50 14.00 

58 days, carpenters, at 3.00 174.00 

360 days, laborers, at 2.00 720.00 

32 days, signal man, at 2.00 64.00 

32 days, call boy, at 1.00 32.00 

1,706 days total $2.99 $5,094.20 



1610 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

As above stated, it required 36 days to sink the caisson and fill 
tlie working chamber witli concrete, hence by dividing each of tlae 
above items by 36 we get tlie number of eacli kind of men per day. 

In addition to tlie materials and labor above enumerated, there 
were tlie supplies, which cost as follows : 

220 tons coal at $3 $660.00 

220 gals, gasoline and kerosene, at 10c. . . 20.00 

40 gals, valve oil at 50c 20.00 

20 gals, engine oil at 35c 7.00 

70 lbs. waste at 5c 3.50 

43 prs. rubber boots at ?3 135.00 

Total $845.50 

The guide piles around the caisson were driven with a scow 
dri\e!\ and cost as follows : 

600 lin. ft. piles at 10c ? 60.00 

Labor driving 52.00 

Coal for di-iver, etc 20.00 

Total $132.00 

There were 400 cu. yds. of concrete placed in the working cham- 
ber of the caisson and 400 cu. yds. inside the stone masonry on 
top of th.e caisson. The cost of this concrete was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

1 cu. yd. stone at $1 $1.00 

0.45 cu. yd. sand at 80c 36 

0.7 bbl. cement at $2 1.40 

Mixing and placing 1.15 

Erecting derricks, platforms, etc 34 

Total $4.25 

The $1.15 for "mixing and placing" covers the wages of the men 
($2 a day) engaged in hand mixing and handling the concrete, the 
derrick engineman, the foreman, the lock tenders, and the coal ; 
but it does not include the placing and tamping of the concrete 
in the working chamber of the caisson, for that item is included in 
the cost of sinking the caisson. 

There were 400 cu. yds. of concrete in the caisson and 400 cu. 
yds. of concrete on the top of it, but of this last 400 cu. yds. only 
60 per cent, or 210 cu. yds., was below the ground level. Hence 
we have 400 + 240 = 660 cu. j''ds. of concrete below the ground 
level. This 660 cu. yds., at $4.25, cost $2,803, which is equivalent 
to $62 per lin. ft., or $1.93 per cu. yd. of pier below the ground 
level. 



BRIDGES. 1611 

"We may now summarize the cost as follows : 

Total. 

Plant, proportionate cost % 2,525 

Setting up platform and derrick. . . 100 

Pipe left in caisson 130 

6,000 lbs. Iron left in caisson 300 

78,800 ft. B. M. caisson, $20 1,576 

9,000 ft. B. M. cofferdam, $20 180 

15,000 lbs. cutting edge. 4y.c 675 

9,200 lbs. rods, drifts, etc., 2y.c 230 

6,200 lbs. boat spikes, etc 172 

2,200 lbs. oakum, 4c 80 

100 lbs. rubber packing, 70c 70 

486 days bldg. caisson, $2.96 1,439 

79 days building cofferdam, ?2.97.. 235 

1,076 days sinking. ?2.99 5,094 

220 tons coal, $3.00 660 

Other supplies 185 

600 lin. ft. piles delivered, 10c 60 

600 lin. ft. piles driven, 12c 72 

Supt. and office exp 700 





Per eu. 


Per lin. 


yd. (1,500 


ft. (45 ft.) 


cu. yds. ) 


? 56 


?1.G8 





0.07 


3 


0.09 


7 


0.20 


35 


1.05 


4 


0.12 


15 


0.45 


5 


0.16 


4 


0.11 


2 


0.05 


2 


0.05 


32 


0.96 





0.16 


112 


3.39 


15 


0.44 


4 


0.12 


1 


0.04 





0.05 


16 


0.47 



Totals ?14,483 $322 $9.66 

The cost of cutting and handling the sandstone for the masonry 
was as follows : Pgj. ^.^ y^ 

2.8 days, stone cutter, at $6 $1.68 

3.2 days, laborer, at $2 0.64 

0.04 day, blacksmith, at $3.50 0.14 

0.04 day, blacksmith helper, at $2.50 0.10 

0.06 day, horse, at $1.50 0.09 



Total $2.65 

The total cost of this stone masonry was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

1 cu. yd. stone at $6.50 $ 6.50 

Cutting stone 2.65 

Setting stone 0.95 

0.08 cu. yd. sand at 80c 0.05 

0.2 bbl. cement at $2 0.40 



Total $10.55 

There were 600 cu. yds. of this stone masonrj^ hence its cost 
was $6,330. About 60 per cent of it, or $3,798, was below the 
ground level. 

Summarizing the cost of the pier below the ground level, we 
have : Per Per 

Total. lin.ft. cu. yd. 

Brought forward $14,483 $322 $9.66 

Concrete at $4.25 2,805 62 1.93 

Masonry at $10.55 >. . -3,798 84 2.53 



Total $21,086 $468 $14.12 

The cost of the 20 lin ft. of pier above the ground level was: 

160 cu. yds. concrete at $4.25 $ 680 

240 cu. yds. masonry at $10.55 2,532 



Total, 20 lin. ft, at $160 $3,212 

The total cost of the pier was $24,298. 



1612 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The reader will note that the tabulated cost of this caisson is 
given In such shape that the cost of similar work can be easily- 
estimated by allowing for differences in prevailing prices and 
wages. If timber costs $30 per M, instead of $20, then, by adding 
50 per cent to the items involving timber, the increased cost per 
cubic yard of caisson is readily estimated. Since the timber in the 
caisson cost $1.05 per cu. yd. of caisson, when timber was $20 per 
M, it is evident that, with timber at $30 per M, this item of $1.05 
will be increased 50 per cent, making it $1.58 per cu. yd. of cais- 
son. In like manner other items may be raised or lowered, almost 
by inspection, and a total secured which will be a very accurate 
estimate. The above costs do not include "engineering," which, 
in this case, was about 6 per cent of the total. 

In a succeeding issue will be given the cost of the two caissons 
(piers Nos. 1 and 3) mentioned in the first part of this article; 
and in that issue we shall compare the costs of caissons in piers 
Nos. 1, 2 and 3, showing that the cubic yard is the proper unit 
to use in recording and comparing the cost of caisson work, and 
not the lineal foot. The lineal foot, it is true, has long been re- 
garded as a convenient unit of caisson costs, but it is wholly unre- 
liable for comparative purposes, and should be abandoned. 

Cost of Two Pneumatic Caissons and IVIasonry Bridge Piers.* — In 
our last issue we gave a general description of a large pivot pier 
caisson and plant used in sinking it to a depth of 45 ft. In this 
issue we shall give the itemized cost of two smaller caissons of the 
same type, sunk with the same plant described in our last issue, 
and under the same conditions. Each of these caissons was 16 x 34 
ft. in cross-section, and 15 ft. high ; and on top of each was built 
the masonry pier as fast as the caisson- was sunk. These two "rest 
piers" will be designated as piers No. 1 and No. 3. The masoni-y 
was built to a height of 51 ft. above tlie top of the caisson, or 13 
ft. above water level. The cutting edge of the caisson of pier 
No. 1 reached 47 ft. below ground level, or 53 ft. below water level. 
The cutting edge of pier No. 3 reached the same distance below 
water level, but only 38 ft. below ground level. 

The masonry of each pier had a cross-section of 11x28 ft. at the 
base, and 7 x 24 ft. under the coping. The masonry was cut stone 
(sandstone), excepting a core or concrete, 4 x 19 ft., 29 ft. higli 
above the top of the caisson. The working chamber of the cais- 
son was filled with concrete after it had been sunk to the proper 
depth. 

Cost of Pier No. 1. — Eighteen days after the caisson was launched 
the sinking was begun. Eleven days after the sinking began, the 
sinking was completed, but the compressed air was not taken off 
until 17 days after the sinking began. The masonry pier was 
completed 54 days after the sinking began. 

Since the cross-section of the caisson was 544 sq. ft. and it was 
sunk to a depth of 47 ft., the excavation amounted to 947 cu. yds. 

The proportionate charge for the use of the plant for this pier 
was $1,262. 



*Engineering-Contracting, May 15, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1613 

There were 6,000 lbs. of iron (air shafts, etc.) left in the pier, 
for which a charge of 5 cts. per lb., or $300, was made. 

There were 160 ft. of 4-in. pipe, and 40 ft. of 1%-in pipe and 
fittings, worth $100, left in the pier. 

The cost of materials in the caisson was as follows: 

Per Per 

Lin. Ft. Cu. Yd. 
Total. ( 4 7 f t. ) ( 9 4 7 cu. yds. ) 

Plant, proportionate cost $1,262 . $-27 ? 1.33 

Setting up derrick and platform 90 . 2 0.10 

Pipe left in caisson 100 2 0.10 

6,000 lbs. iron left in caisson. . 300 6 0.32 

51,000 ft. B. M. caisson, $20... 1,020 22 1.08 

13,000 lbs. cutting edge, 41/0 cts. 585 13 0.62 

8,000 lbs. rods and drifts, 2 i/j . 200 4 0.21 

5,000 lbs. boat spikes, etc 136 3 0.14 

1,500 lbs. oakum, 4 cts 60 1 0.06 

100 lbs. rubber packing, 70 cts. 70 2 0.07 

321 days building caisson, $2.94 945 21 1.00 

943 days sinking caisson, $3.10. 2,929 62 3.09 

100 tons coal, $3.00 300 6 0.32 

Other supplies 109 2 0.11 

Supt. and office expense 440 9 0.47 



Total $8,546 $182 $9.02 

2 80 cu. yds. concrete, $4.25... 1,190 25' 1.25 



Total $9,736 $207 $10.27 

46,000 ft. B. M. in caisson, at $20.... $ 920 

2,000 ft. B. M. in false floor, at $20 40 

13,000 lbs. cutting edge, at 41/2 cts.. 585 

1,300 lbs. corner plates, at 4 cts 52 

5,000 lbs. rods, at 2% cts 125 

3,000 lbs. drift bolts, at 2.^2 cts 75 

2,400 lbs. boat spikes, at 2 cts 48 

800 lbs. cast washers, at 2 cts 16 

500 lbs. lag screws, etc., at 4 cts 20 

15 bales (1,500 lbs.) oakum, at $4 60 

100 lbs. rubber packing, at 70 cts 70 

Total materials $2,071 . 

There were 51,000 ft. B. M. in the caisson. 

The cost of framing and erecting the caisson was : 

30 days, foreman, at $4.00 $120.00 

220 days, carpenters, at 3.00 660.00 

60 days, laborers, at 2.00 120.00 

7 days, blacksmith, at 3.50 24.50 

4 days, machinists, at 5.00 20.00 



321 days, total, at .$2.94 $944.50 

This is equivalent to $18.50 per 1,000 ft. B. M., which is a very 
high cost. 



1614 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of sinking the caisson, which includes tamping the con- 
crete in the caisson also, was as follows : 

18 days, foreman machinist, at.. $5. 00 $ 90 

24 days, general foreman, at. . . . 6.00 144 

48 days, sub-foremen, at 5.00 240 

36 days, top lock tender, at 2.25 81 

380 days, pressure men, at 3.50 1,330 

44 days, enginemen. at 3.50 154 

44 days, firemen, at 2.75 121 

38 days, coal passers, at 2.50 95 

24 days, steamfitters, at 3.00 72 

2 days, blacksmith, at 3.50 7 

30 days, carpenter, at 3.00 90 

250 days, laborers, at 2.00 500 

5 days, call boy, at 1.00 5 

943 days, total, at $3.10 $2,929 

The coal supplies used in sinking the caisson were as follows: 

100 tons coal, at $3 $300.00 

70 gals, gasoline and kerosene, at 10 cts. 7.00 

160 lbs. candles, at 12 cts 19.20 

3,000 ft. B. M. in inside curb, at $20 60.00 

20 lbs. valve oil, at 50 cts 10.00 

10 lbs. engine oil, at 35 cts 3.50 

35 lbs. waste, at 5 cts 1.75 

20 pairs rubber boots, at $3 60.00 

100 lbs. red lead, at S cts 8.00 

Total $409.45 

There were 200 cu. yds. of concrete placed in the working cham- 
ber of the caisson and 80 cu. yds. in the pier, the cost being $4.25 
per cu. yd., as given in our last issue. 

We may now summarize the total cost as follows : 

In addition to the above there were 480 cu. yds. of stone 
masonry, the actual cost of which was $10.55 per cu. yd., or $5,064. 
About 330 cu. yds. of this masonry was below the ground level, 
which is equivalent to $3,481 of stone masonry below the ground 
level. Dividing this by 47, we have $74 per lin. ft. 

Summarizing, we have the following cost of pier No. 1 below 
the ground level : 

Total. 

Caisson, etc $ 8,546 

280 cu. yds. concrete at $4.25 1,190 

330 cu. yds. masonry, at $10.55... 3,481 

Total $13,217 $281 $13.93 

150 cu. yds. masonry above ground 

level, at $10.55 1,583 

Grand total $14,800 

Cost of Pier No. 3. — The design of this pier was the same as of 
Pier No. 1. It differed somewhat in cost, however, since it was 
sunk to a depth of only 38 ft. below ground level, due to the fact 
that the water was deeper at the site of this pier than at the site 
of pier No. 1. 

Fifteen days after the caisson was launched, the sinking began. 
It took 15 days to sink the caisson, and 4 days more to fill the 



Per lin. ft. 


Per cu. yd, 


$182 
25 

74 


$ 9.02 
1.25 
3.66 



BRIDGES. 1015 

working chamber with concrete, making 19 days of work under air 
pressure. The masonry pier was completed 37 days after tlie sink- 
ing was begun. The cost of materials in the caisson was the same 
as for pier No. 1. 

The cost of framing and erecting the caisson was : 

29 days, foreman .$4.00 $116.00 

218 days, carpenters 3.00 654.00 

58 days, laborers 2.00 116.00 

9 days, blacksmith 3.50 31.50 

4 days, machinist 5.00 20.00 

318 days, total $2.95 $937.50 

This is equivalent to $19 per M. 

The cost of sinking the caisson, which included tamping the con- 
crete in the caisson also, was as follows : 

18 days, foreman machinst $5.00 $ 90.00 

30 days, general foreman 6.00 180.00 

38 days, sub-foreman 5.00 190.00 

33 days, top lock tender 2.00 66.00 

340 days, pressure men 3.50 1,190.00 

50 days, enginemen 3.50 175.00 

46 days, firemen 2.75 126.50 

20 days, coal passers 2.50 50.00 

28 days, steamiitters 3.00 84.00 

2 days, blacksmith 3.50 7.00 

16 days, carpenter 3.00 48.00 

220 days, laborers 2.00 440.00 

851 days, total $3.11 $2,646.50 

The coal and supplies used in sinking the caisson were a^ 
follows : 

120 tons coal, $3 . . $360.00 

70 gals, gasoline, etc., 10 cts 7.00 

175 lbs. candles, 12 cts 21.00 

20 gals, valve oil, 50 cts 10.00 

12 gals, engine oil, 35 cts 4.20 

35 lbs. waste, 5 cts 1.75 

24 pairs rubber boots, $3 72.00 

100 lbs. red lead, 8 cts 8.00 

Total $483.95 

The guide piles cost as follows: 

620 lin. ft, delivered, 10 c'.s $ 62.00 

620 lin. ft. driven, 10 cts . 62.00 

Total $124.00 



1616 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Summarizing we have : 

Per Per 

Lin. Ft. Cu. Yd. 

Total. (38 ft.) (766 cu. yds.) 

Plant $1,262 $ 33 $ 1.65 

Setting up derrick and platform.. 120 3 0.16 

Pipe left in caisson 150 4 0.20 

6,000 lbs. iron left in caisson... 300 8 0.39 

50,000 ft. B. M. left in caisson, $30 1,000 26 1.31 

13,000 lbs. cutting edge, 41/. cts.. . 585 15 0.76 

8,000 lbs. rods and drifts, 21/2 cts. 200 g . 0.26 

5,000 lbs. boat spikes, etc 136 4 0.18 

1,500 lbs. oakum, 4 cts 60 2 0.08 

100 lbs. rubber packing, 70 cts. . 70 2 0.09 

318 days .building caisson, $295.. 938 25 1.22 

851 days sinking caisson, $3.11.. 2,646 71 3.45 

120 tons coal, $3.00 360 9 0.47 

Other supplies 124 3 0.16 

Supt. and office e.xp 440 11 0.57 

Total $8,391 $221 $10.95 

280 cu. yds. concrete, $4.25 1,190 31 1.55 

Total $9,581 $252 $12.50 

In addition to the above there were 480 cu. j'^ds. of stone masonry, 
the cost of which was $10.55 per cu. yd., or $5,064. Adding this to 
the $9,581, we have a total cost of $14,645 for pier No. 3. 

Let us compare the costs of piers Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Referring 
to our issue of May 8, we find the cost of pivot pier No. 2. In 
making the comparison we shall exclude the cost of the masonry 
and concrete. 

No. 1. No. 2. No. 3. 

Cost per cu. yd., displaced $9.02 $9.66 $10.95 

Cost per lin. ft. below ground level 1.82 3.22 2.21 

It is perfectly evident, from this comparison, that the lineal foot 
of distance sunk below the ground level is not a rational unit to be 
used in comparing the cost of pneumatic caisson work. On the 
other hand, the cubic yard of displaced earth is a much more ra- 
tional unit. Obviously the cost of the masonry should be estimated 
.separately, excepting possibly the concrete used in filling the work- 
ing chamber of the caisson. 

The foregoing data relate to work carried on at moderate depths 
below the water level. 

Cost of a Caisson in Arizona. — Mr. S. M. Rowe gives the following 
data relative to a caisson for the Red Rock cantilever bridge, built 
in 1889, across the Colorado River in Arizona for the Atlantic 
and Pacific R. R. Co. 

The caisson was 30 x 60 ft. in cross-section and 17 ft. high, sur- 
mounted by a timber crib 47 ft. high, the height from the cutting 
edge to the top of the crib being 64 ft. The ordinary low water 
level was at the top of the crib, and the depth of water (at low 
water) was only 4 ft. The material penetrated was mostly sand, 
gravel and boulders. So compact was the material at a depth of 
61 ft. that it was practically impossible to reach bed rock. 



BRIDGES. 1617 

.The caisson and crib were of Oregon pine, and the following 
was the bill of material : 

Ft. B. M. 

Working chamber (incl. 3 ins. casing inside) 82,560 

Roof, 8 ft. thick 155,904 

Crib (incl. 3 ins. casing outside) 240,855 



Total timber (neat) 479,319 

Iron bolts and spikes 58,000 lbs. 

Concrete in crib (47.7 cu. yds. per lin. ft.) . 2,290 cu. yds. 
Concrete in working chamber 580 cu. yds. 



Total concrete 2,870 cu. yds. 

It is stated that the timber weighed 35 lbs. per cu. ft. when well 
dried, and that it absorbed 28 lbs. of water per cu. ft. 

There were 1,480 cu. yds. of solid timber and 2,870 cu. yds. of 
concrete, making a total of 4,350 cu. yds. as the volume of the 
caisson and crib, the timber being 34% of the total volume. 

The total cost was $128,263, or nearly $30 per cu. yd., of which 
$16.50 is labor, which is an exceedingly high cost. The following 
is the itemized cost of the caisson : 

Timber (480 M) $ 7,665.02 

Iron and steel (58,000 lbs.) 2,180.13 

Piling 315.24 

Tools and materials 8,415.65 

Fuel and water 7,15 8.30 

Cement for 2,870 cu. yds. concrete 9,568.00 

Freight 13,363.20 

Local and train service 2,790.96 

Labor ■ '71,754.02 

Engineering . 5,052,67 



Total $128,263.19 

This did not include the building of a trestle across the river to 
the site of the caisson, which cost $6,238, nor the tracks to the 
quarry, which cost $7,313. 

The following gives the labor cost for the different periods : 

Depth Labor Cost 
Pay Roll. Sunk. Per Lin. Ft. 

November, 10 days $ 2,612 9.9 ft. $263 

December, 31 days 10,027 23.4 ft. 429 

January, 31 days 10,710 26.8 ft. 400 

The last foot or two sunk in January cost $2,500 per ft. for labor. 

In February, 11 days were spent, at a cost of $3,760 for total 
labor, filling the working chamber with 580 cu. yds. of concrete. 

The air plant consisted of 3 compressors (two of which were 
double cylinders 16 x 24 ins., and one 12x18 ins. Two were used 
while excavating and one held in reserve. These were driven by 
two 75-hp. boilers and by one of 50 hp. The air plant was on a 
boat 24x60 ft. built for the purpose. 

The stone for the concrete was a broken volcanic rock, with 
which the "mesas" were strewn, which was raked into windrows 
and hauled by wagons to a pile where it was loaded into a car. 



1618 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of a Caisson in Tennessee. — Mr. Hunter McDonald gives the 
following data relative to a caisson for a pivot pier of a railway 
swing bridge built in 1893 across the Tennessee River for the 
Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry., by contract. 

The caisson was 36 ft. square and 16 ft. high, surmounted by a 
crib 28 ft. high, making a total height of 44 ft. The cutting edge 
was sunk through gravel and sand to a depth of 44 ft. below low 
water. The caisson and crib were filled with 1:2:5 natural 
cement concrete. The contract price of the pivot pier was as 
follows : 

119,792 ft. B. M. timber in caisson, at ?3S $ 4,552.11 

95,727 ft. B. M. timber in crib, at $28 2,680.37 

54,975 lbs. iron, at 4 cts 2,199.00 

96 lin. ft. shafting left in place, at $7 672.00 

44 lin. ft. sinking below water level, at 

$344.81 15,172.42 

313.4 cu yds. material removed through lock 

at $35 10,969.00 

1,085.9 cu. yds. concrete in crib and pockets, 

at $6 6,515.40 

233.5 cu. yds. concrete in air chamber, at $12 2,802.00 

Total cost of caisson $45,562.00 

Since the displacement of this 44 ft. caisson was 2,112 cu. yds., 
the cost was $21.57 per cu. yd., or $1,035 per lin. ft. of vertical 
height. 

The cost of the stone masonry was: 

415.62 cu. yds. face stone, at $12 $ 4,987.44 

725.19 cu. yds. backing, at $7 5,076.33 

24:52 cu. yds. coping, at $16 392.32 

Total masonry $10,456.09 

The masonry was 48 ft. high above the top of the crib. 

A caisson for a rest pier was 16%. x40% ft. in ci'oss- section, and 
displaced 1,107 cu. yds., and cost $19 per cu. yd., or $476 per lin. ft. 
of vertical height. It contained 115,000 ft. B. M. in caisson and 
crib and 672 cu. yds. of concrete. 

Cost of Four Caissons. — Mr. B. L. Crosby gives the following data 
relative to 4 caissons built in 1892 for the St. Louis, Keokuk & 
Northwestern R. R. for a double-track bridge across the Missouri 
River. The work was done by company forces. Each caisson was 
30 X 70 ft. in cross-section and 16 ft. high, surmounted by a crib. 
The cribs were 24, 45, 58 and 64 ft. high for piers Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 
4, respectively. The caissons and cribs were filled -with 1:2:4 
natural cement concrete. 

The air plant consisted of two No. 4 Clayton duplex compressors, 
having steam and air cylinders, each 14 ins. with 15-in. stroke ; and 
a Worthington duplex pump, 18% x 10^4 x 10 ins. This plant was 
set on a small steam boat. There was a duplicate plant mounted 
on a platform on piles. There were several hoisting engines, a 
pile-driver boat, provided with a derrick for handling the timbers, 
and an arc light plant for night work. The concrete was mixed 



BRIDGES. 1619 

in a Cockburn Barrow Co. mixer on a barge provided with a der- 
rick for handling concrete blocks. There were several other 
barges for handling timber, cement and stone, and a small steam- 
boat for towing barges. 

Tlie caissons were built on launching ways constructed of piles 
capped with 12 x 12 -in. timbers parallel with the river bank. The 
way timbers were 12 x 12-in. having a slope of 3 ins. to the foot 
toward the river, and were extended far enough into the river to 
allow the caisson to float before being clear of the timbers. The 
piles under water were cut off with a circular saw and caps were 
placed by a diver ; the drift-bolts were driven by a ramrod work- 
ing through a gas pipe over the drift-bolt. 

Several sandbars at the sites of the piers were washed away by 
the paddle wheels of the steamboat, a hole 7 to 10 ft. deep being 
dug out in this manner. Barges were placed on each side of a 
caisson, and heavy timbers bolted the caisson, extending out over 
the barges. By pumping air into the caisson it was raised till it 
drew only 5 ft. of water, and blocking was placed under the tim- 
bers projecting over the barges. Then it was towed to place. 

The following were the depths below "standard low water" to 
w-hich the different caissons were sunk: No. 1, 68 ft. ; No. 2, 89 ft. ; 
No. 3, 101 ft. ; No. 4, 83 ft. 

Some blasting of the rock site of caisson No. 1 was done. 
Rackarock was used, because its fumes do not give the men head- 
aches as do the fumes of dynamite in a caisson. 

The total combined height of the four caissons and cribs was 
255 ft., and, since their cross-section was 30x70 ft., tliis is equiva- 
lent to combined displacement of nearly 20,000 cu. yds., of which 
257o was the yellow pine timbei-, there being 1,609,000 ft. B. M. 
There were 13,285 cu. yds. of 1:2:4 concrete placed in the 
caissons and cribs, requiring 20,800 bbls. of cement, of which 80% 
was natural and 207c Poi'tland. The cost of the concrete was $5.36 
per cu. yd., including all material and labor. The cost of framing 
the timber and building it into the caissons was $22 per 1,000 ft. 
B. M., including the cost of the launching way", han- 
dling and- towing, and all labor and materials, but not 
including the cost of the timber in the caissons and 
cribs. It is likely that in 1892 this yellow pine cost 
about $18 per M. In which case the total cost was $40 per M in 
place. Since 1,000 ft. B. M. = 3.08 cu. yd., each cubic yard of tim- 
ber would cost $13. If each cubic yard displaced by the caisson and 
cribs was 25% timber (at $13 per cu. yd.) and 75% concrete (at 
$5.36 per cu. yd.), then the average cost was $7.20 per cu. yd., to 
which must be added the cost of sinking the caissons, which was 
$2.48 per cu. yd., making a total of $9.68 per cu. j^d. displaced. 
As a matter of fact the total cost actually was $9.23 per cu. yd., 
from which it would appear either that our assumed price of $18 
per M for the timber is a little too high, or that the percentage of 
timber was not quite 25%. 



1620 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The material was excavated and discharged from the working 
chambers with a Morrison sand pump, which is a modification of 
the Eads sand pump. 

For comparative purposes it is well to record here that a long 
timber trestle, built at the same time by company forces, cost $7.42 
per M for labor, including unloading, framing and erecting. 

Wages are not given, except for "pressure men," who received 
$3.50 a day, and worked an hour at a time for 2 or 3 hrs. a day 
when at the greatest depth. It is probable that common laborers 
received $1.25 to $1.50 and carpenters $2.50 per day of 10 hrs., at 
that time and place. 

Materials for a Caisson. — In building a single-track bridge for 
the Illinois Central R. R. across the Ohio River near Cairo, 10 piers 
were sunk 75 ft. below low water. The frictional resistance was 
found to be 600 to 700 lbs. per sq. ft. of exposed surface. The 
largest caisson and crib is 30 ft. wide, 70 ft. long and 50 ft. high. 
The total height of the pier is 177 ft. (50 ft. of caisson and crib 
filled with concrete, and 127 ft. of masonry on top). It contains 
the following materials : 

331,000 ft. B. M. lumber. 

137,000 lbs. iron. 

2,865 cu. yds. concrete in caisson and crib. 

3,800 cu. yds. masonry. 

The pier measures 14x43 ft. on top. 

The weight of the 137,000 lbs. of iron was distributed as follows: 

Lbs. 

Cutting edge 26,583 

Corner plates 8,108 

Air locks ( 1 pr. doors left in) 7,287 

Sections of shaft 14,813 

Rods 30,570 

Washers 7,111 

Drift bolts 21,606 

Boat spikes 15,402 

Lag screws 265 

Bolts 331 

Pipe (334 ft. of 4 in.) 3,495 

Pipe (83 ft. of 5 in.) 1,234 

Total 136,785 

Cost of Erecting Three Steel Viaducts and a New Formula for 
Computing the Weight of Viaducts.* — In Engineering-Contracting of 
April 3, 10 and 17 and May 8, we gave the costs of erecting a num- 
ber of steel bridges of different spans and types. In this issue we 
shall give the cost of erecting several steel viaducts, and shall 
briefly discuss methods of estimating the cost of steel viaducts. 

The modern steel viaduct is a structure consisting of deck plate 
girder spans supported by steel bents resting on concrete pedestals. 
Each steel bent has two legs, having a batter of 2 ins. to the foot. 
Bents on high viaducts are spaced 30 ft. and 60 ft. apart alter- 
nately, so that the plate girder spans are alternately 30 ft. and 



*Engineering-Contracting, June 19, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 1621 

60 ft. long. Every pair of bents 30 ft. apart is braced by Iiorizontal 
and diagonal members, thus forming a "tower." Ordinarily, there- 
fore, the number of towers in a viaduct is just half the number 
of bents ; and the number of plate girder spans is just one 
more than the number of bents. 

Estimating Weight of Viaducts. — There are excellent rules or for- 
mulas for estimating the approximate weight of plate girders and 
truss bridges of different" spans, but the existing formulas for 
estimating the weight of viaducts are very unsatisfactory. The 
editors of this journal have deduced a new formula for estimating 
the weight of steel in viaducts of the type just described, but, be- 
fore presenting the deduction, we shall quote the empirical for- 
mulas proposed by Mr. C. P. Howard, M. Am. Soc. C. B. They 
are as follows : 

W = 26 A, for height of 20 ft. 

TF= 20 A, for height of 60 ft. 

W= 17 A, for height of 90 ft. 

W = total weight of viaduct in lbs. 

A = profile area of viaduct in square feet. 

The above formulas are for Cooper's B 40 loading. Add 20% for 
Cooper's E 50 loading. 

This method of estimating the weiglit of viaducts by profile areas 
alone is a very common one, but is wholly irrational, as is seen by 
the fact that a different factor is necessary for different heights. 
The profile area, it should be explained, is the area on the profile 
between the base of the rail and the ground surface, or between the 
lower chord of the plate girders and the line joining the tops of the 
masonry pedestals on which the towers rest. It is in the former 
sense (which is most common) that we use the term profile area 
liere, although the latter sense is to be preferred and should be 
generally adopted. Obviously the weight of the bents, or towers, 
bears some relation to this area, but it is equally obvious that the 
weight of the plate girders bears no relation whatever to tlie profile 
area. 

For a live load of two 11 6 -ton engines and a train weighing 3,000' 
lbs. per sq. ft, the average weight of plate girder spans (30 ft. and 
60 ft. alternating) is about 600 lbs. per lin. ft. For the same load- 
ing, the weight of steel in each bent is about 540 lbs. per lin. ft. of 
height of bent, for viaducts of any considerable height. Having 
these data in mind, we are able to deduce a very simple and ra- 
tional formula for estimating the weight of steel in high viaducts. 

Let A — profile area in sq. ft. 
L = length of viaduct in ft. 
W = weight of viaduct in lbs. 

Then: 

A 

Average height of bents = — . 

L 
L 

Number of bents = — . 
45 



1622 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This last equation is slightly in error, giving one bent too few 
when the average length of girders is 45 ft. (1/2 of 30 + 60), but it 
Is close enough for practical pvirposes. Therefore : 

A L A 
Total height of all bents = — X — = — . 

L 45 45 
But the ■weight of bents per lin. ft. of height is 540 lbs. ; hence: 

A 
Total weight of bents = 540 X — =12 A. 

45 

The -total weight of girder spans = 6001/. Therefore: 

W=12 A + 600 i. 

This is a formula which the editors have used in estimating the 
weight of many viaducts of different heights, and, except for very 
low viaducts (20 or 25 ft.), or for viaducts of antiquated design, It 
gives very close results. Low viaducts are really trestles, with 
bents spaced at equal distances, and not built with bents spaced 
and braced so as to form towers. 

We shall now pass to a consideration of the cost of erecting two 
viaducts, and at the close of this article will discuss the design of 
masonry substructures, indicating wherein we believe present prac- 
tice to be extravagantly wasteful of material. 

Cost of Erecting a 500-ft. Viaduct. — This viaduct weighed 340 
tons and was erected by contract. The profile area was 31,500 sq. 
ft., and the average height was 63 ft. The following costs were the 
actual costs to the contractor. 

The average force was : 

Per day. 

1 foreman at $5.00 ? 5.00 

1 foreman carpenter, at $4.U0 4.00 

1 foreman, at ?3.50 3.50 

7 riveters, etc., at $3.25 22.75 

10 bridgemen, at $3.00 30.00 

8 carpenters, at $2.75 22.00 

3 laborers, at $2.50 7.50 

1 stationary engineer, at $3.25 3.25 

1 water boy, at $1.50 1.50 

33 Total gang $99.50 

It will be noted that foremen's wages constituted 12% of the 
.total. 

Time allowed traveling — 

1 day at $5.00 $ 5.00 

1 day at 4.00 4.00 

1 day at 3.50 .; 3.50 

8 days at 3.25 26.00 

10 days at 3.00 30.00 

8 days at 2.75 22.00 

3 days at 2.50 7.50 

Total 98.00 



BRIDGES. 1623 



Loading derricks and tools — 

4 days at $5.00 $20.00 

4 days at 3.50 14.00 

12 days at 3.00 36.00 

2 days at 2.50 5.00 

Total $75.00 

Framing traveler and rig derrick car — ■ 

3 days at $5.00 $15.00 

3 days at 3.50 10.50 

6 days at 3.25 19.50 

7 days at 3.00 21.00 

Total $66.00 

Erecting traveler — 

1 14 days at $5.00 $ 7.50 

9i/> days at 3.25 30.87 

9 days at 3.00 27.00 

Total $65.37 

Erecting towers — 

12 days at $5.00 $ 60.00 

12 days at 3.50 42.00 

36 days at 3.25 117.00 

47 days at 3.00 141.00 

12 days at 2.50 30.00 

6 days at 1.50 9.00 

Total $399.00 

Riveting toioers — 

48 days at $3.25 $156.00 

52 days at 3.00 156.00 

32 days at 2.50 80.00 

7 days at 1.50 10.50 

Total $402.50 

Filling leases of posfs luitli concrete — 

4 days at $2.75 $11.00 

Erecting girder spans — 

10 days at $5.00 $ 50.00 

10 days at 3.50 35.00 

40 days at 3.25 130.00 

60 days at 3.00 180.00 

5 days at 1.50 7.50 

Total $402.50 

Riveting girder spans — 

24 days at $3.25 $ 78.00 

48 days at 3.00 144.00 

12 days at 2.75 33.00 

6 days at 1.50 9.00 

Total $264.00 

Framing ties for floor — 

10 days at $4.00 $ 40.00 

33 days at 2.75 90.75 

Total $130.75 



1624 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Laying floor — 

16 days at $4-00 $ 64.00 

16 days at 2.50 40.00 

43 days at 2.75 118.25 

Total $222.25 

Painting — first coat — 

231/2 days at $3.25 $ 76.37 

26 days at 3.00 78.00 

20 days at 2.50 50.00 

Total $204.37 

Painting — second coat — 

21 days at $3.25 ...$ 68.25 

24 days at 3.00 72.00 

16 days at 2.50 40.00 

Total $180.25 

Summary — 

Time traveling $ 98.00 

Loading- derricks and tools 75.00 

Framing traveler, etc 66.00 

Erecting traveler 65.37 

Total general expense. . $ 304.37 

Erecting towers 399.00 

Riveting towers. . . . 402.50 

Filling bases of posts 11.00 

Erecting girder spans 402.50 

Riveting girder spans 264.00 

Framing ties 130.75 

Laying floor 222.25 

Painting, first coat 204.37 

Painting, second coat 180.25 

Total labor $2,521.00 

Coal for derrick engine 120.00 

Blacksmith coal 45.00 

Train service, 5 days, at $25 125.00 

Wear of tools 125.00 

Total, 500 lin. ft., at $6 $2,936.00 

Summary per ton — Per ton. 

General expense. .$304 $0.90 

Erecting and riveting, $1,479 4.32 

Painting, 2 coats, $385 1.13 

Framing and laying floor, $353 ' 1.05 

Total labor $7.40 

Coal, $165 0.48 

Train service, $125 0.37 

Wear of tools, $125 0.37 

Grand total $8.52 

The cost of framing and laying the floor, it will be seen, was $353, 
or 70 cts. per lin. ft. 



BRIDGES. 162-5 

The total cost of this viaduct to tlie railway company was as 
follows : 

Steel superstructure, labor ? 4,240 

Steel superstructure, materials 19,000 

Masonry substructure, labor 4,360 

Masonry substructure, materials 5,200 

Total ?32,800 

This is equivalent to ?46.50 per lin. ft. for sviperstructure, and 
$19.10 per lin. ft. for substructure, or $65.60 per lin. ft. of viaduct. 
The substructure, therefore, cost 30% of the total. Since the steel 
superstructure weighed 340 tons, or 680,000 lbs., it cost 3.56 cts. 
per lb. in place. As previously stated, the average height of this 
viaduct was 63 ft. ; its maximum height was 89 ft. from top of 
masonry to base of rail. It was supported by 6 towers (or 12 
bents), the length of the "tower spans" being 31 ft. The remain- 
ing spans, or "open spans," were three spans of 57 ft., two of 
38 ft., and two of 30 ft. The above costs for labor include con- 
tract price for erection, salaries of engineers, inspectors, etc. The 
costs for materials include freight and train service. 

Cost of Erecting a S80-ft. Viachict. — This viaduct was erected by 
contract, with the same gang as the 500-ft. viaduct just described. 
The weight of the steel was 382 tons, or 764,000 lbs. The profile 
area was 34,800 sq. ft., the average height was 60 ft., and the 
maximum height from masonry to base of rail was 89 ft. There 
were 7 towers or 14 bents. The "tower spans" were 31 ft. The 
"open spans" were: One 61-ft. span, three 57-ft., one 38-ft., and 
three 30-ft. spans. 

The cost to the contractor was as follows : 

Time traveling — 

2 days at $5.00 $10.00 

, 2 days at 3.50 7 00 

12 days at 3.25 3& 00 

20 days at 3.00 60 00 

Total $116.00 

Loading derricks and tools — 

4 days at $5.00 $20.00 

6 days at 3.25 19.50 

10 days at 3.00 30:00 

Total $69.50 

Erecting traveler — 

1 day at ?5.00 $5.00 ' 

1 day at 3.50 3.50 

1 day at 3.25 3.25 

10 days at 3.00 30.00 

Total 41.75 



1626 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Erecting towers — 

11 days at $5.00 ? 55.00 

10 days at 3.50 35.00 

22 days at 3.25 71.50 

104 days at 3.00 312.00 

24 days at 2.75 66.00 

5 days at 1.50 7.50 

Total $547.00 

Riveting towels — 

32 days at $3.25 $104.00 

88 days at 3.00 264.00 

8 days at 1.50 12.00 

Total $380.00 

FllUng 'bases of posts with concrete — 

4 days at $2.75 $11.00 

Erecting girder spans — 

12 days at .?5.00 $ 60.00 

12 days at 3.50 42.00 

24 days at 3.25 78.00 

83 davs at 3.00 249.00 

G days at 1.50 9.00 

Total $438.00 

Riveting girder S2Hins — 

24 days at $3.25 $ 78.00 

66 days at 3.00 198.00 

9 days at 1.50 13.50 

Total $289.50 

Floor, framing ties — 

1 8 days at $4.00 $72.00 

30 days at 3.00 90.00 

10 days at 2.75 27.50 



Total $189.50 

Laying floor — 

15 days at $3.50 $ 52.50 

48 days at 3.25 156.00 

100 days at 3.00 300.00 

Total $508.50 

Painting — first coat — 

7 days at $5.00 $ 35.00 

35 days at 2.75 96.25 

25 days at 3.25 81.25 

40 days at 3.00 120.00 



Total $332.50 

Peiinting — second coat — 

2 days at $5.00 $ 10.00 

28 days at 3.25 91.00 

60 days at 3.00 180.00 



Total $2 81.00 



BRIDGES. 1G27 



Sttmmary — 



Time traveling ? IIG.OO 

Loading derricks, etc 69.50 

Erecting traveler 41.75 



General expense % 






Erecting towers 547.00 

Riveting towers 380.00 

Filling bases 11.00 

Erecting girder spans 438.00 

Riveting girder spans 289.50 

Floor, framing ties 189.50 

Laying floor 5 8. 5 

Painting, first coat 332.50 

Painting, second coat 281.00 



Total $3,204. 



■"'n 



Coal for derrick engine 72.00 

Blacksmith coal 45.00 

Train service, 5 days, at ?25 125.00 

Wear of tools 160.00 

Grand total .$3,606.25 

Summary of cost per ton— Per ton. 

General expense. ?227 .$0.59 

Erecting and riveting, $1,665 4.36 

Painting, 2 coats, $603 1.60 

Framing and laying floor, $69 8 1.83 

Total : .$S.3S 

Coal, $117 0.30 

Train .service, $125 0.33 

Wear of tools, $160 0.42 

Grand total $9.43 

Comparing this with the cost of erecting the 500-ft. viaduct, we 
see that the painting cost 50% more per ton, and that the work on 
the floor (timber deck) cost 80% more. In this 5S0-ft. viadtict the 
total labor on the deck cost $698, or $1.20 per lin. ft., which is 
fully double what it should have cost. 

The total cost of this 580-ft. viaduct to the railway company 
was as follows : 

Steel superstructure, labor ? 5,750 

Steel superstructure, materials 21,950 

Masonry substructure, labor 5.860 

Masonry substructure, materials 4.240 

Total , $37,800 

This is equivalent to $47.80 per lin. ft. for superstructure and 
$19.70 per lin. ft. for substructure, or $67.50 per lin. ft. of viaduct. 
Therefore the substructure cost 20% of the total. The steel super- 
structure cost 3.63 cts. per lb. in place. 

Cost of a IjyO-ft. Viaduct. — This steel viaduct had profile area of 
97,200 sq. ft., and an average height of 78^/. ft. It had 12 towers 
and 2 "rocker bents," making a total of 26 bents. The extreme 



1628 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

height of bent from top of masonry pedestals to base of rail was 
104 ft. ; the average lieight 77 ft. ; and the aggregate height of all 
bents, 2,000 ft. There were 12 plate girder "tower spans" of 31 ft. 
over the towers, 11 plate girder "open spans" of 61 ft., and 4 
girder "open spans" of 31 ft. 

The weight of the metal was 1,690,000 lbs. 

The actual cost of erecting the viaduct was $8.50 per ton. The 
viaduct was built and erected by a contractor at the following cost 
to the railway company for materials and labor : 

674,000 lbs. girder spans in place, at 3.9 cts....$ 25,286 

1,004,000 lbs. bents and towers, 3.9 cts 39,156 

5,400 lbs. sheet lead, at 6 cts 324 

132.000 ft. B. M. in floor system, at $25 3,300 



Total superstructure $ 68,066 

1,000 cu. vds. dry excavation, at 40 cts 4,000 

640 cu. vds. wet excavation, at $2 1,280 

216,000 ft. B. M. slieet piling, etc., in cofferdams, 

at $25 5,325 

8.000 lin. ft. piles delivered and driven, at 30 cts. 2,430 

3,000 cu. yds. riprap, at $1.50 4,500 

1.800 cu. yds. concrete, at $8 14,400 

1,800 lbs. iron in anchor bolts, etc., at 4 cts. . . 72 



Total superstructure $ 32,007 

Engineering, sliop inspection, etc 5,500 



Grand total $105,573 

The cost per lin. ft. of viaduct was : 

Per lin. ft. Per cent. 

Superstructure $58.13 64.3 

Substructure 27.35 30.4 

Engineering 4.77 5.3 

Totals $90.25 100.0 

The foimdations of two of the towers, eight masonry pedestals in 
all, were in water, which ran up the total cost of substructure very 
considerably. Nevertheless, the cost of the substructure of the 
majority of steel viaducts of large size is usually a far higher 
percentage of the total cost than it should be. This is due to the 
fact that bridge engineers are generally very painstaking in the 
economic design of superstructures and not so painstaking in the 
design of svibstructures. Because the design of a superstructure is 
an exact science, there is an attractiveness about such work easy 
to understand. Because the design of foundation is merely by 
rule of thumb, there is less of fascination in the work. This par- 
ticular viaduct is a splendid example of our contention that engi- 
neers usually put altogether too little brains into designing sub- 
structures. 

The concrete pedestals of the substructure rest on rock, with the 
exception of eight pedestals which have pile foundations. Yet every 
one of these concrete pedestals is designed exactly as if it were in- 
tended to rest on soft earth, as is shown in Fig. 15. It will be 



BRIDGES. 



1629 



seen that each pedestal has a base of 110 sq. ft. Even at a point 
where the viaduct is 90 ft. higli, as in this case, the weiglit of the 
steel is less than 1,700 lbs. per lin. ft. The timber floor system 
would add only a little more than 300 lbs. per lin. ft., making a 
total of 2,000 lbs. Adding a live load of 5,000 lbs. per lin. ft. to 
this, we have 7,000 lbs. per lin. ft. Each bent has to support the 
weight of 45 lin. ft. of bridge, or 45X7,000 = 315,000 lbs. But 
this is distributed over two pedestals, making a load of 160,000 lbs. 
per pedestal, or 80 tons. If wind pressure were to raise this to 
110 tons, the load on the foundation would be 1 ton per sq. ft., for 
we have 110 sq. ft. of foundation area. 

From this it is clear that, even where resting on earth, the area 
of the pedestal base is in excess of any reasonable requirement. 




Fig. 15. — Pedestals for Steel Viaduct. 



Reid's "Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Construction," p. 408, 
gives the safe bearing power of soft clay at 1 ton per sq. ft., and 
of ordinary loam at 3 tons. Hence the absurdity of providing any 
such area of base as in this pedestal under discussion, for it is 
resting not on earth but on rock. It is perfectly clear that the 
designer could have saved 60 or 70% of the concrete masonry in 
each of these pedestals, had he not followed a rule of thumb which 
is applicable only to foundations resting on earth, and not always 
applicable even to them. 

It is no. unusual thing for earth to be called upon to support 10 
tons per sq. ft., and there are few places where 5 tons can not be 
safely imposed on each square root. A bridge engineer who is 
seeking to effect every possible economy should visit the site of 
every large structure, and personally test the bearing power of the 
earth, by digging test pits to the proposed depth of foundation 
where possible. 



1030 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Another noticeable economic defect in the design of these pedes- 
tals is the excavation of the rock so as to form a square footing. 
Solid rock having so slight a transverse slope as that shown in the 
illustration need not be excavated at all. A few drill holes, in 
which large dowel pins are placed, will serve every purpose in pro- 
viding against possible sliding of the masonry on the ledge rock 
under the vibration of passing trains. 

Cost of the Pecos Viaduct.*— The Pecos Viaduct, Texas, was built 
in 1S91 for the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry. It is a 
single track steel viaduct 2,180 ft. long, and 321 ft. high at the 
center. The viaduct is built on a peculiar profile. For 1,070 ft. of 
the west end the average height of the viaduct is 57 ft;., then the 
ground drops off precipitously, so that for a distance of 600 ft. the 
towers are 260 ft. high and rest on masonry piers, of varying 
heights up to 80 ft. Then the ground rises on an almost uniform 
slope to the last pier on the east end. The profile area between the 
base of rail, and the tops of masonry piers is approximately 280,- 
000 sq. ft. Dividing this by the length gives 129 ft. as the average 
height of the viaduct. None of the tower piers is under water at 
times of low water, but three of them are submerged at times of 
high water. There are 33 towers and the tower spans are plate 
girders 35 ft. span. The spans between the towers are 8 riveted 
lattice girder spans of 65 ft., 2-pin-connected cantilever spans of 
172 ft., and one 80 ft. suspended span. The masonry piers were 
built in 229 working days. Th3 steel work was erected in US days, 
including 2 4 days required to build a traveler weighing 116 tons 
and 6 days to take it down and move it to the opposite side of the 
river. The erecting gang average 60 men and at no time exceeded 
79. Tlie average amount of steel erected were 41,000 lbs. per day 
for the 86 days, or 39,600 lbs. per day for the 118 days. 
If wages were $2.50 a day, this would be equivalent to 
0.36 ct. per lb. ; exclusive of the cost of erecting and moving the 
traveler, or 0.5 ct. per lb. including erecthig and moving the 
traveler. The actual wages paid are not available but were appa- 
rently considerably more than $2.50, for the actual cost of erecting 
this viaduct was 0.87 ct. per lb. including not only the cost of 
erecting the traveler but the cost of the traveler itself. 

The weight of th!s viaduct was as follows : 

Lbs. 

34 plate girder spans, 35 ft. long 495,550 

1 plat3 gh-der span. 35 ft. long 24,810 

8 lattice girder spans, 65 ft. long 354,-120 

1 lattice girder span, 80 ft. long 57,870 

2 cantilevers, 1721/2 ft. long 478,400 

Floor bolts and railings 51,620 

Total superstructure 1,462,370 

Towers and anthor bolts 2,147,190 

Grand total 3,609,560 



*Engvneering-Coniructing, Dec. 2, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 1G31 

The cost was as follows : 

3,270 cu. yds. masonry, at $13 $ 42,505 

3,609,560 lbs. steel delivered, at 4.43 cts. 160,000 

Erecting, including cost of traveler 30.500 

256,600 ft. B. M. timber flooring, at $20.75 5.325 

Total .$238,330 

This is equivalent to $119 per I'n. ft. ; and the weight of steel was 
1,650 lbs. per lin. ft. 

It will be noted that the masonry pedestals cost only IS^o of the 
total cost of the viaduct. 

Cost of the IViarent Viaduct.* — In 1SS4 a single track iron viaduct 
was built for the Northern Pacific Ry. across Marent Gulch to re- 
place a timber viaduct. The profile area of this viaduct is 95,700 
sq. ft. below the top of the stringers, and the length of the viaduct 
is 800 ft., so the average height is practically 96.000^-800 = 120 ft. 
nearly. It has two towers, each 200 ft. high; two towers each 120 
ft. high ; and four short bents. 

There are 4 plate girder spans at the ends, each 30 ft. ; 5 truss 

spans, each 116 ft. long; girders 23 ft. long over each of the four 

towers. The foundation piers are of concrete, of which there was 

•544 cu. yds. in all. The viaduct contained the following amount of 

iron and steel : 

Lbs. 

Towers and bents 872,900 

5 deck truss spans 466,700 

Floor system 297,827 

4 plate girder spans 40,161 

Miscellaneous 8,962 

Total, at 2,133 lbs. per lin. ft 1,686,550 

This is equivalent to 17.5 lbs. per sq. ft. of profile area. 
The iron work cost 3.85 cts. per lb. delivered at St. Paul, and 
the "traffic charges" for transporting the iron and other materials 
from St. Paul, at 1 ct. per ton mile, amounted to $24,743. 

The total cost was : 

Foundations % 21,664.59 

Masonry 30,079.81 

Towers, materials and labor 49,188.44 

Superstructure, materials and labor... 36,593.94 

Timber, floor 4,701.43 

Painting 1,826.74 

Permanent track 116.06 

Engineering and incidentals 9,085.15 

Permanent track 116.06 

Total $153,362.16 

Traffic charges 24,743.18 

Total, at $222.63 per lin ft $178,105.34 



*Engineering-Contractinff, Dec. 2, 1908. 



1632 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of erecting the towers was $15,800, and of erecting tlie 
superstructure (spans and floor) was ?6,500, or a total of $22,300 
for erecting 840 tons, or nearly $27 per ton. This exceedingly high 
cost is said to have been due to high wages and to working in the 
winter. It appears, however, to have been due to the usual lazi- 
ness of men doing "company work." 

The following were the quantities in the substructure, including 
the abutments : 

Cu yds. 

Rock excavation 1,645 

Earth excavation 3,689 

Concrete 544 

Cut stone masonry 722 

It cost $7,664 to remove the old wooden viaduct, which con- 
tained 970,000 ft. B. M., or about $7.70 per M. for removing this 
timber. 

Skilled labor received $3 to $4.50 a day. The cost of erecting 
and removing the temporary buildings in which the men lived was 
$2,700. Depreciation on plant was estimated at $4,500. Both these 
items are included above. 

For comparison, the following weights of a viaduct of the same 
average height are given by Mr. H. G. Tyrrell. The weight of a 
single track railway viaduct 120 ft. high, with tower bents 30 ft. c. 
to c, and intermediate girder spans of 60 ft. was: 

Wt. per lin. ft. 

Spans 622 lbs. 

Bents 955 lbs. 

Traction bracing 324 lbs., 

Total 1,941 lbs. 

Taking the cost of steel in place at 3% cts. per lb. for girders and 
4 cts. per lb. for bents and bracing, the cost per lin. ft. is $75 for 
the steel. To this must be added the cost of the concrete pedestal 
piers. 

Cost of the Old Kinzua Viaduct. — Mr. Thomas C. Clark gives the 
following data relative to the original Kinzua viaduct built in 1882 : 

The viaduct was 2,050 ft. long, 302 ft. high at the center, and 
weighed only 1,400 tons, or 7.36 lbs. per sq. ft. of profile area. It 
was designed for a live load of an 80 ton consolidation engine fol- 
lowed by a train of 3,000 lbs. per lin. ft. Rough calculations from 
a small profile indicate that the profile area was about 380,000 sq. 
ft. below the base of rail. The viaduct was erected by a gang of 40 
men in 4 mos., using one traveler. The iron work was delivered 
at only one end of the ravine, and slid down along A trough to a 
point below the traveler. The tower girders were 38% ft. long, 
and the intermediate girders 61 ft. long. Mr. Clark claims that 
the first American viaduct was designed by C. Shaler Smith, the 
viaduct being really a high trestle with iron posts. Mr. Clark, in 
1870, designed the first modern type of viaduct, consisting of braced 
towers supporting intermediate girders. 

Mr. Clark states that the cost of erecting the Kinzua viaduct was 
less than $12 per ton, which is equivalent to $16,800 for erecting 



BRIDGES. 1633' 

the entire viaduct. This does not agree very well with his state- 
ment tliat 40 men erected it in 4 mos., for that would be about 4,000 
man-days, and it is not likely that any such v/ages at $4 a day 
were paid, unless the height at which the men worked led to a de- 
mand for high wages. If wages averaged $2.50 a day, the labor 
cost would have been about $7 per ton. As a matter of fact this 
same viaduct was removed in 1900 and a new one built in its place, 
the cost of erection (including removal of the old viaduct) being 
given below. 

Cost of the New Kinzua Viaduct. — Mr. C. R. Grim gives the fol- 
lowing data about the Kinzua viaduct on the Erie R. R., in Mc- 
Kean County, Pa. It was built in 1900 to replace an iron viaduct 
built 19 years before. The viaduct is 2,053 ft. long, rests on the 
old piers, and has 20 towers, ranging from 30 to 285 ft. high from 
masonry to base of rail, and has a profile, area of about 380,000 sq. 
ft. below the base of rail. 

The weight of the deck spans is 638 tons, and that of the towers 
is 2,715 tons, total 3,353 tons. I'wo travelers were used, working 
from opposite ends. Bach traveler spaned a clear space of 160 ft., 
having an old tower in the middle. The work of removing the 
old viaduct and erecting the new one consumed 4 mos., with a force 
of about 120 men at 10 hrs. a day. Charging the entire cost 
against the new viaduct, and assuming that Avages averaged $2.50 
a day, the labor cost would be about $30,000 or $9 per ton. The 
weight was about 17.6 lbs. per sq. ft. of profile area. 

Weight of a Steel Viaduct. — A single track steel viaduct was built 
in 1904 near Paoli, Ind., for the Chicago, Indianapolis & Louis- 
ville Ry. It is 870 ft. long, and 87 ft. high in the center. It has 2 
abutments and 36 small pedestal piers, four under each tower. The 
abutments are 60 ft. high. The pedestal piers are 3% ft. square 
on top and extend down to solid rock, a distance of 3 to 12 ft. below 
the ground. There are 4,300 cu. yds. masonry in piers and abut- 
ments, and 1,091,000 lbs. steel and cast iron in the viaduct. 

Data on Riveting a Viaduct. — In the construction of the Cuyahoga 
Valley Viaduct, there were 18,869 seven-eighths inch rivets driven 
in the field. The average day's work for a gang of 4 men was 
192 rivets. The best day's work was 315, all hand driven. The 
defective rivets amounted to less than 2 per cent. 

Cost of Concrete Pedestals for a Steel Viaduct. — The viaduct was 
410 ft. long with towers 30 ft. high on the Canadian Northern On- 
tario Ry. The concrete work consisted of 10 x 10 x 4-ft. footings 
carrying pedestals 5x5 ft. on top with sides battered 1 in 12 to 
meet the footings. The tops of the pedestals were all at the same 
elevation but their height varied, the highest being 18 ft. above 
tops of footing. The pedestals were cored for anchor bolts. The 
total amount of concrete in the work was 711% cu. yds., of which 
298% cu. yds. were in the footings and 405 cu. yds. were in the 
pedestals. The concrete was a 1-2% -4 mixture, taking 1 1/2 bbls. 
cement for the footings; and a 1-2^-4 mixture, taking 1% bbls. 
cement Cor the pedestals. Altogether 3,350 bags of cement were 



1G34 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

used for the 711% cu. yds. of concrete, including 44 bags for the 
1-2 mortar top dressing and 15% bags for wasliing, plastering, etc. 
Excavation. — The pits for the footings were 12 ft. square car- 
ried down into hard clay through 5 or 6 ft. of sand and clay and a 
1-ft. layer of driftwood. The average depth of pit was 11 Va ft., 
the maximum depth 15.2 ft. The material was handled by a horse- 
power derrick, consisting of a guyed mast and a boom set at 45°. 
The bucket was lifted by a double purchase block, the fall of the 
line being carried to a pulley set a few feet to one side of the mast 
and thence to a whiffletree. This gave enough side pull on the 
boom to swing the bucket clear of the excavation. To hold the 
boom fixed during hoisting and lowering, a line from the end was 
carried to the far side of the excavation and operated by one man. 
One man drove the horse. Two %-cu. yd. bvickets were employed, 
one being filled as the other was being dumped. There were 1,127 
cu. yds. of excavation which cost as follows : 

Items. Total. Per cu. yd. 

General expenses $194 ?0.172 

Foreman, 35 days at $3 105 0.093 

Labor. 323 days at $1.60 517 0.458 

Horse, 26 days at $2 52 0.046 

Totals $868 $0,769 

Forms. — The forms for the footings were I'ough 2-in. lumber 
braced to the pit walls. The pedestal forms were made of 2-in. 
dressed lumber. Five sets were made. Each form was made 16 
ft. high and was added to at the bottom for the taller pedestals 
and cut off for the shorter pedestals, which were built last. Two 
sides of each form were built in panels or units, and the two other 
sides were built up board by board as the concreting progressed. 
The solid panel sides were held together by two wire ties every 3 ft. 
in height ; one tie every 3 ft. held the other two sides. These ties 
were No. 9 gage wire looped around studs and tightened by twist- 
ing. There were also core forms for the anchor bolts, each a box 
4 ft. long. 6 ins. square on top and 5% ins. square on the bot- 
tom. The cost of the forms was as follows: 

Lumber — Total. Per cu. yd. 

7,000 ft. B. M. 2-in. derrick at $19 per M $133 

2,000 ft. B. M. 2-in. rough at $18 per M 36 

750 ft. B. M. 2x4-in. scantling 14 

Cartage. $2.50 per M. ft 24 

Anchor bolt boxes, etc 10 



Totals $217 

Deduct salvage $10 $207 $ 0.29 

Wire, Ties, Nails — 

5 rolls No. 9 at 3 cts $ 12 

200 lbs. wire nails at $2.50 5 

Totals $ 17 $0,024 



BRIDGES. 163.J 

Labor — 

Carpenter, 2S days at $2.50 $ 70 

Helpers. 38 days at $1.75 67 

Totals $137 $0,193 

Grand totals $361 $0,507 

Concrete. — The concrete was mixed by hand on "boards" set close 
to the piers and was shoveled directly into the forms. The mate- 
rials were transported to the boards in wheelbarrows. A gang of 
1 foreman, 5 barrowmen, 6 mixers and 1 man in the form aver- 
aged 25% cu. yds. per day, or a little over 2 cu. yds. per man 
working. The maximum day's work was 38 cu. yds. with 16 men. 
The concrete was deposited moderately wet and the mortar was 
spaded to the surface. The top 3 ins. of the pedestals was built 
of 1-2 mortar. The exposed surface of the piers was washed with 
a thin cement grout ; about 1 bag of cement was required for 25 
sq. yds. of surface. One man covered 7% sq. yds. per hour, using 
an ordinary whitewash brush. The cost of the concrete work was 
as follows : 

Materials — Total. Per cu. yd. 

173 cu. yds. rubble stone at $0.85 $ 147 $ 0.207 

555 cu. yds. 2-in. stone at $1.875 1,041 1.463 

290 cu. yds. sand at $1.25 363 0.510 

840 bbls. cement at $1.80 1,512 2.121 

Cartage at 15 cts. per btal 126 0.163 

Totals $3,190 $4,464 

Labor — 

Foreman, 28 days at $4 $112 $ 0.157 

Laborers, 343 days at $1.75 600 0.843 

Totals $712 $1,000 

General Expenses. — General expenses were as follows : 

Superintendence $239.50 

General labor 78.40 

Interest and depreciation on plant tools... 70.50 

Total $388.40 

This gives a charge of 27.3 cts. per cubic yard of concrete. 
There were also the following items of cost : 

24 M. ft. B. M. 6x8-in. hemlock at $20 $480 

Labor backfilling piers 162 

Platforms, runways, etc 69 

Total , $768 

We can summarize the cost of concrete woi-k as follows : 

Per cu. yd. 

General expenses ( i/o of $388) $0,273 

Platforms, runways, etc 0.097 

Forms 0.507 

Labor 1.000 

Materials 4.464 

Total $6,341 

Mr. J. H. Ryckerman is authority for the above data. 



1636 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Abutments and Pedestal Piers, Lonesome Valley Viaduct. 
— Mr. Gustave R. Tuska gives the following on the concrete sub- 
structure of the Lonesome Valley Viaduct, near Knoxville, Tenn. 
There were two U-shaped abutments and 36 concrete pedestal piers 
made of a light limestone that deteriorates rapidly when used for 
masonry. Derricks were not needed as would have been the case 
with masonry piers, and colored labor at $1 for 11 hrs. could be 
used. The piers were made 4 ft. square on top, from 5 to 16 ft. 
high, and with a batter of 1 in. to the foot. The abutments aver- 
age 26 ft. high, 26 ft. long on the face, with wing walls 27 ft. 
long ; the wall at the bridge seat is 5 ft. thick, and the wing walls 
are 3i/i ft. wide on top. Batters are 1 in. to the foot. 

The forms were made of 2-in. tongued and grooved plank, braced 
by posts of 2 X 10-in. plank placed 3 ft. c. to c. for the abutments, 
and at each corner for the piers. At the corners one side was 
dapped into the other, so as to prevent leakage of cement. The 
posts were braced by batter posts from the earth. For the piers a 
square frame was dropped over the forms and spiked to the posts. 
The abutment forms were built up as the concreting progressed. 
The north abutment forms were made in sections 6 ft. high, held by 
%-in. bolts buried in the concrete. The lower sections were re- 
moved and used again on the upper part of the work, thus saving 
plank. The inside of forms was painted with a thin coat of crude 
black oil. The same form was used for several piers. 

The concrete was 1:2:5, the barrel being the unit of measure, 
making about % cu. yd. of concrete per batch. The mortar was 
mixed with hoes, but shovels were used to mix in the stone. By 
passing the blade of a shovel between the form and the concrete, 
the stone was forced back and a smooth mortar face was secured. 
Rammers weighing 30 to 40 lbs. were used for tamping. Two days 
after the completion of a pier the forms were removed. The con- 
crete was protected from the sun by twigs, and was watered twice 
a day for a week. It was found by actual measurement that 1 cu. 
yd. of concrete (1:2:5), the ingredients being measured in barrels, 
consisted of 1% bbls. of Atlas cement, 10 cu. ft. of sand and 26% 
cu. ft. of stone. The total amount of concrete was 926 cu. yds. of 
which two-thirds was in the two abutments. The work was done 
(in 1894) by contract, for $7 per cv\ yd., cement costing ?2.80 per 
bbl., sand 30 cts. per cu. yd., and wages $1 a day. A slight profit 
was made at this price. A gang of 15 men and a foreman would 
mix and lay about 40 cu. yds. in 11 hrs. when not delayed by 
lack of materials. The cost of making the concrete, with wages at 
•fl a day, was: 

Cents per 
cu. yd. 

1 man' filling sand barrels and handling v.-ater 2.7 

2 men filling rock barrels 5.4 

4 men mixing sand and cement 10.6 

4 men mixing stone and mortar 10.6 



BRIDGES. 1637 

Cents per 
cu. yd. 

2 men wheeling concrete 5.3 

1 man spreading concrete in place 2.7 

1 man tamping 2.7 

Total labor 40.0 

1 foreman at $2 5.0 

Total exclusive of forms 45.0 

If wages had been $1.50 a day instead of $1, the labor cost would 
have been 68 cts. per cu. yd. 

Cost of Paint. — Mr. Walter G. Berg, Chief Engineer of the Le- 
high Valley R. R., gives the following on painting iron railway 
bridges : 

Oxide of Iron. 

614 lbs. oxide of iron, at 1 ct ?0.06 

5/6 gal. (6 14 lbs.) raw linseed oil, at 56 cts 0.47 

Cost of 1 gal. of paint $0.53 

Red Lead. 

20 lbs. red lead, at 5 cts $1.00 

% gal. (5% lbs.) raw linseed oil, at 56 cts 0.42 

Cost of 1 gal of paint $1.42 

GrapMte. 

3 % lbs. graphite paste, at 12 cts $0.45 

% gal. boiled linseed oil, at 59 cts 0.45 

Cost of 1 gal. of paint $0.90 

Weight and Surface Area of Steel Bridges. — Mr. C. E. Fowler. 
Chief Engineer Youngstown Bridge Co., gives a table of the weights 
of iron liighway and single track bridge trusses, and the corre- 
sponding areas of metal requiring painting, as determined "by 
actual calculation in a large number of cases." I find by a study 
of the tables tliat they can be very simply expressed in rules or 
formulas, as follows : For a highway bridge divide the weight of 
metal in pounds by 7 to get the area of metal surface in square 
feet. This applies to highway bridges 16 ft. wide, calculated for a 
floor load of 90 lbs. per sq. ft., for all spans from 40 to 300 ft. For 
a single track railway bridge, divide the weight of metal in pounds 
by 12 to get the area of metal surface in square feet. 

The weight in pounds of metal in a highway bridge is found by 
adding 50 to 2 times the span in feet and multiplying this sum by 
the span in feet. Expressed in a formula this rule is w^L (2 L + 
50). 

The weight in pounds of metal in a single track railway bridge 
is foimd by adding 400 to 4.8 times the span in feet and multiply- 
ing this sum by the span in feet, tc = 1/ (4.8 Z/ -1- 400). 

Cost of Painting a Howe Truss Bridge.— The bridge was painted 
with two coats of paint costing $1 per gallon. One gallon covered 
133 sq. ft., two coats thick, and a painter averaged 166 sq. ft., two 



1G38 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

coats thick, per 10 hrs., or 332 sq. ft. of one coat per day. The 
cost was, therefore, as follows : 

Cts. per Cts. per 
sq. ft. sq. yd. 

Paint, two coats 0.75 6.8 

Labor painting-, two coats (17% cts. per hr.) 1.15 10.3 

Total 1.90 17.1 

Cost of Painting 6 R. R. Bridges. — Three spans pin-connected 
Pratt truss bridges, each 145 ft. long, 14 ft. wide and 20yo ft. high, 
were painted with one coat at a cost of $4 8 per span for labor. One 
span required 35 gals, of asphaltum paint costing 65 cts. per gal. 
The other spans received 27 gals, of carbon paint each, at $1.50 
per gallon. 

A riveted Pratt truss bridge, 94 ft. long, 14 ft. wide and 20 ft. 
high was given one coat of black carbon paint, 23 gals., at $1.50 
per gal. The labor was $40. 

A double-intersection riveted lattice truss bridge, 96 ft. long, 14 
ft. wide and 20 ft. high, was repainted with one coat of carbon 
paint, 26 gals., at $1.50 per gal. The labor cost $46. 

A single intersection lattice truss highway bridge (20-ft. road- 
way and two 8-ft. sidewalks), 106 ft. long, was painted with one 
coat of black carbon paint, 35 gals., at $1.25 per gal. The labor 
cost $59. 

Cost of Painting 6 R. R. Bridqes and 2 Viaducts. — Mr. O. E. 
Selby, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., 1897, has a paper on the cost of 
painting the Louisville and Jeffersonville Bridge across the Oliio 
River. The work was begun June 3, and finished Aug. 7, 1895. 
There was practically no traffic over the bridge during the work, 
which, of course, lessened the cost of painting ; and the iron being 
new required no great amount of cleaning. The force averaged 
about 50 men with 1 foreman, 1 assistant foreman and 1 time- 
keeper. The men were mostly ordinary bridge men, erectors and 
carpenters, and were paid $2 a day of 10 hrs. Some few men paint- 
ing sidewalk railings and other parts not hazardous were paid $1.50 
a day. The paint was oxide of iron, and was used just as it came 
from the barrel, except for a little occasional thinning, equivalent 
to about % gal. per bbl. of paint. The cost of the paint was 67 
cts. per gal. The best results were obtained with flat brushes 
costing $7.50 per doz., of which 19 doz. were used; 4 doz. steel 
brushes and 13 doz. whisk brooms were used for cleaning the iron. 
The total cost of the work was: Paint, $3,769 ; labor,. $4,427 ; equip- 
ment, $301 ; accident insurance, $200 ; total, $8,697 distributed as 
follows : 

Jeffersonville Approach (Viaduct) and Span No. 1 (4,271 Ft. 
Long; 1,762 Tons). Per ton. 

0.62 gallon iron oxide paint $0.42 

Labor, $2 per 10 hrs 0.51 

Total per ton of 2,000 lbs $0.93 

Total per lin. ft $0.38 



BRIDGES. 1639 

This Jeffersonville approach is a viaduct having an average 
height of 40 ft. and a length of 4,063 ft., all single track, except 
1,000 ft., which is double track. Span No. 1 is single track, 209 
ft. c. to c. The Jeffersonville approach had previously been painted 
with one coat in October, 1892. The work of which costs are above 
given consisted in going over the viaduct, cleaning and painting 
all spots where rust had formed ; then after this had dried the 
whole viaduct was given one coat. 

Louisville Approach (2,585 Ft. Long; 1,012 Tons). Per ton. 

0.90 gallon paint, first coat $0.61 

0.58 gallon paint, second coat 0.39 

Labor on first coat 0.72 

Labor on second coat 0.38 

Total per ton $2.10 

Total per lin. ft ?0.82 

This Louisville approach is 2,585 ft. long, single track, and has 
an average height of 45 ft. It had been erected a year before it 
was painted, and had never been painted before. It received two 
coats throughout. 

Bridge Spans Nos. 5 and 6 (Each 338 ft. c. to. c. ; Total Weight 
665 Tons). Per ton. 

0.66 gallon paint, first coat $0.44 

0.44 gallon paint, second coat 0.30 

Labor on first coat 0.47 

Labor on second coat 0.35 

Total per ton of 2,000 lbs $1-56 

Total per lin. ft $1.5 3 

Bridge Spans Nos. 2, 3 and 4 (Each Span 546% ft. c. to c. ; Total 
2,768 Tons). Per ton. 

0.50 gallon paint, first coat $0.33 

0.32 gallon paint, second coat 0.22 

Labor on first coat 0.32 

Labor on second coat 0.22 

Total per ton of 2,000 lbs $1.09 

Total per lin. ft $1.84 

All these bridge spans were single track, erected about a year 
before they were painted. All the iron had had a shop coat of lin- 
seed oil. All the spans were given two coats of paint throughout, 
except the inside of the top chords and end posts which received 
only one coat, as it was believed that this one coat in such a pro- 
tected location would outlast the two coats on exposed work. 

Spans Nos. 5 and 6 were erected in the latter part of 1893, while 
the other and longer spans were erected a year later, so that the 
rustier condition of Nos. 5 and 6 may account for their taking 
more paint. 

The labor cost of painting 5,700 lin. ft. of sidewalk railings was 
$390, or $6.85 per 100 ft. This does not include the cost of the 
paint, which was a small item. Half of this railing was a lattice 
railing 4 ft. high ; the other half was a gas pipe railing consisting 
of two lines of 1%-in. gas pipe. 



1640 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Painting 50 Plate Girder Bridges. — ^Mr. W. J. "Wilgus 
gives the following data on the cost of repainting 33 steel bridges 
on the Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg R. R. in 1896-8. The 
bridges were originally painted with two coats of "patent paint" 
that had failed within a year. The following costs include clean- 
ing with wire brushes, and repainting with one coat of asphaltum- 
varnish paint made of 4 lbs. lampblack ground in pure raw lin- 
seed oil, % gal. genuine asphaltum varnish, % gal. pure boiled 
linseed oil, and % gal. drying japan. This paint cost 60 to 80 cts. ' 
per gal., and 1 gal. covered 350 sq. ft. Labor cost $2 a day. 

The calculation of the exposed areas of many of the plate girder 
bridges showed that there were 100 sq. ft. for every ton of 2,000 
lbs. 

Cost of Painting 50 Plate Girder Spans (Av. Length, 74 ft. ; Total 
Weight, 1,884 Short Tons). Per ton. 

0.30 gal. paint $0,175 

Labor cleaning and painting 0.340 

Total per ton ?0.515 

Cost of Painting 5 Truss Spans (Av. Length, 155 ft. ; Total Weight, 
638 Tons). Per ton. 

0.39 gal. paint $0,235 

Labor cleaning and painting 0.490 

Total per ton $0,725 

Cost of Painting 11 Spans of a Viaduct (Total Length, 705 ft.; 
Height, 88 ft.; Weight, 342 Tons). Per ton. 

0.48 gal. paint $0.39 

Labor cleaning and painting 0.60 

Total per ton $0.99 

Cost of Cleaning and Painting 10 Bridges. — Mr. E. D. Graves 
gives the following data on the painting of light double triangular 
trusses in bridge spans from 80 to 136 ft., the total length being 
1,000 ft. painted in the summer of 1897. The steel work had re- 
ceived one shop coat of iron oxide paint, and had been in place 
one year. The greater part of the surfaces was found to be scaled 
off and rusted. The surfaces were scraped with a steel scraper or 
brushed with a steel wire casting-brush. The dust was removed 
with a whisk broom, and one coat of No. 38 Detroit Graphite paint 
applied, costing $1.10 per gallon, delivered. The floor beams and 
bottom chords being most likely to rust, were painted a second coat. 
The foreman received $3.50 per day, and had 8 to 12 men, at $1.75. 
These men were mostly laborers, except a few bridge men for the 
top work. The cost was as follows per ton of 2,000 lbs. : 

Cost of First Coat — Per Ion. 

0.94 gal. first coat on 202 tons $1.04 

Labor cleaning and painting 202 tons 1.44 

Total per ton, one coat $2.48 



BRIDGES. 1641 

Cost of Second Coat (Bottom Chord and Floor Beams). 

Per ton. 

0.35 gal. second coat on 100 tons $0.38 

Labor painting second coat 100 tons 0.58 



Total per ton of bottom chord and beams.? 0.9 6 

The total cost of paint and labor was $598, or nearly 60 cts. per 
lln. ft. of bridge. 

Cost of Painting 48 Bridges and 2 Viaducts. — ^Mr. C. D. Purdon 
gives the following data : These bridges were new and painted 
with two coats of red lead. They had received one coat of oil at 
the shop. 

Cost per ton 

Paint, Labor. Total. 
Two deck girders, each 54 ft. (34.3 tons).. $0.80 $1.34 ?2.14 

Pratt truss, 103 ft. (62.9 tons) 0.58 1.45 2.03 

Pratt truss, 180 ft. (161.4 tons) .. : 0.82 1.27 2.09 

Six deck girders, each 54 ft. (105.2 tons).. 0.65 1.12 1.77 

Iron viaduct; two 64 ft., two 48 ft., and two 

32 ft. deck girders (182.4 tons) 1.40 0.76 2.16 

Iron viaduct, eight 64 ft., and seven 32 ft. 

spans (471 tons) 1.00 0.66 1.66 

Pratt truss, dbl. track, 150 ft. (228.7 tons) 0.51 1.17 1.68 

The summary of the amount of lead and oil used on the above 
bridges is as follows: 

Per ton ■ 

Lbs. Gals. 

of lead. of oil. 

Deck girders (139.5 tons) 6.08 0.48 

Single track trusses (224.3 tons) 7.12 0.56 

Viaducts (653.3 tons) 13.80 0.44 

Summary of all (1,245.6 tons) 10.10 0.42 

Judging from the amount of paint used, a truss bridge takes 
1.2 times as much paint per ton as a plate girder, and a viaduct 
takes 2.3 times as much as a plate girder. This is confirmed on p. 
560. 

The cost of cleaning and painting 17 spans over the Arkansas 
River is as follows : These bridges received two coats of red lead 
and oil, having been originally painted with iron oxide which was 
first cleaned off. The cost of cleaning off the old paint is included, 
and almost equaled the cost of applying the first coat of red lead. 

Cost of 9 Spans (153 Ft; Weight, 810.6 Tons). 

Per ton. 

7 lbs. red lead $0.49 

Labor 58 

Second coat 

2.3 lbs. red lead 0.17 

Labor 0.25 

Total per ton $1.49 



1642 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of 8 Spans (Three, 253 Ft.; Four, 162 ft.; One 
Draw, 370 Ft. ; Total "Weight, 1,451.2 Tons). 

First coat — - Per ton. 

6 lbs. red lead $0.42 

Labor 0.54 

Second coat — 

1.9 lbs. red lead 0.15 

Labor 0.26 

Total per ton ?1.37 

The average of the above 17 spans was: 6.42 lbs. of lead and 
0.23 gal. of oil per ton for the first coat ; 2.04 lbs. of lead and 0.074 
gal. of oil per ton for the second coat. 

The cost of repainting 13 spans with two coats of iron oxide 
was as follows: 

— Gallons — Cost per ton 

Paint. Oil. Paint. Labor. Total. 
200-ft. deck truss and two 50-ft. 

girders, dbl. track (475.6 tons) 128 60 $0.20 ?0.62 ?0.82 

Pony lattice, 921/2 ft. (115 tons) 30 10 0.31 0.33 0.64 

Three through spans, 150 ft. and 302 

ft. draw span (656.7 tons) 335 122 0.36 0.63 0.99 

Three through spans, 150 ft. (313.3 

tons) 184 46 0.38 0.54 0.92 

Three through spans, 150 ft. (297.6 

tons) 130 30 0.28 0.54 0.82 

These 13 spans had originally been painted with iron oxide which 
was not cleaned off except at rusted spots. 

It will be noted that about % gal. of oil was used to thin each 
gallon of paint. 

The cost of repainting ten old bridges with one coat of iron 
oxide was as follows; 

— Gallons Cost per ton — — 

Paint. Oil. Paint. Labor. Total. 
Double track truss, 126 ft. (176 

tons) 75 25 $0.19 $0.55 $0.74 

Through plate girder, 50 ft. (27.6 

tons) 15 31/2 0.34 0.34 0.68 

Six spans deck truss, 150 ft. (696.5 

tons) 280 62 0.25 0.51 0.76 

Deck plate girder, 70 ft. (30.4 tons) 12 ,. 0.20 0.22 0.44 
Through plate girder, 47 ft. (24.5 

tons) 17 .. 0.32 0.34 0.6G 

These 10 spans had been originally painted with iron oxide which 
was not cleaned off except at rusted spots. 

It will be noted that the average of these ten spans is 0.51 gal. 
of paint and oil per ton, for one coat work. 

Cost of Cleaning and Painting Four Bridges, St. Louis. — Mr. N. 

W. Bayers gives the following data on painting railway bridges 
with one coat of carbon paint. This paint was ground especially 
for the bridge work, and came as "semi-liquid" taking about 1 gal. 
of oil to 1 gal. of "semi-liquid." It was laid on thick. 

The St. Louis Merchants' Bridge is double track, three spans, 
each of 517% ft., trusses 75 ft. deep at center. It was erected in 
1890, and had had one shop coat and one coat of iron oxide after 



BRIDGES. 1643 

erection. The metal was very rusty, and the cost of cleaning was 
quite large, but could not be separated from the cost of painting. 
The total cost of cleaning and painting these three spans in 1895 
was as follows: 

493% gals, boiled oil, at $0.58 ? 286.08 

5521/2 gals, carbon paint, at ?1.25 690.62 

Sundry supplies 69.96 

48 days' labor, at $2.50 120.00 

91.4 days' labor, at $2.25 205.65 

444.4 days' labor, at ?2.00 888.80 

51.5 days' labor, at ?1.00 51.50 

Total $2,312.61 

The cost per lin. ft. was, therefore, $1.49, and 0.69 gal. of paint, 
costing 93.3 cts. per gal., was required per lin. ft. 

The Ferry St. Bridge is a double track deck span, 126 ft. resting 
on iron columns. It was cleaned and painted in 1895, at the fol- 
lowing cost: 

32 gals, boiled oil, at $0.58 $ 18.56 

22 gals, carbon paint, at $1.25 27.50 

Labor 97.70 

Total, at $1.14 per lin. ft $143.76 

The Angelica St. Bridge is a through plate girder bridge, 68-ft. 
span, having a total painted surface of 6,250 sq. ft., which required 
1 gal. of paint for every 312% sq. ft. The cost was as follows: 

10 gals, boiled oil, at $0.58 $ 5.80 

10 gals, carbon paint, at $1.25 12.50 

Labor 22.00 

Total, at $0.59 per lin. ft $40.30 

The Elevated Structure, Merchants' Bridge, consists of steel col- 
umns supporting plate girder spans of 28 to 35 ft., carrying a 
double track railroad. It was erected and painted in 1890, but in 
1897 it was badly rusted and was repainted at a contract price of 
57 cts. per ft. for 4,075 ft. The actual cost to the contractor was 
as follows: 

Carbon paint and oil, one coat $ 748.13 

Labor for cleaning 657.67 

Labor for painting 628.74 

Total, exclusive of foreman's time. .$2,034.54 

The St. Louis (Eads) Bridge was repainted in 1896. It consists 
of three arched spans of a total length of 1,524 ft., carrying a 
double track railway on the lower floor and a highway on the 
upper floor. The floor beams for the highway are the struts for 
the wind truss. The bridge is 54 ft. wide out to out. The metal 
was quite rusty, in places, requiring chipping to remove scale, espe- 
cially the highway floor beams exposed to locomotive smoke. It 



1644 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was painted with one coat. The cost was $0.70 per ton distributed 
as follows : 

675 gals, boiled oil, at $0.35 $ 236.25 

650 gals, carbon paint, at $1.25 812.50 

Sundry supplies 52.55 

Labor, 130 days, at $2.50 325.00 

246 days, at $2.25 553.50 

955 days, at $2.00.... 1,910.00 

Total, at $2.55 per lin. ft $3,889.80 

Cost of Painting Two Railway Bridges. — The following data on 
scraping and painting two railway bridges are given by Mr. A. 
S. Markley. The bridges were both painted in 1896, bridge No. 1 
being painted during the summer and bridge No. 2 during October 
and November. The structures are viaducts with lattice columns 
and lattice struts in towers. The total number of tons of iron 
In bridge No. 1 was 719 ; in bridge No. 2 there was 15-1 tons 
of iron. 

Bridge No. 1, first coat — 

Total. Per ton iron. 

Red lead, 3.560 lbs., at S.049 $174.44 $0,242 

Boiled oil, 177 gals., at .40 70.80 .098 

L. black, 18 lbs., at .085 1.53 .002 

Labor 558.39 .776 

Total $815.16 fl.118 

Bridge No. 1, second coat — 

Red lead, 2,395 lbs., at $.049 $117.35 $0,163 

Boiled oil, 160 gals., at .40 64.00 .089 

L. black, 55 lbs., at .085 4.67 .006 

Labor 372.08 .517 

Total $558.10 $0,775 

Bridge No. 2, first coat — 

Red lead, 500 lbs., at $.049 $ 24.50 $0,159 

B. L. oil, ISVo gals., at .40 7.40 .048 

L. black, 5 lbs., .085 43 .003 

Labor 121.41 .788 

Total $153.74 - $0,998 

Bridge No. 2, second coat — 

Red lead, 335 lbs., at $.049 $ 16.41 $0,106 

B. L. oil, 17 gals., at .40 6.80 .044 

L. black, 10 lbs., at .081/2 85 .005 

Labor 89.90 .584 

Total $113.96 $0,739 



BRIDGES. 1645 

Summary — 

Per ton iron. ^ 

Bridge 1, Bridge 2. 

Labor 1.294 1.372 

■Labor and material 1.896 1.731 

Material $0,602 ?0.359 

Labor, scraping 194 .... 

Labor, painting, first coat 776 .788 

Labor, painting, second coat 517 .584 

Pounds of red lead, first coat 4.95 3.25 

Pounds of red lead, second coat 3.33 2.17 

Gallons boiled oil, first coat 246 .120 

Gallons boiled oil, second coat 222 . .110 

Cost of Painting Plate Girders, Truss Bridges and Trestles on the 
C. & W. M. Ry.* — Table XIX gives the cost of painting several 
bridges on the Chicago & TVest JVEichigan Ry. (Detroit, Lansing & 
Northern R. R.). the work being done in 1894. 

Cost of Painting, Cross- References. — For further data consult 
the index under "Painting." 

Cost of Bridge Abutments. — Mr. W. A. Rogers gives the following 
data relative to the construction of bridge abutments on the C, 
M. & St. P. Ry. : The work consisted in building 20 abutments 
for 10 four- track plate girder bridges over street crossings in 
Chicago. The work was done between May 1 and Oct. 1, 1S98, in 
which time 8,400 cu. yds. of concrete were placed, all the work 
being done by company labor. The forms were made of 2-in. 
plank and 6 x 6-in. posts bolted together at the top and bottom 
with %-in. rods. The lumber was used over and over again. When 
the dressed plank became too poor for the face it was used for the 
back. The concrete was 1 Portland cement, 3 gravel and 4 to 4% 
limestone (crusher run up to 3-in. size.) A mortar face 1% ins. 
thick was built up with the rest of the concrete. The concrete 
was made quite wet, and each man ramming averaged 18 cu. yds. 
a day rammed. The concrete was mixed by a machine of the Ran- 
some type, operated by a 12-hp. portable gasoline engine. The 
load was very light for the engine, and 8 hp. would have been 
sufficient. The engine made 235 revolutions per minute, and the 
pulley wheels were proportioned so that the mixer raade 12 revs, 
per min. One gallon of gasoline was used per hour, and the mixing 
was carried on day and night so as not to give the concrete time to 
set. The time required for each batch was 2 to 3 mins., and about 
% cu. yd. of concrete was delivered per batch. The average 
output was 70 cu. yds. per 10-hr. shift, with a crew of 28 men; 
but as high as 96 cu. yds. were mixed in 10 hrs. The concrete 
was far superior to nand mixed concrete. The water for the 
concrete was measured in an upright tank and discharged by a 
pipe into the mixer. The sand and stone were delivered to the 
mixer in wheelbarrows, and the concrete was taken away in wheel- 
barrows. No derricks were used at all. Each wheelbarrow of 
concrete was raised by a rope passing over a pulley at the top 
of a gallows frame ; one horse and a driver serving for this raising. 



* Engineering-Contracting J June 13, 1906. 



1646 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



m . 


;fJs« 




M«'VTj<'*eo©«iO 


T-li-l-W 1H 


r% 


otousoomooo 


IMrHeOegOJOOCDinrH 


i% 


M 1-1 









u 


OOt-OC*qcO 'USlLa 


p J 


OOiHOsOt^r-l -COOO 


^ § 


rHe^T-ioSrHoi ti-ii-i 


M- 


o 




O 





CJ 

e 

pq 

CJ 

<! 
P4 

O 



o 
O 



W bH Or-(*^O00.-l(MTH • 
*J . THiH'-jMOrHrHT-l • 

g cc «» 



to lO t- t- iH Oi CO t- lO 
■^ J IJ3 00 "5 00 O 05 CO lO •* 

*; J? ood^Nodoii-ieDO 
>> >; r-i '^iHoc-oeoo 

fcH VJ 60- <M 



O Q t- O t- t- .-I O t- (M iH 

+j ^ oo"^ooeqoiomio 

Q Oi t-^ to "* t> 00 0> rH ■* LO 

rj l-J 5* r-l T><U3Tt<CqeO 



Q d mmoooo550»^Tt< 
'^ lOooiHoooast-oci 

o v2 



*^ . OtoCOOOOS •M'lO 

OJD^L^^t^ooirscst- -cooo 












02 



^ 0) 

. oooiMinoooio 

^ <M iH tH 00L--«3<M 



■ c 

<D • • • : <u 

yr, U U U . t. 

™ (U <U 0) • f- 

S-. t. t. " 



u u u %^ ,^^ 
O (U 0) <U .S o 

'H '-I -H d, .S 

' ' I I iV 
be ortTj- 6j) - 

H-l o O O (Utll 



CJ CU w 

0) o M 

> 1- <C 3 

o S cd t. 



CM 

>. 

I 



o 

fl 

-a 

I. 

(1> 
u 



BRIDGES. 1647 

A small gasoline hoisting engine would have been more satisfactory 
than the horse which was worked to its full capacity. After the 
barrows were raised (12 ft.), they were wheeled to the abutment 
forms and dumped. The empty wheelbarrows were lowered by 
hand, by means of a rope passing over a sheave and provided with 
a counterweight to check the descent of the barrow. The cost 
of the concrete (built by company labor) was as follows: 

Per cu. yd. 

Cement, gravel and stone delivered $3.28 

Material in forms (used many times) 11 

Carpenters building and taking down forms 34 

Labor 1.18 

Total per cu. yd, ?4.91 

The labor cost includes moving the plant from one bridge to the 
next, building runways, gasoline for engine, oil for lights at night, 
and unloading materials as well as mixing, delivering and ramming 
the concrete. Wages were $1.75 per 10-hr. day for laborers and 
$2.50 for carpenters. 

Data on Thirty-two Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Bridges 
(20 Highway and 12 Raiiway), Including Yardage, Cost, Etc.* — ^An 
engineer is frequently called upon to estimate the probable cost of 
a bridge before plans are drawn for the structure. In such cases 
it is very desirable to have at hand the cost of several similar 
structures as a guide to the judgment. It is also desirable to have 
a short description of each structure, and a statement of the quan- 
tities of material involved in its construction. With such data at 
hand an engineer, even though somewhat inexperienced, is not 
likely to go far wrong in his preliminary estimate of cost — his 
reconnaissance estimate, if you choose to call it so. 

Valuable as such records of cost are for the purpose just indi- 
cated, they possess an additional value that should not be under- 
rated — ^namely, as a guide in comparing the relative economy of the 
designs of two similar bridges. For this latter purpose it is de- 
sirable to have a record not merely of the total yardage of con- 
crete in each bridge, but the distribution of that yardage in the 
various parts of the bridge. The yardage in the arch ring, the 
yardage in the spandrel walls, the yardage in the abutments, and 
so on, should be given, together with the weight of steel reinforce- 
ment in each of these groups of concrete yardage. Unfortunately, 
however, the published records of concrete bridges are almost 
invariably lacking in this respect, as will be noted in the follow- 
ing records. ' 

In this connection, a word as to what every record should con- 
tain. The following dimensions should be given : The total length 
of the bridge over all, total length between abutments, length of 
barrel or true width of bridge, width of floor surface, width of 
road way or carriage way, width of side walks, clear span of arch 
and rise, thickness at crown and at spring line, height of abut- 
ments and piers up to the spring line, width of piers at spring line, 

*Engineering-ContracUng , Sept. 2, 1908. 



1648 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

width of abutments at base, height of roadway above crown of 
arch, and ditto above low water. 

When these dimensions are given, accompanied by a- general 
description of the type of bridge and a detailed tabulated state- 
ment of quantities, the reader can form a very accurate idea of its 
general design. 

In comparing the costs of any two concrete bridges, the first step 
should be to ascertain the cost per lineal foot measured between 
abutments. If there are several arches in series, the same holds 
true. If the bridges are single or double track railway structures 
a direct comparison of costs is then possible, but if they are high- 
way bridges, it is necessary to ascertain the cost per square foot 
of floor area, for highway bridges differ so greatly in width. This 
floor area should not be estimated for the total length of the bridge 
over all, but only for the length between the abutments of the 
extreme spans. The retaining walls of highway bridges are fre- 
quently mere extensions of the spandrel walls, and it is deceptive to 
include all the area between these retaining walls as floor area, 
although it is frequently done. The fraction of a yard of concrete 
per sq. ft. should be stated. Where a large main arch is ap- 
proached on each side by a number of small arches or by a con- 
crete trestle, it is clear that the major part of the cost of the 
bridge may often be charged to this main arch. Hence it is not 
good practice to lump both the main arch and the approaches to- 
gether in estimating the cost per lin. ft. or per sq. ft. of floor. Yet 
this is almost invariably done, as will be seen from the following 
records. One cost per lin. ft. or per sq. ft. should be estimated 
for the main span or spans, and a separate unit cost for the 
approach spans. 

The live loads should be stated as a rule, although if the date of 
construction is given, together with the type of bridge, an engineer 
can readily ascertain what was the prevailing practice as to load- 
ing at that time. Since nearly all the bridges recorded in this 
article were built during the last decade, it seems unnecessary to 
state the loading. 

The reader should note the fact that many of the concrete 
railway bridges have replaced steel bridges and that in nearly 
every case the steel bridge was approximately 20 years old when 
replaced. These steel bridges had in all cases become too light 
for the heavy locomotives and cars. So far as the past is con- 
cerned, this indicates a depreciation in steel railway bridges of 
about 5% per annum in America — a fact which is itself worthy of 
sober thought on the part of the bridge designer. We may also 
add in this connection that the average life of an American loco- 
motive is not far from this same 20 years. 

We shall first give the records of materials or cost, or both, 
of 20 highway bridges, as completely as was possible to secure 
them. It will be noted that for the usual spans of arches and 
heights of piers, reinforced concrete highway bridges have cost 
about $4 per sq. ft. of floor area. 



BRIDGES. 1649 

Cost of 25-ft. Arch for Highway. — A reinforced concrete highway 
bridge was built in 1902 in Wabash county, Ind. It is an arch with 
a span of 25 ft., a crown thickness of 8 ins. and a roadway 16 ft. 
wide. The abutments are tied together by steel rods buried in a 
concrete pavement below the bed of the stream, according to the 
Luten method. The contract price was only $573, which is equiva- 
lent to $23 per lin. ft., or $1.44 per sq. ft. of floor. This price bears 
testimony to the economy of the design. 

Cost of 45-ft. Arch for Highway. — A reinforced concrete highway 
bridge was built in 1902 over the River Des Peres, Forest Park, 
St. Louis, Mo. It is a single arch span of 45 ft., with a rise of 
12 ft, and a width of 45 ft. out to out. The abutments are 8 ft. 
high to the spring line. The bridge cost $12,600 (including $2,000 
for excavation and riprap), which is equivalent to $280 per lin. ft., 
or $6.20 per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 54-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete high- 
way bridge was built in 1903 across the Kalamazoo River at Plain- 
well, Mich. The bridge is 414 ft. long between abutments, and has 
an 18 ft. carriage way and one 5-ft. sidewalk. It consists of 7 
arches having a span of 54 ft. and a rise of 8 ft. Piers are only 
6 ft. high to the spring line, 6 ft. wide at the spring line and rest 
on piles. The water was only 4 ft. deep. The arches are 1 :2 :4 
concrete and the piers, etc., 1 :3 :6. The arches are reinforced 
with 4-in. channel steel. The materials used were : 

Cu. Yds. 

Concrete in foundations 570 

Concrete in arches 770 

Concrete in walls 150 

Concrete total 1,490 

Steel, 36,000 lbs. 

Earth fill, 1,944 cu. yds. 

The contract price was $19,900, which is equivalent to $2.10 per 
sq. ft. of floor. There is less than 0.16 cu. yd. of concrete per 
sq. ft. of floor. 

The detailed cost of this bridge is given in Gillette and Hill's 
"Concrete Construction — Methods and Cost." 

Cost of 60-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete high- 
way bridge was built in 1906 across the Hudson River at Sandy 
Hill, N. T. The bridge is 984 ft. long between abutments and 35 
ft. wide. Its deck is 24 ft. above the water surface. The river 
is shallow and flows over a slate rock bottom. The water is 8 ft. 
deep only at times of very high water. The bridge consists of 15 
arches of 60 ft. span and 8% ft. rise. The piers are 13 ft. high to 
the spring line. Each arch span is composed of 7 reinforced con- 
crete arch ribs, and the ribs support a reinforced concrete slab 
flooring. All concrete was a 1:2:4 mixture, except the heart- 
ing of piers and the footing courses, which were 1 : 3 : 5. About 
11,000 bbls. of cement were used. The outside facing of the piers 
and parapet walls consisted of concrete blocks. The bridge was 
built by day labor at a cost of $80,000, which is but slightly more 



1650 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

than ?80 per lin. ft, or ?2.30 per sq. ft. of floor, which is an 
exceptionally low cost per sq. ft., and indicates excellent design. 
The bridge was designed and built by Mr. M. O. Kasson of Sandy 
Hill, N. T. 

Cost of 66-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete high- 
way bridge was built in 1903 at Bridge St., Jacksonville, Fla., over 
the tracks of several railways, by the Concrete-Steel Engineering 
Co., under the Melan and Thatcher patents. The total length is 845 
ft., consisting of 11 arches, having an average span of about 66 ft. 
and a rise of 7 ft., with piers about 20 ft. high and 126 piles under 
each pier. The width of the bridge was 58 ft. between hand rails. 
The contract price was $149,900, which is equivalent to ?177 per 
lin. ft., or $3 per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 80-ft. and 65-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced con- 
crete highway bridge of ingenious design was built in 1904 across 
Clifty Creek, six miles north of Greensburg, Ind., by the National 
Bridge Co., of Indianapolis, Daniel Luten, president. The bridge 
is an arch of 80 ft. span and 12 ft. rise, and has a 16 ft. roadway. 
The abutments are connected by steel tie rods embedded in con- 
crete, which forms a pavement over which the creek flows. The use 
of these tie rods greatly reduces the mass of concrete required 
in the abutments. The mean depth of water was 3 ft. There were 
4,500 lbs. of steel used in the ties connecting the abutments, and 
4,800 lbs. in the arch and spandrel walls. The concrete amounted 
to only 265 cu. yds. and the contract price for this bridge complete 
was only $2,695, which, so far as we know, breaks all records for 
low cost of a single concrete arch bridge of 80 ft. span. The cost 
was therefore only $34 per lin. ft., or $2.10 per sq. ft. of floor, or 
$10 per cu. yd. There is only 0.26 cu. yd. per sq. ft. of floor. This 
design of Luten arch is illustrated on page 785 of Reid's "Concrete 
and Reinforced Concrete Construction." 

Another highway bridge of the same type is the Bast Washington 
St. bridge at Indianapolis. It has a span of 65 ft., a rise of 10 ft. 
and a roadway 57 ft. wide. It contains 1,100 cu. yds. concrete and 
the contract price was $10,885, which is equivalent to $167 per 
lin. ft., or less than $3 per sq. ft. of floor, or $10 per cu. yd. 
There is 0,3 cu. yd. of concrete per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 75 to 100-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete 
higliway bridge was built in 1905 across the Wabash River at 
Peru, Ind. Its length is 700 ft., and the roadway is 30 ft. wide. 
The height of roadway is 30 ft. above low water. The bridge 
consists of 7 arch spans; one 100, two 95, two 85 and two 75 ft. 
The rise of the arches is 13 to 15 ft. The piers average. 30 ft. high 
and rest on solid rock 6 to 16 ft. below low water. The bridge 
contains 5,000 cu. yds. of concrete, which required 6,000 bbls. of 
cement. The concrete was reinforced according to the Luten sys- 
tem. The contract price was $36,900, which is equivalent to only 
$53 per lin. ft., or $1.80 per sq. ft. of floor, or $7.20 per cu. yd. 
There is 0.24 cu. yd. of concrete per sq. ft. 

This is a remarkably low cost and is indicative of good design. 
This contract price was lower than competitive bids for a steel 



BRIDGES. 1651 

bridge of the same length having wooden flooring. This bridge 
was designed by the National Bridge Co. of Indianapolis, Ind., 
Daniel Luten, president. 

Cost of 80-ft. Arch for Highway. — ^A concrete highway bridge was 
built in 1901 across San Leandro Creek, near Oakland, Cal. It is an 
arch (not reinforced) having a span of 81 ft, a rise of 26 ft., a 
crown thickness of 3 ft. and supports a macadam carriage way 
41 ft. wide with 8 ft. sidewalks on each side, giving a roadway 
57 ft. wide. The abutments have a thickness of 30 ft. and extend 
only 5 ft. below the spring line, and rest on clay. There were 
90,000 ft. B. M. used in the centers and forms, or 24 ft. B. M. 
per cu. yd. of concrete. The spandrel walls have a length of 192 
ft. each. There are 3,384 cu. yds. of concrete in the bridge, and 
the contract price for its construction was $25,840, which is equiva- 
lent to ?319 per lin. ft. of span, or $5.60 per sq. ft. of floor. There 
are $.74 cu. yds. of concrete per sq. ft. of floor. The concrete was a 
1 : 2 : 7 mixture, and it will be seen that the contract price for the 
bridge was equivalent to about $7.70 per cu. yd. of concrete. 

Cost of 85-ft, Arch for Highway. — ^A reinforced concrete highway 
bridge was built in 1903 at Seeley St., over Prospect Ave., Brook- 
lyn. The arch has a span of 85 ft. and a rise of 8% ft. The car- 
riage way is 32 ft. wide and the sidewalks are each 12% ft. wide, 
making a total width of roadway of 57 ft. The total length of 
each parapet wall is 144 ft. The abutments are 15 ft. high to the 
spring line. The bridge contains 1,300 cu. yds. of concrete, and 
91,400 lbs. of corrugated reinforcing bars. The contract price was 
$21,800, which is equivalent to $256 per lin. ft., or $4.53 per sq. ft. 
of floor, or nearly $17 per cu. yd. There is 0.27 cu. yd. of con- 
crete per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 69 to 88-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete 
highway bridge was built in 1903 across the Great Miami River on 
Main St., Dayton, Ohio. Its length is 588 ft. between abutments, 
and it has a carriageway 40 ft. wide and two 7-ft. sidewalks, mak- 
ing a total width of 54 ft. It consists of 7 arches having spans 
of 69 to 88 ft., reinforced according to the Melan system. The 
rise of the arches is 1-10 to 1-13 of the span. The piers are 31 ft. 
high to the spring line, and the base of piers is about 15 ft. below 
low water. The contract price was $123,170, which is equivalent to 
$210 per lin, ft., or slightly less than $4 per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 80 to 110-ft. Arches for Highway. — A reinforced concrete 
highway bridge was built in 1904 across the Great Miami River at 
Third St., Dayton, Ohio. The bridge consists of 7 arches and has 
a total length of 710 ft. between abutments, and its width is 62 ft. 
between balustrades. It is of the Melan type, designed by the 
Concrete-Steel Engineering Co., which received a royalty of $12,000 
paid out of the contract price. The arch spans ranged from 80 ft. 
to 110 ft., with a ratio of span to rise averaging about 7% to 1. 
The piers were 22 ft. high. The contract price was $179,600, which 
Is equivalent to $253 per lin. ft., or about $4 per sq. ft. of floor. 

Cost of 100-ft. Arch for Highway. — A reinforced concrete highway 
bridge was built in 1907, in Rock Creek Park, Washington, D. C, 



1652 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

on Ross Drive across Rock Creek. The length is 163 ft. and its 
width is 16 ft. It consists of a main span of 100 ft. having a 15-ft. 
rise, with concrete trestle approaches 30 ft. long on each side. The 
three hinged arch span consists of three ribs carrying, at inter- 
vals of 10 ft., light spandrel columns supporting the reinforced 
concrete beams and floor slabs. A steel handrail is provided on 
each side. An existing timber trestle was utilized for centering. 
The bridge was designed for a live load of 100 lbs. per sq. f*., 
with a concentrated load of only 6 tons on a four-wheel wagon. 
The bridge was built by day labor and cost $8,000, or $50 per lin. 
ft., or $3.20 per sq. ft. of floor, including approaches. 

Materials in 50-ft. and 100-ft. Arches for Highway. — A concrete 
highway bridge was built in 1903 over a mill pond on the Anthony 
Kill, near Mechanicsville, N. Y. Its length is 265 ft. between abut- 
ments, and its width is 17 ft. over all. It consists of two 100-ft. 
arches and one 50-ft. arch not reinforced. The rise of the 100-ft. 
arches is about 20 ft. Tlie piers have a height of about 15 ft. 
Piles were driven to support the centers. There were 140,000 ft. 
B. M. in the centers and forms, which lumber was used but once. 
About 2,500 cu. yds. of concrete were required, or 0.56 cu. yd. per 
sq. ft. of floor. Therefore it took 56 ft. B. M. per cu. yd. of con- 
crete. The centers consisted of bents supporting lagging laid 
parallel with the center line of the roadway. 

Cost of 125-ft. Arch for Highway. — A concrete highway bridge 
was built in 1906 at 16th St., Washington, D. C, known as the 
Piney Creek bridge. Its length is 272 ft. and its width is 25 ft. 
It consists of a parabolic arch having a span of 25 ft. and a rise 
of 39 ft., resting on abutments about 12 ft. high, and a concrete 
viaduct approach on each side of the arch. The arch is not rein- 
forced and is 5 ft. thick at the crown. It carries a solid spandrel 
wall on each side and reinforced concrete posts between the walls, 
which support the reinforced concrete slab roadway. The viaduct 
approaches are merely extensions of this spandrel construction, 
and have an average height of about 65 ft. 

The design of this bridge is illustrated and described in Reid'? 
"Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Construction." The cost of the 
bridge was $52,231, of which $3,000 was for engineering and $1,500 
for inspection. This is equivalent to a cost of $200 per lin. ft, 
or $8 per sq. ft. of floor area. 

Cost of 135-ft. Arch for Highway. — A reinforced concrete high- 
way bridge was built in 1907 across Cherry Creek, at Bannock St., 
Denver, Colo. The bridge is a one-arch span of 135 ft., consist- 
ing of 8 parabolic three hinged arch ribs. This design was adopted 
because the bridge crosses the creek on a skew of 36°. The rise 
of the arch is 13 ft., and the arch is 24 ins. thick at the crown. The 
arch supports a reinforced concrete slab floorway resting on rein- 
forced concrete spandrel posts. The carriage way is 36 ft. wide, 
flanked by an 8-ft. sidewalk on each side, giving a total width of 
52 ft. of roadway. The bridge contains 1,146 cu. yds. of 1:2:5 
concrete, 166,000 lbs. of steel reinforcement and 33,000 lbs. of steel 



BRIDGES. 1653 

castings. There is less than 0.28 cu. yd. per sq. ft. of floor. The 
contract price was $28,325, or $210 per lin. ft., or $4 per sq. ft. of 
floor space, or $24.60 per cu. yd. of concrete. This low cost per 
square foot for so long a span indicates excellent design on the part 
of Mr. Charles W. Comstock, M. Am. Soc. C. E. Contrast this de- 
sign and cost with the design and cost of the Piney Creek bridge 
above given. 

Cost of 150-ft. Arches for Highway — ^A concrete highway bridge 
was finished in 1907 over Rock Creek, Washington, D. C, and is 
known as the Connecticut Ave. bridge. It has a total length 
of 1,068 ft. between abutments. The abutments are U shape, and 
are filled with earth, giving a total length of 1,341 ft. of bridge 
including abutments. The bridge consists of five concrete arches 
(not reinforced), each of 150-ft. span and 75-ft. rise, and two 82-ft. 
arches of 41-ft. rise. The 150-ft. arches support spandrel arches 
that carry the roadway. The roadway is about 150 ft. above the 
base of foundation of the center pier. The bridge is 52 ft. wide. 
It contains 80,000 cu. yds. of concrete, or 1.62 cu. yds. per sq. ft. 
of floor. The cost was $850,000, or $639 per lin. ft. of total length, 
which is equivalent to $12.30 per sq. ft. of floor. Full detailed 
costs of the materials and labor required to build this bridge are 
given in Gillette and Hill's "Concrete Construction — Methods and 
Cost." 

Cost of 233-ft. and 53-ft. Arches for Highway. — ^A concrete high- 
way bridge was built in 1906 across the Wissahickon Creek, Phila- 
delphia, and is known as the Walnut Lane bridge. The bridge is 
585 ft. long and 60 ft. wide, having a 40-ft. roadway and two 10-ft. 
sidewalks. It consists of a main arch of 233 ft. span, approached 
on one side by three 53-ft. arches and on the other side by two 53-ft. 
arches. The main arch has a rise of 70 ft. and supports 8 spandrel 
arches. The abutments for this main arch have a height of 15 ft. 
and rest on rock. The concrete is not reinforced. The main arch 
consists of twin arch rings, side by side. The contract price for 
this bridge was $253,551, which is equivalent to $434 per lin. ft., 
or $7.25 per sq. ft. 

Estimated Cost of 703-ft, Arch for Highway. — Plans for a rein- 
forced concrete highway bridge of unprecedented size have been 
prepared for the city of New York, and the estimated cost and 
amount of materials are worthy of record here. The ^bridge is to 
be known as the Hudson Memorial Bridge, and is to cross Spuyten 
Duyvil Creek. The bridge is to be 2,840 ft. long and 80 ft. wide. 
The main arch is 703-ft. span and 170-ft. rise, 70 ft. wide, 15 ft. 
thick at the crown and 28 ft. thick at the spring, and supports 
10 spandrel arches. The approaches consist of 3 arches of 100 ft. 
span on one side and 4 on the other side. The bridge is to carry 
two decks, one for highway traffic and the other for rapid transit 
railway traffic. The steel in the arch ring is to be used in com- 
pression and is, strictly speaking, not a reinforcement. It averages 
about 1%% of the volume of the arch ring. There are to be 17,000,- 
000 lbs. of steel in the 47,000 cu. yds. of concrete in the arch ring. 



1654 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The total amount of concrete is to be 75,000 cu. yds. in the main 
arch, including the spandrels, foundations, etc., which will con- 
tain 24,000,000 lbs. of steel. The estimated cost of the arch and 
approaches (2,840 ft. long) is $3,800,000, which is equivalent to 
nearly $1,340 per lin. ft., as nearly $17 per sq. ft. 

Cost of a Stone Arch Highway Bridge. — A stone highway bridge 
was built in 1904 across the Connecticut River at Hartford. It is 
1,185 ft. long and 80 ft. wide between parapets. It consists of 
8 stone arches, having spans of 68 to 119 ft., and a 100-ft. Scherzer 
rolling lift bridge. The foundations for the piers were put down 
with pneumatic caissons. The toe of each caisson averaged about 
30 ft. below low water level and 50 ft. below the spring of the arch. 
The piers and parapets are faced with granite, and the backing is 
concrete. There were 23,300 cu. yds. of concrete in caisson piers, 
32,000 cu. yds. concrete backing, 9,300 cu. yds. granite ashlar, 
10,000 cu. yds. granite voussoirs, 9,500 cu. yds. arch ring concrete 
and 300 cu. ycjs. granite parapet and posts, or a total of 84,400 
cu. yds. masonry. There were 20,000 cu. yds. excavation for abut- 
ments and 37,800 cu. yds. dredging and excavation for piers. The 
contract price for the masonry and foundations was $1,369,520 and 
the total was $1,600,000, or $1,330 per lin. ft, or $17 per sq. ft. of 
floor. 

Cost of Longest Stone Arch Bridge. — The longest stone arch 
bridge span in the world was begun in 1903 at Plauen, Saxony. 
It is a highway bridge with a roadway 36 ft. wide flanked by two 
sidewalks 10 ft. wide each, making a total width of 56 ft. The 
arch has a span of 295 ft. and a rise of 59 ft., and a crown thick- 
ness of 4.9 ft. It springs directly from ledge rock. The bridge 
has a total length of 492 ft. and is built throughout of stone 
masonry. There are about 15,000 cu. yds. of masonry in the 
bridge, and 848,000 ft. B. M. of timber were required for the 
centers and falsework. The centers rested on concrete footings. 
The cost of the bridge was only $120,000, due to the low cost of 
labor in Saxony. This is equivalent to $8 per cu. yd. of masonry. 
Hence the bridge cost $244 per lin. ft., or $4.35 per sq. ft. of road- 
way. 

Estimated Cost of 50, 75 and 100-ft. Electric Railway Arches. — 

In estimating the cost of double track reinforced concrete bridges 
for interurban electric lines, Mr. George P. Carver gives the fol- 
lowing quantities for 50, 75 and 100-ft. single span arches having a 
width of 28 ft. These arch spans were all designed to cross streets 
(not rivers) and had hollow reinforced concrete abutments. 



Span. 


Concrete. 


Steel. 




Ft. 


Cu. Yds. 


Lbs. 


Cost. 


50 

75 

100 


370 

740 

1,008 


27,700 
38.800 
55,650 


$4,780 

8,830 

12,150 



It will be noted that the estimated cost is $12 to $13 per cu. yd. 
of concrete, not including the cost of excavation. Prices assumed 
in making the estimates were as follows: 



BRIDGES. 1655 

steel, 2% cts. per lb. 

Placing steel, 1 ct. per lb. 

Cement, $2 per bbl. 

Stone, $2 per cu. yd. 

Sand, $1 per cu. yd. 

Forms, $1 per cu. yd. 

Mixing and placing, $1.50 per cu. yd. 

Add for incidentals, 15%. 

Add for profit, 10%. 

Materials in Concrete Railway "Trestle." — ^A double track rein- 
forced concrete bridge was built in 1900 across Ames Creek for the 
Illinois Central Ry. It is 72 ft. long between abutments, and is 
36 ft. wide out to out. It consists of 4 spans of 15 ft. each, which 
are such flat arch spans that they are really girders. Fourteen, 
steel I beams (9 in.) are embedded in these spans for reinforce- 
ment. The concrete is 18 ins. thick at the crown. ^The piers are 
3 ft. thick at the top and 10 ft. high, resting on piles. The bridge 
contains 725 cu. yds. of concrete, or 10 cu. yds. per lin. ft. 

Materials In Concrete Railway "Trestle." — ^A double track con- 
crete trestle was built in 1906 across Cave Hollow Creek for the 
C, B. & Q. Ry. The total length is 80 ft. between abutments. It 
consists of five spans of 14 ft. each resting on piers 2 ft. wide on 
top, 30 ft. long and 16 ft. high. The footing of each pier is 5 ft 
wide and rests on 26 piles 16 ft. long. The abutments are 12 ft. 
high. The superstructure is composed of reinforced concrete slabs 
16 ft. long, 28 ft wide and 2 ft. 4 ins. thick, with a parapet 1 ft. 
high on each side. There are 34,000 lbs. of Johnson corrugated 
bars and 520 cu. yds. of concrete in this trestle, or 6.5 cu. yds. per 
Im. ft. A 1 : 2 : 4 concrete was used in the superstructure and a 
1 : 3 : 6 in the piers and abutments. 

Cost of Concrete Railway "Trestle." — ^A single track concrete 
trestle was built in 1905 for the Illinois Central Ry. at New Athens, 
111. Its length is 82 ft. between abutments and its width is 15 ft. 
over all or 12 ft. between prrapet walls. It consists of 5 arch re- 
inforced spans of 14 ft. each resting on solid piers 3 ft. thick and 
19 ft. high. The arches are eliptical, having a rise of 4 ft. and a, 
crown thickness of 16 ins. The footing of the piers is spread at the 
base to 8x 19 ft., giving a load on the earth of 1% tons per sq. ft. 
The extrados of the arches is very flat and is at subgrade at the 
crown, so that the parapet wall, which is 18 ins. thick, has a height 
of only 18 ins. above the crown. A 1:2:5 concrete was used. 
The cost was about $7,500, which is equivalent to $91 per lin. ft., 
including a large amount of excavation for piers and abutments. 

Cost of 38-ft. Arch for Railway. — A three-track reinforced con- 
crete bridge was built in 1905 across Trim Creek, near Chicago, 
for the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Ry. The bridge is a reinforced 
concrete arch span of 38 ft. having a rise of 7 ft. and a width of 
48 ft. The abutments are 15 ft. high to the spring. The arch is 
26 ins. thick at the crown. The bridge contains 1,578 cu. yds. of 
concrete and 36,000 lbs. of Johnson corrugated bars. A similar 
bridge built for the same road cost $7.60 per cu. yd., including the 



1656 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

reinforcing bars, at which rate this bridge would cost about $12,000 
or $315 per lin, ft., or $6.55 per sq. ft. There is 0.86 cu. yd. per 
sq. ft. 

Cost of 64-ft. Arches for Railway. — ^A double track stone and con- 
crete bridge was built in 1903 across Rock River, at Water town, 
Wis., for the C, M. & St. P. Ry., replacing a single track iron 
bridge built 19 years previously. It is z80 ft. long between abut- 
ments and 30 ft. wide over all. It consists of 4 stone arch spans 
of 64 ft each, with a rise of 16% ft. and a crown thickness of 3 
ft. The piers are 8 ft. wide at the spring line and 15 ft. high to the 
spring line, and rest on piles. The parapet walls are each 360 ft. 
long. The bridge contains 4,000 cu. yds. of stone and concrete 
masonry, and its cost was $40,700, including removal of the old 
bridge, building a temporary bridge, filling and new track. This 
is equivalent to $145 per lin. ft., or $4.80 per sq. ft., or $10.20 per 
cu. yd. There is 0.48 cu. yd. per sq. ft. 

Cost of 68-ft. and 82-ft. Arches for Railway. — A double track re- 
inforced concrete railway bridge was built in 1906 across the 
Sangamon River, near Decatur, 111., for the Wabash Ry. Its length 
is 386 ft. between abutments and its width is 25 ft. between para- 
pet walls. The bridge consists of 4 skew arches (45° skew), two 
of which have a clear span of 58 ft., measured perpendicular to the 
piers, or a span of 82 ft. measured along the center line of the rail- 
way. The other two arches each have a clear span of 48 ft. meas- 
ured perpendicular to the piers, or 68 ft. along the center line. 
The rise of the arches is 30 ft. and the piers have a height of 35 ft. 
The three piers are in water about 5 ft. deep. At each end of the 
bridge is an abutment with side retaining walls 125 ft. long. This 
bridge was reinforced with corrugated bars. It replaced a steel 
bridge built 21 years previously. The following quantities were 
involved in the construction: 

Earth excavation, cu. yds 8,320 

Piling, lin. ft 36,775 

Foundation slabs for piers, concrete, cu. yds 1,300 

Piers proper, with skewbacks, concrete, cu. yds 2,270 

Arch rings, concrete, cu. yds 2,370 

Spandrel walls of arches, concrete, cu. yds 2,180 

Foundations for abutments, concrete, cu. yds 1,580 

Abutments above foundations, including slabs and 
intermediate walls, together with spandrel walls, 

concrete, cu. yds 5,930 

Retaining walls, concrete, cu. yds 540 

Reinforcing bars, lbs 430,000 

The cost was $124,000, which is equivalent to $321 per lin. ft., or 
$12.80 per sq. ft. of roadway. The total amount of concrete is 16,170 
cu. yds., so that the cost of the bridge was equivalent to $7.65 per 
cu. yd. There are 1.68 cu. yds. per sq. ft. 

Materials in 74-ft. Arch for Railway. — A four-track concrete 
bridge, 160 ft. long, was built in 1904 across the Ashtabula River, 
Ohio, for the Lake Shore Ry. It comprised two 74-ft. concrete 
arches having a rise of 37 ft., resting on piers and abutments only 
6 ft. high. The arches were 7 ft. thick at the crown and 21 ft. at 
tlie spring, and were not reinforced. An earth fill 30 ft. deep over 



BRIDGES. 1657 

the crown was placed upon the arches, making it necessaiy to 
have the barrels of the arches 145 ft. long. There were 17,500 
cu. yds. of concrete and 50,000 cu. yds. of earth fill. This bridge 
is a good example of poor design, for, at $8 per cu. yd. for con- 
crete and 15 cts. per cu. yd. for fill, its cost would be $147,500, or 
more than $900 per lin. ft., or about $18 per sq. ft. of roadway. 
A narrow bridge with spandrel piers supporting the roadway could 
have been built at far less cost. It will be noted that there were 
about 2.2 cu. yds. of cnncrete in this bridge per sq. ft. of roadway. 

Materials in 75-ft. Arch for Raiiway. — A reinforced concrete rail- 
way bridge was built in 1903 over Big Rock Creek, 51 miles west of 
Chicago, on the line of the C, B. & Q., replacing a steel bridge built 
22 years previously. The span is 75 ft. The bench walls are 12 ft. 
high, and the rise of the arch is 28 ft. It is a three center arch 
3 ft. thick at the crown and the barrel length is 44 ft. There is no 
appreciable fill over the crown. The arch is designed for a loading 
of 1,000 lbs. per sq. ft. The wing walls are each 55 ft. long, and 
10% ft. thick at the bottom. The abutments of the arch are 25 ft. 
wide at the base. Abutments and wing walls rest on piles. Cor- 
rugated steel bars are used for reinforcement. There are 6,588 ft. 
of %-in. bars and 24,046 ft. of %-in. bars in the bridge. The arch 
ring is 1 : 2 : 4 concrete and contains 770 cu. yds. The rest of the 
concrete is 1:3:6. The total concrete in the structure is 3,350 
cu. yds., or nearly 45 cu. yds. per lin. ft., or 1 cu. yd. per sq. ft. 

IVIaterials in 80-ft. and 100-ft. Arches for Railway. — A double track 
concrete bridge was built in 1906 across the Vermillion River, for 
the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. It consists of 
two 80-ft. arches and one 100-ft. arch between them. The piers 
of the 100-ft. arch are 30 ft. high to the spring line, and the arch 
has a rise of 40 ft. These main arches support a series of small 
spandrel arches having spans of 8 ft., resting on piers 2 ft. thick. 
The crown thickness of the 100-ft. arch is 4 ft. The base of rail is 
20 ft. above the crown and 90 ft. above the foundations of the 
center piers. The bridge has a total length of 290 ft. between 
abutments, a width of 29 ft. between parapets, and contains 12,000 
cu. yds. concrete, or nearly 41 cu. yds. per lin. ft., or 1.41 cu. yds. 
per sq. ft. The bridge is designed as a plain concrete bridge, 
although steel reinforcement is used as a precautionary measure. 
There were 260,000 lbs. of Johnson corrugated bars used. The 
bridge required 500,000 ft. B. M. for centers and forms, which is 
equivalent to 42 ft. B. M. per cu. yd. 

IVIaterials in 100-ft. Arches for Railway. — A single track concrete 
bridge was built in 1906 across the Cumberland River for the Ken- 
tucky & Tennessee Ry. It is 500 ft. long between abutments, con- 
sisting of 5 spans of 100 ft. c. to c. of piers, and the width is 16 ft. 
between parapet walls. The bridge is on a 30° skew. The arches 
have a rise of 18 ft. and a crown thickness of 3 ft. 7 ins. The 
piers are 40 ft. high. There are 6,470 cu. yds. of concrete and 
240,000 lbs. of twisted steel reinforcement in this bridge. This is 
equivalent to nearly 13 cu. yds. per lin. ft. of bridge, or about 0.8 
cu. yd. per sq. ft. of roadway. 



1658 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of 140-ft. Arches for Railway.— A double track concrete 
railway bridge was built in 1902 across the Big Muddy River for 
the Illinois Central Ry., to take the place of a single track steel 
bridge built 13 years previously, which was getting too light for 
the traffic. The bridge is 463 ft. long between abutments and 32 
ft. wide, or 26 ft. between parapet walls. It consists of three elip- 
tical arches (not reinforced), each having a span of 140 ft., a 
rise of 30 ft. and a crown thickness of 7 ft. These main arches 
supported spandrel arches of 13 ft. span reinforced with steel skele- 
tons made principally of rails. The piers are about 22 ft. high 
to the spring line and are built around and over the old single track 
bridge piers. 

The total cost was $125,000, which is equivalent to $270 per lin. 
It., or $10 per sq. ft. of roadway. There were 12,000 cu. yds. of 
concrete, or 26 cu. yds. per lin. ft., or 1 cu. yd. per sq. ft. of road-i 
w^ay ; 5,000 cu. yds. of excavation, which cost 76 cts. per cu. yd. ; 
400,000 ft. B. M. in cofferdams, centers and forms, and 300,000 lbs. 
steel reinforcement. The labor cost of handling, punching and 
erecting the steel was 0.61 ct. per lb. 

Materials In 140-ft. Stone Arch for Railway — A double track stone 
bridge was built in 1899 across the Connecticut River, at Bellows 
Falls, Vt., for the Fitchburg railroad. It consists of two stone arch 
spans of 140 ft. each, having a rise of 20 ft. The width over all 
is 27 ft. The arch sheeting is 4 ft. thick. The bridge is peculiar 
in that it has no masonry abutments or pier, the arches springing 
directly from ledge rock on each bank and from a rock island in 
the center of the stream. This natural pier in the middle of the 
river is 32 ft. thick along the spring line, thus giving a total length 
of bridge of 312 ft. between the natural abutments. There were 
232,000 ft. B. M. required for the centers, or 55 ft. B. M. per cu. 
yd. of masonry in the bridge. The masonry was as follows: 

Cu. Yds. 

Ring stones and skewbacks 1,262 

Coping 286 

Rubble 2,467 

Concrete in foundations 180 

Total 4,195 

This is equivalent to 13% cu. yds. per lin. ft. 

Price of a Concrete Arch Highway Bridge. — Mr. William B. Bar- 
ber gives the following data : This highway bridge crosses San 
Leandro Creek, Cal. It has a macadam roadway 41 ft. wide, and 
two 8-ft. cement walks. The span is 81% ft., the rise is 26 ft., and 
the thickness is 3 ft. The footings have at the crown a width of 
30 ft. on each side and extend 5 ft. below the bed of the creek, 
resting upon a bed of clay without any pile supports. There were 
90,000 ft. B. M. of lumber in the centers. The concrete was a 
1 :2 :7 of broken stone. The bridge contains 8,389 cu. yds. and was 
built at a contract price of $25,840 by the E. B. & A. L. Stone Co., 
of Oakland, Cal. 



BRIDGES. 1659 

Materials In a Concrete Highway Bridge. — ^A concrete arch high- 
way bridge was built across the River Eyach, near Inman, Ger- 
many, in 1896. It is a three-hinge arch, the hinges being of gran- 
ite with intermediate sheets of 3/16 in. lead. The span is 98 ft. ; 
the rise is 9.8 ft.; the thickness at the crown is 1.48 ft.; at the 
haunches, 2.62 ft. ; at the spring joint, 1.64 ft. The carriageway is 
only 8.2 ft. wide, and the two sidewalks are each 2.46 ft. ; total, 
13.12 ft. The arch spreads in width to 11.48 ft. at the spring lines. 
The roadway rests on the arch at the center, and is supported by 
four spandrel arches resting on three piers at each end. Each 
abutment rests on 41 batter piles, 13 ft. long. The bridge was 
designed to carry 74 lbs. per sq. ft. and a 16% ton steam roller, 
with compressure stress not exceeding 480 lbs. per sq. in., and ten- 
sile stress not exceeding 57 lbs. Thei'e are 408 cu. yds. of concrete 
in the bridge, including foundations, built for $3.20 per cu. yd. for 
foundation and $8.24 for arch. Contract price was $2,930, includ- 
ing excavation and piles. 

Dimensions and Cost of Forty-five Concrete Arch Bridges. — In 

Engineering-Contracting, Mar. 17, 1909, the following table of costs, 
by Mr. B. P. Goodrich, is printed. 

Table XX gives some of the dimensions and costs of a number 
of arches. In the case of single arch spans, the cost per square 
foot is computed from face to face of abutments and out to out 
of railings. 

Cost of Concrete Bridges. — In a table covering eighteen concrete 
arch bridges recently built in Philadelphia the contract price spread 
upon the span area — the clear span by the width — varies from $3.11 
to $9.74 per sq. ft. and it varies from $1.73 to $7.39 per sq. ft. of 
area occupied by the ground plan to ends of wings, the latter ex- 
tremes being not on the same bridges as the other two. The aver- 
age of the lot was $6.25 per sq. ft. of span area and $3.50 per sq. 
ft. over all, most of them being single span bridges with long wings, 
and all being highway bridges designed to carry loads of 40 tons 
on two axles 20 ft. apart. All have ornamental concrete balus- 
trades and washed granolithic surfaces and paved decks, with elec- 
trical conduits and manholes, and water pipe and sewer well-holes 
and some have pretty deep foundations. If the whole contract 
price be set against the yardage of the concrete in the structure 
the unit costs vary from $8.50 to $11.25 per cu. yd., averaging 
$9.75. Mr. Henry B. Quimby, Engineer of Bridges, Philadelphia, 
Pa., is authority for these figures. 

Concrete Arch Bridge, S. P., L. A. & S. L. R, R.— Mr, A. C. 

Ostrom gives the following facts about an eight-arch bridge cross- 
ing the Santa Ana River on the San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt 
Lake R. R. The bridge is 984 ft. long, 17 ft. wide, 55 ft. high 
(averaged), and contains 14,000 cu. yds. of concrete without any 
steel reinforcement. Each arch has a radius of 43y2 ft., a rise of 
37 ft., and a thickness of 42 ins. at the crown. The arch ring 
projects 6 ins. beyond the face of the spandrel walls. The piers 
have a footing 16 X 28 ft. resting on granite, and narrow by steps 



1660 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 






CO CO Tt^ ^ US »0 lO 
O) O) OS OA O) O Od 
00 00 00 OC 00 00 00 



CO 00 

oso> 

00 00 



o o o o o -H 1-1 e< N t-i I CO I '<4i ko 

o o o ooooooo<-<o I o o 

0> Oi 0> 03 Oft Oa Oa O) Q» 03 O 0& Ob 0> 0> 

T-H 1-* tH »-H tH *-4 T-t t-< »-H tH OS tH tH 1-H »H 



o <u • 



O O ^ OOOOXSOOOOOO (M 

t^ 1-t C^ rH Tt* O »-H -^ C<I CD 50 00 CC 1-t 

M 

CO 00 U^ lOOaCO00rHUdLOt«i-4^CQ i-H 



o o 
HO 



IMOOOOUSO 
c0OlMOC0t~.O 
CO t^ -^ O T-t -^ U5 

ooco'THiNiNr^o 

.-KM i-> 



o o>o o 

O «500 t^ 



CO oooocooooooo 
00 t^ooot^oooooo 

CO 1-t WSOIOlOCDOOOiOOO 



to »H 



cocooc^oob* 






^bb 



&bl3 



o 
o 

a 
< 

w 
2; 

o 

(A 

» 



X 
X 



J3 



Ocbcoob>o&>CQ^l5fe ^ 



a 

CO 



■^OTOOOOOOOCOOmcOOCOOOOO O 000000'4<000000 

ibws^cci ooo^ot*^oocQOo»CTtHoo o Tt*OTj<ou5w5b>o^iboc^o 

e-J iO CO >-( t- O •* Ol .-I 0> tC 05 O rt "5 >0 1» CQ o t» « oo CO OC N tK o ■* us OO CO OO "3 
rt T-l .-(.-I rH rH.-< rtrt 1-1 rli-l (M tH 

e<i(M»o 



o c.y 



T-( 00 

r^ oa 

CO .-I 



Is 

o 



C0X1U5O i-l 
00-»<C^(M •>* 

isiTji^^r^ CO 



> 

o 



M 



o 

■3 
PL, 2: 



rQ_Q V-, W h W 

cs cii 3 o.y ts 



nl 



3 u 
QW 



ni 
t8 



^ 


M 


<u 


m 


(U 


rt 





3 


^_, 


crt 








Ji) 



I sill 

O PLiO>P< 



> > 

f^ :>.o,S 

\u _;t1 N +a,— I 
■qJh w cS O tS 

ojr c <u te 
J>^ ca m R 



(1< 



s 3 : 









__r.._r (-1 . M hn 



3n !^9fc^:? 



T n '-' - 



fi^islgpi^wcopq 



> ^ 



O p 

d.fi 



•a 



O 
-d 



O 



o 



;3 N 

O cS 

a ■ 






■a ca 
a 3 



Q .S 
0) :S 



CO 

'3 
. o 

I'd . ra 



3 g -a' =5 






3^^' 



lU H Co yj ctj' 
g oi <a g rt' 



II- 

" s 



MdicoS 



BRIDGES. 



1661 



w 



oooo 

03 0> A o> 



O Co" 



eOCO-^U3<MC<li-ICOIMIM^H th CO C^ C<l t^ IM O -^ 



O O 

HO 



•-IOOOU30000U30 O 

rao-oossooooaoTK o 



o oooooo 

o oooooo 

CO O0OU3OO 

o NMCflto'io^" 

CO t^O^-HI>»CO 



f^' 



b 






IslsSs 






bb^^bbbb^lsb Is 



oi ocnoooorH 



CO 






C<IOO■^J«5«l3rt^^i3So5^3o^^iHo5o»'500 
5OU500.S t>. t- 1>. !0 CO Tj< eO CO i-H t^ O 00 T-( 00 (M 

O cSNOCO COIM U3 c4 






bb?-o 

5*1 00 coo 

t^OOTdO 



oo 

0"5 
00 (M 



^ b 



MOO 

0"5 



> 

o 



■ ca 

:^ 

u rt g 
C (U eS 






CL< 



^ 



•2 3 



:ai 



+3 sh c (u cs c5 

S ™ (4 O i-titi 



4-» ^ 

1_^ Cd W3 (U Ih 

' mr; cS-S O 

o «J .^ rt 






I d-d 

■O In (3 

d rt (u 

<o o ca El i3 S 



i Q 



1662 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to 9 X 21. They are penetrated vertically by two wells 2% X 5 ft, 
thus saving concrete and providing drainage by weep holes below 
and horizontal tunnels at the top of the arch haunch. There are 
two sets of spandrel walls connected by cross walls, covered by a 
10-in. concrete floor which sustains the 3% ft. of ballast. Cement 
and gravel in the ratio 1 to H were used for the foundations and 
spandrel walls. The arch rings were made of 1:2:4% stone con- 
crete. The gravel was washed by means of a sluice passing 
through a box where the coarse gravel and clean sand settled. 
Three Ransome mixers were operated by a 25-hp. engine. The arch 
centers were supported on four bents of four piles per bent driven 
to bed rock. These were capped by 12 X 12-in. caps. The thrust 
from the segments was conveyed by radial 8 X 8-in. struts to hor- 
izontal chords which were upheld by wediges placed on 12 X 12-in. 
stringers that rested upon the caps. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Arch Hiflhway Bridge. — ^Mr, P. A. 
Courtright gives the following on the cost of mixing and placing 
concrete in a concrete bridge having 7 arches, each of 54 ft. span 
and 8 ft. rise, at Plainwell, Mich., in 1903, as follows: 

Total Total 

per day. per cu. yd. 

13 men, at $1.80 $23.40 $0.78 

Engine and mixer 5.00 0.17 

1 team 3.00 0.10 

1 foreman 3.00 0.10 

Total labor for 30 cu. yds $34.40 $1.15 

0.9 cu. yd. gravel, at $0.50 $0.45 

0.65 bbl. cement, at $2.00 1.30 

Total, per cu. yd $2.90 

The concrete yardage was as follows: 

5.70 cu. yds. of 1 :8 gravel concrete in foundations. 

770 cu. yds. of 1 :6 gravel concrete in arches. 

150 cu. yds. of 1 :6 gravel concrete in walls. 

One sack of cement was considered to be 1 cu. ft. The bridge 
had an 18-ft. roadway and a 5-ft. side wall, a total length of 44G 
ft., and the estimate of its cost at contract prices was: 

1,490 cu. yds. concrete, at $7.00 $10,430 

1,200 cu. yds. earth fill, at $0.30 360 

36,000 lbs. of steel, at $0.05 1,800 

2,800 ft of piles in foundations, at $0.20 560 

2,230 sq. ft of cement walk, at $0.10 223 

Total $13,373 

Excavating, pumping, coffer dams, and centers, $791 

per arch 5,537 

Grand total $18,910 



BRIDGES. 1563 

The method of making the concrete was as follows: The gravel, 
which had 32% voids, and contained sufficient sand, was shoveled 
into a 1 cu. yd. wagon at the pit, and hauled to a platform at the 
intake of a McKelvey continuous mixer. Half the cement required 
for a batch was spread over the load of gravel before dumping the 
load through the bottom of the wagon ; then the rest of the cement 
was added after dumping. One man shoveled the material over to 
another man who shoveled it into the mixer. After the material 
had passed one-third the length of the mixer, water was turned in. 
The mixer delivered the concrete into wheelbarrows from which it 
wag dumped to place and spread in 3-in. layers. Two men were 
employed tamping to 1 man shoveling the concrete. The gravel for 
the arches and walls was screened through a 2-in. mesh screen 
placed on the wagon while loading at the pit. Regarding the 
product of the mixer, Mr. Courtright says: "A more complete 
blending of materials would be difficult to produce." This state- 
ment is noteworthy in view of the common prejudice against con- 
tinuous mixers. 

Centers. — The heels were supported on the benches constructed 
upon each pier and abutment foundation. Each center was sup- 
ported to the panel joints by twelve temporary piles. These were 
driven in advance of the foundation work, sawed off, capped with 
timbers, and used as a working platform. 

The centers themselves were made of Georgia pine plank. ~ Each 
rib section was built up with three planks, two 2 X 12 inch for out- 
side, and one 10 X 2-inch between. These were securely nailed and 
bolted together, the panels being joined by bolting on two pieces 
of 2 X 4-inch oak. 

The top chord was made of one plank, cut in sections, and 
rounded to fit the intrados of the arch. The panel joints were sup- 
ported by 8 X 12-inch timbers, carried on posts resting on 8 X 12- 
inch timber caps on piles. 

Wedges for lowering the centers were used at all bearing points. 

Centers were covered with 2 X 12 -inch planed pine lagging and 
made a very rigid and smooth surface for concrete. The minimum 
of time allowed for the removal of centers after the completion of 
an arch was 28 days. 

The appearance of the arch rings, showing the same divided as 
by joints between stones, was produced by nailing half round strips 
on the form, and gives a good structural effect to the work. The 
entire structure was built in the forms with the single exception of 
the fourteen keystones, which, owing to their peculiar design, were 
cast separate, and set in the form. 

Piling. — Each abutment foundation has 31 piles, the piers hav- 
ing 23 each. Piles were oak, elm, beech and hickory, not less than 
12 ins., nor more than 16 ins. at the head. They cost, delivered 
on the ground and sharpened ready for driving, 15 cents per lineal 
foot. The average number driven per day was 8%. 



1664 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The character of the soil rendered driving very difficult ; a pene- 
tration of 2 or 3 ins. when starting a pile was the exception rather 
than the rule. 

Cost of driving — 

Engine and driver, per day $ 5.00 

Engineer 2.50 

Fireman 1.80 

Four driver men, at $1.80 7.20 

Total $16.50 

Conditions for construction were very favorable. The water va- 
ried in depth from 3 to 5 ft., with a current of from two to three 
miles per hour. Under the silt and sand which formed the river 
bed, gravel was found to depth of about 3 ft. ; below this, quick- 
sand, filled with stones of varying sizes, was encountered. 

For foundations, piles were driven to an approximate depth of 
10 ft. below the bed of the stream. Cofferdams were built, the 
water pumped out, and the excavation carried down until 1 ft. of 
gravel was left above the quicksand. The piles were sawed ofC 1% 
ft. above the bottom of the excavation, and the concrete carried up 
to the spring line of the arches. 

Cost of Three Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridges, L. S. & M. S. 
Ry. — Mr. Samuel Rockwell gives the following as to the size and 
cost of three reinforced concrete railway arch bridges. The bridge 
arches had a span of 30 ft., a rise of 9 ft., a crown thickness of 33 
ins., a thickness at the spring of 6% ft., and a barrel length of 40, 
60 and 160 ft, respectively. The abutments were 8 ft. high and 
14 ft. wide at the base. Johnson corrugated steel bars were used, 
for reinforcement. The concrete was 1 sand, 3 gravel and sand 
(50% each) and 6 broken stone laid wet. In all there were 4,833 
cu. yds., including wing walls and parapets. The work was done 
by company forces at Elkhart, Ind., in 1903. It will be noted that 
the sand and stone were unusually low in cost. 

Total Cost per 
cost. cu. yd. 

Cement $ 8,860 $1.84 

Stone 1,789 0.36 

Sand and gravel (obtained from founda- 
tions) 240 0.05 

Drain tile 103 0.02 

Steel rods .- 3,028 0.63 

Labor on concrete 8,091 1.68 

Engineering and watching 508 0.11 

Arch centers and forms 3,529 0.73 

Sheet piling and boxing 1,006 0.21 

Excavating and pumping 1,620 0.33 

Machinery, pipe, fittings, etc 416 0.08 

Temporary buildings, trestles, etc 752 0.15 

Total for 4,833 cu. yds $29,942 $6.19 

Cost of Small Reinforced Concrete Highway Bridges.* — Reinforced 
concrete highway bridge construction is being widely advocated by 



* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 2, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 



1665 



the Illinois Highway Commissioner, Mr. A. N. Johnson, State Kngl- 
neer. To encourage the building of such bridges, he has worked 
out two general standard designs. He recommends reinforced con- 
crete for all spans under 50 ft. in length. It has found that for 




*-3-0-^, 



Fig. 16. 



-a —0 "jo'-f 






~|i^" — r i~n~rT^— r 



p H"! f~f 

§ iJ_Jl_L_J_J._i_J-_i_J.^ J._l_L4_i_J._LJ._L 

, U_X_l_J._i_J._!_i_) L_t_J_L._J_l_LjL_L 



-¥ II I T ' ' ' ' ' 



■S * " 

y/zharalEcts. 

- %baroS'/icts. a.kc. 



LJ-Ti 



t-i-+-.- 
J ."_4_!_±_i_j._'. 

h-+-{-i-i-}-f-}-f- 

H-f-h-l-f-I-4-Ml-l-hi-!-+-{-^-}-_-f. 



I ' ' . ^ 
~r+-H4-l-r> 






llll 



i I I I . 
I ( I 



I I I I . . . 
L.JL_L_J_J._!_J._I_J. 

A — I- 



I I I 



I I I I 

I r I 
rill 



*jS!*- 



■■^"^ . 



te 



'/z'hara/Z eta. d -i U- '/ibaralicfi d -H^* '^f-s'-o'-M 



Fig. 17. 



li. 



spans under 40 or 50 ft., reinforced concrete can be used at very 
reasonable cost and that for longer spans a reinforced concrete 
floor does not add an excessive amount to the cost of the bridge. 

Spans Under 18 Ft. — For spans under 18 ft. in the clear a plain 
reinforced concrete slab Is used for the floor, the principal rein- 



1666 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



forcement running from abutnxent to abutment. Reinforced con- 
crete side rails are used for this class of bridge and are considered 
preferable to pipe or angle rails because of their strength and dura- 
bility. Figures 16, 17 and 18 show the plans for one of these 
bridges. In constructing these bridges Mr. Johnson says : 

"Where a number of slab bridges under 20 ft. in span are built 
the same season, it may prove cheaper to use I-beams to support 
the slab until the concrete has set than to use mud sills and timber 
posts. If this is done the abutments are carried up as usual to the 
height of the under side of the floor, pockets being left for the "I- 
beams ; these pockets being about 6 ins. wide and deep enough so 
that when opposing wedges are placed under the ends of the I- 
beams the top flanges of the I-beams will be 2 ins. below the 




Fig. 18, 



level of the^ bottom of the slab. Two-in. planking is used to sup- 
port the slab. When the concrete in the slab and rails has hard- 
ened sufficiently the wedges are removed and the floor forms drop 
down ; the planks are drawn out at the sides and likewise the I- 
beams through the pockets in one of the abutments. The pockets 
are then filled with concrete. The I-beams and planks may be 
used repeatedly." 

Spans From 18 to 42 Ft. — For spans ranging in length from 18 
to 42 ft. the concrete rails have been designed as girders to carry 
the load to the abutments. The floor in this case Is a reinforced 
concrete slab, the main reinforcement running from girder to gir- 
der. The floor is suspended to the girders by bending every third 
floor bar up into the girders. This type might well be classed as 
a reinforced concrete through girder bridge. This has proved to 
be a very economical design. The forms are very simple and much 



BRIDGES. 1667 

of the lumber remains uncut. The bending moment in the floor 
slab is independent of the length of the span, and consequently the 
amount of concrete and steel in tne floor slab, for a given width 
of roadway, remains constant per foot of bridge. The rails or 
girders for bridges 18 to 30 ft. in span contain but little more con- 
crete than would ordinarily be necessary for appearance and eco- 
nomical placing in the rail forms. For spans over 30 ft., and par- 
ticularly for wide roadways, the girders become heavier, and it has 
been found necessary to design the girders with a heavy coping, 
giving the girders a T-beam section. A number of girder bridges 
of this character have already been bulit and the plans drawn for 
several which will be built the coming season. 

The dimensions, quantities and costs for a number of the bridges, 
built on these plans are given in Table XXI. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Highway Bridge. — The bridge had 
a clear span of 30 ft. and an 80-ft. roadway.. The arch ring was 
8 ins. thick at the crown and 12 ins. thick at skewbacks, with a 
rise of approximately 6 ft. It rested on 12-in. abutment walls., 
with center posts and 21-in. footing slabs. The spandrel 
walls were 12 ins. thick and reached well beyond the abut- 
ment walls on each side, the free ends having inside counter- 
forts. The height of the abutment walls from skewback to water 
level was 12 ft. These walls were continued beyond the faces of 
the spandrel walls by wing walls, which held the slopes of the deep 
fill from the channel. This fill reached to a height of 4 ft. above 
the crown of the arches. All walls were founded on piles. There 
were 872 cu. yds. of concrete in the structure. The general design 
was made by City Engineer M. P. Blair, St. Boniface, Manitoba, 
where the bridge was built and the reinforcement was designed 
and supplied by Clarence W. Noble, Winnipeg, Manitoba. The re- 
inforcement was high carbon square twisted steel bars. The work: 
was done by day labor by the city engineer and cost as follows: 

Foundations — Total Cost. 

5,336 cu. yds. excavation, at 38.2 cts $2,034.63 

6,060 lin. ft. piling, at 14.7 cts 893.85 

Driving piles at 15% cts. per lin. ft. (by contract) 939.30 

Total $3,867.78 

Concrete Materials— Total. Per-cu. yd. 

1,446 bbls. cement, at $2.45 $3,543 $4,063 

872 cu. yds. aggregate f. o. b. cars at $1 872 1.000 

Lumber for forms, etc. (1/3 of $1,491).. 497 0.570 

Reinforcing bars 1,418 1.626 

Totals ?6.330 $7.25» 



1668 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



% 



U ■«J<e<10COCq;D(MOiH000050C-00«DO 

JJ +J eoiasotDt-tomoojoOi-iT-im'^omio 

'^ **^ rH O O O «0 ci lii CO t^ r-i -<l^ CO CO CO 00 OS iri «D 
ii — • t-COCO'^TH-^U5T)<mTj<fOr1COinCOD5Cqr-< 

o -S =«• 



comoooorHoioeoCTxMmOTjiooioo 

+j' T)lrtiCq<H5D-*lM0005eMi-ICOOU5lO(J500J 

m T-i cq 1-no ■* to C3 CO to rH -^ cq o> c~ th CO ■* i-i 

6 d 



• t-5005000u50iffloo«ocooeot-moo 

Ql W3 CQ^C<IOlrtCOU3lrtOQ*^COOCOT^OCOlrtOO 

<y ^ u5 0oe<ioiH'*OTtioa<M-<*'m«oooaaooTj< 
^ "^ " co"«c co"-* oTco" egco'oOT^OT-rcvTrH 



CQ 



O 4) . 
H (U ^ t- OS t-lH THiniO t- to CO CO to t- CO 



o s 



(Tjiesiosm'Oco'iCiH 



rt" in tOr-l -t- • -OiOOcOCO 

I. <u .00 o.>j<'C-''C<iir5oio 

(U OJ w JO oc- '05 • •oinooirs 

3 m '-' «^ "MtH . . .rH(N 

« 

ai "5j ^ e<i eocoeot- • •T)<oou5t- 

^ "2 ^ t>> "^ . . . • . |o^;i^5,^ni ■ 'cOrHNSO 

H 3q'^'i>.;...;.mij3rHC0.;Trt-pqcq 



■ o 



E^ I O " 



t-< . Cq • • .00 • •0505005CO •0505(M'Tl<0 

OJ OQ ..a< . . .lO • •Tti|>.*00O -iHTfiCOOSOO 

_2 -^ »-* • ■ -^ • •■^■^(M'^m • O TJH T-l cq Tj* 

02 CO ; ; ;«o ; tt-rn i-Tco rcot-'THcJr-!' 



t" >>co * \ 'tr- ' *Tj<o'co'oc<J ■T)<'<a<od«oo 
. leg . .eoi-< t-iim ;iHCO iHiH 






o . 

o 

O I vl 

f^ f^ ^ 0000C0C0C000C0COCDO«0'^C0C0«0C0C0«O 

+3 ri >> iH tH tH 1-1 rH iH iH i-l tH (M IH iH tH T-t iH tH iH iH 

-d o d 



s: tf ^ 



O <H mm in in mm 
■y -M ^j- (M t- 1- oJ CO 00 ■<* e^ ■^ m o> N .* o m 00 to 



m 
C +J tooctimt-^mooNcoiMoOTCOoeoeq 

Oj "H tH iHe^rH'^corH i-( eq CO iH CO iH i-( r-t 

CQ .5 



BRIDGES. 1669 

Labor — 

Labor on forms $ 652 $0.74 

Placing reinforcement 129 0.148 

Hauling aggregates 323 0.371 

Mixing and placing concrete 1,408 1,614 

Finishing concrete work 56 0.064 

Erection of mixer 61 0.070 

Totals $2,629 $3,007 

Supplies — 

Coal $ 24 $0,027 

Oil for forms 31 0.035 

Totals .-.....; $55 $0,062 

Grand totals for concrete work $9,014 $10,335 

The work was carried on under considerable difRculty. The ex- 
cavation was interrupted by frequent rains, and the banks slipped, 
causing the handling of considerable additional material. The 
work of driving piles was also frequently interrupted by rain, and 
as a consequence the extra work of placing concrete did not start 
until late in the fall, and had to be prosecuted by two shifts, work- 
ing day and night, Sunday "ncluded, until it was finished. The 
conditions are reflected in the high unit cost of excavation. The 
cost of placing reinforcing bars is about typical, while the cost of 
placing concrete at $1.61 per yard is abnormal, owing to the fact 
that in this item is charged considerable general labor, which could 
not be otherwise apportioned. 

The specifications originally contemplated the use of crushed 
limestone, but there was submitted to the engineer samples of very 
good gravel at a price of $1 per cu. yd. This gravel was clean, 
and contained enough sand to fill the voids without additional mate- 
rial ; in fact, some of it contained slightly too much sand. The cost 
of sifting out the coarse material and again sifting out the fine 
material, and then mixing the two together in the proper propor- 
tions was found to be 32 cts. per cu. yd. This was used for all arch 
concrete, but for abutments the mix of the gravel as delivered was 
deemed satisfactory, as it did not vary greatly from the proper 
proportions. The footings were made of crusher rock dust and 
limestone, which had been owned by the city for several years. 
This material is considered as costing the same as gravel. 

Cost of Mixing and Placing Concrete tor an Arch Bridge. — A 

natural mixture of sand and gravel was brought in on trucks AA 
by electric railway and discharged through gratings into a storage 
bin, Fig. 19. Five parallel charging car tracks BB ran under this 
storage bin. The charging cars C were 16 cu. ft. capacity, just one 
batch for the mixer. A car was first loaded with gravel under one 
of the hoppers, then moved back under the cement chute to receive 
the cement, and then moved forward onto the truck F which trav- 
eled on the transverse track passing the mixer. The mixer dis- 
charged into a hoist bucket / which automatically discharged its 
load into the hoppers JJ whence the concrete was chuted into 
wheelbarrows, two wheeled carts or dump cars and taken out on 



1670 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 




Emj.'Contr. 



Fig. 19. — Concrete Mixing Plant. 



BRIDGES. 



1671 



trestles to the work. The gang charging and mixing and placing 
the concrete was as follows: 

Duty. No. men. 

Charging cars 3 

Cement 1 

Operating mixer 2 

At hopper in tower 1 

"WTieeling concrete 3 to 5 

Placing and spading concrete 3 

Hoist engineer 1 

Fireman (mixer and pump) 1 

Total 15 to 17 

This gang placed on an average 150 cu. yds. of concrete per day, 
or about 10 cu. yds. per man. With wages averaging $2 per man 
per day this would give a labor cost of 20 cts. per cu. yd. for mix- 
ing and placing, not including superintendence. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridge. — In Engineering- 
Contracting, July 22, 1908, Mr. John Harms gives the following 
data : The bridge has a roadway 30 ft. wide in the clear, and two 
sidewalks 8 ft. wide each. The length of the bridge is 306 ft. 




Cnif-Contr 



I3'e^^ 



Fig. 20. — Concrete Arch Bridge. 



divided as follows: 20 ft. for each abutment, 81 ft. for each outer 
arch, 88 ft. for center arch and 8 ft. for each pier. The reinforce- 
ment used in the arches is 1 in. twisted steel, 2 ft. c. to c. in two 
rows, 1% ins. from extrados and intrados and tied to % in. square 
transverse rods every 5 ft. The reinforcement of the overhanging 
sidewalks is of expanded metal No. 4 gage 6 in. mesh, which is 
turned down at the outer edge for about 4 ins. and fastened to a 
% in. square rod, and on the inner edge is hooked to a 1 in. twisted 
rod which is anchored with % in. twisted rods to the bottom rein- 
forcing rods of the arch, as shown by Figs. 20 and 21. 

The thickness of concrete of the arches is 40 ins. for the outer 
arches at haunches, 30 ins. at a distance of 16.5 ft. from haunches 
and 21 ins. at the crown. For center of the arch the thickness is 
42 ins. at haunches, 30 ins. at distances of 16.5 ft. from haunches 
and 22 ins. at the crown. 

The piers are of monolithic construction. The upstream and 
downstream ends form a sharp point, reinforced with blocks of 
brown stone, cut to the proper angle to break the ice. Piers and 



1672 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



abutments were built up to an elevation of 9.5 ft. above low water 
mark. Since the bed of the river is soft mud, each of the piers was 
built on a foundation of 60 piles driven 3 ft. c. to c. and cut off at 
an elevation of 2 ft. below M. L. W. 

On account of the kind of soil it was necessary to drive piles 
for the falsework, and this was begun at the same time as the jet- 
ting for the sheetpiling of the abutment. The piles for falsework 
consisted of nine rows of five piles each for outer arches, and ten 
rows for center arch. After piles for first arch were driven, pile 
driving for pier No. 1 was started. This being finished, jetting 
of sheetpiling for the pier was started. Up to this time the 




Otf-Ccnir 



21. — Cross-Section of Bridge. 



water in the river was as low as 2 ft., making it impossible to float 
any craft, and so cribwork had been used for handling the pile 
driver. Heavy rainfalls raised the water to 10 ft. and caused at 
times such strong currents that the work had to be stopped. This 
brought the cost of labor much higher than it would have been 
under ordinary circumstances. The cost of jetting the sheetpiling 
on the pier is given further on. After the sheetpiling was all driven 
and properly shored for heavy water pressure a centrifugal pump 
was installed, driven by the pile driver engine, and the enclosure 
was kept dry until concrete was in place. Excavation was ex- 
tended to 3 ft. below low water mark and the piles cut off 2 ft. 
below the same level, so as to enclose them in about 12 ins. of 
concrete. The whole space was then filled in with concrete up to 
M. L. W., and on this foundation the forms for the pier were built. 
At this time excavation for abutment No. 1 was finished and a 
Koppel industrial railway had been laid. This railway was laid 



BRIDGES. 



1673 



on a temporary trestle across the river and was provided with 
switches to reach abutments and piers. 

Sheetpiling of the abutments served as forms up to about 4 ft. 
below the spring line. Above this point, forms of 2 in. spruce were 
built. The designing of an 18-in. crown molding on all piers and 
abutments at the height of the spring line of arches made the 
forms rather expensive. The concrete in the abutment was fin- 
ished in broken layers on the arch side to give a good bond between 
arch and abutment. While the concreting on abutments and piers 
was being done, the building of falsework for the first arch had 
proceeded. 

The construction of this falsework was as follows : Piles were 
cut ofE at a height of 3 ft. below the bottom line of the concrete 




Fig. 22. — Falsework and Forms. 



arch. On these piles were placed, transverse to the arch, two 
6 X 12 -in. caps, spiked to piles well spliced together at joint in 
center, and overhanging about 6 ft. at outside. An upper cap was 
made of two 6 x 12-in. timbers. Between the two caps oak wedges 
were placed about every 5 ft. On top of the upper caps were 
placed 3 x 12-in. floor beams 2 ft. 8 in. c. to c, cut on top to proper 
line of arch. A 2-in. spruce floor was nailed to these floor beams 
(see Fig. 22). 

It may be well to remark here that the centers were laid out 
full size on a large platform, and patterns were made of 1-in. pine 
boards for all floor beams and side forms of arches. The cutting 
of all the floor beams was done by a 12-in. circular saw, which was 
run by a belt connected to the hoisting engine which pulled the 
cars up the Incline to the mixing platform. 

The different radii of the arches made the curves of the floor 
beams vary to such an extent that the amount of framing of center 
done per day varied a great deal. The side forms of arches were 
made of 2-in. spruce and built in sections of 7 ft. In this way the 



1674 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



placing of forms was done quickly and cheaply. The specifications 
stated that the concreting of the arches should be done in ribs 
of such a width that one complete rib of the arch could be finished 
in a day. Three more forms similar to the outside forms were 
made and so placed as to divide the arch into five equal ribs. 

Since it is important to have reinforcement at the proper dis- 
tance from intrados and extrados, little cement blocks of 1%-in. 
thickness were made to hold the bars at the proper distance from 
the bottom. The advantage of using concrete blocks instead of 
wooden blocks, as is usually done, is easily understood. The 
blocks, being of concrete, stay in place, require no pointing up 
afterwards, and the cost of making them is about % ct. each. 

After placing upper longitudinal bars, sticks were used to 
hold these in place, but the writer proposes on future jobs to make 
concrete blocks as shown in Fig. 23. The cost of such a block the 
writer believes would be small, while its efficiency would be such 
as to make it economical. 




As shown in plan, Fig. 21, the reinforcement of spandrel walls 
and overhung sidewalk was anchored to the lower rods or arch, 
and the 1-in. rod was suspended at the proper height on wooden 
brackets nailed to the outside of the arch forms. From this bar, 
%-in. twisted rods were run to the lower rods, every 18 ins., being 
hooked on both rods by turning the ends. 

Pile driving and sheetpiling had been going on, and when high 
water caused this work to be stopped, concreting of abutment 
No. 2 was done. 

The industrial railway proved of great value during all this 
time for handling materials in an economical way. 

It may be well to mention the method used for handling the ma- 
terials. The storte and sand had to be stored on building lots 
about 250 ft. away from the proposed bridge. A platform 14x16 
ft. was built about 60 ft. from this place at an elevation of 16 ft. 
Under this platform was placed a Smith mixer, blocked up on 
timbers, high enough to allow of dumping into the Koppel side 



BRIDGES. 



1675 



dumping cars. A timber trestle was built extending from stone 
and sand pile to the top of the platform and an industrial railway- 
laid on this. Cars were pulled up the incline by a hoisting engine 
stationed back of the mixer. See Fig. 24. A switch was placed at 
the bottom of the incline, making it possible to work two cars. 
Those cars were marked to give the proper quantities of sand and 
stone for a % batch proportioned 1 : 3 : 6. Atlas cement was 
used and as it was taken from the storage house it was put on 
the cars in bags enough for every batch, and opened and emptied at 
the platform. Each car furnished also all the materials required, 
and in this way an output was obtained of 35 to 40 batches per 
hour. Starting from the mixer was the other industrial railway 
previously mentioned. The elevation of track at the mixer was 
14 ft. 3 ins. above M. L. W. The tracks had a down grade of 
about 4 ft. to a length of 150 ft. 




Fig. 24. 



This brought the rails at the proper height for dumping con- 
crete into piers and abutments, and at the same time, gave the 
cars enough momentum to require but little pushing. 

After finishing the piers and abutments to the spring line, the 
track was removed and laid to the arches. Heavy timber was 
placed across the arch forms on which were laid longitudinal timber 
to carry tracks. At the crown of the first arch the track was ele- 
vated and cars were pulled up this grade by the hoisting engine, 
from which point they proceeded by their own momentum. On the 
crowns of the first and center arches, switches were put in, and by 
this arrangement three cars were handled so rapidly that at no 
time did the mixer have to stop on account of there not being cars 
available. 

The plant proved sufficient to do the work in remarkably short 
time. The time from beginning concreting of first arch until the 
third was finished, including the erection of all falsework and 



1676 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

forms for the last two arches, was only 29 days. All the concrete 
was placed in 15 days, working not longer than 7 hours a day. 
If four ribs instead of five had been made in each arch, the results 
would have been even better, but this would have meant taking a 
great risk, on account of doubtful weather at this season of the 
year and also in case of any breakdown of machinery. 

The building of falsework for the spandrel wall and overhanging 
sidewalk proved difficult and was by far the most expensive of all 
form work. 

This falsework was constructed by resting one side on posts 
placed on the caps of the falsework of the arches, while -the other 
side was held up by posts placed at a slight angle and rammed in 
the mud of the river bottom. These posts and the caps on them 
were 8 x 10-in. timbers. On these caps 3 x 12-in. floor beams were 
placed 3 ft. c. to c, being covered with 2-in. spruce flooring, cut 
into 4-in. strips, the edges being tapered to make tight joints. The 
whole falsework was well braced. At all corners of forms, molding 
was nailed to the forms to round off the corners of the concrete. 
Panel effects in the concrete were also made by nailing battens to 
the forms. These pieces were generally planed. 

Each arch had expansion joints of % in. at both ends and also 
at a distance of 24 ft. 3 ins. from both ends. Bach expansion 
joint was made up of %-in. corrugated paper covered on both sides 
with 3-ply tar paper. 

Balusters. — The balusters for the railway were all made on the 
job, there being 350 required, and for this purpose eight forms 
were made. These were made in four parts each and were held 
together with bolts so that removing the form was easily done. 

The base of these balusters was 8x8 ins., the height being 2 ft. 
As previously stated, eight forms were made for this work. The 
forms were made on the job. The entire labor cost of making the 
balusters was : 

Carving white wood blocks, 1 man, 12 days, at $3..? 36.00 

Making 8 forms, 1 man, 12 days, at $2.75 33.00 

Making and finishing balusters, 1 man, 35 days, at 

$2.75 96.25 

Total . , $165.25 

A man made 10 balusters per day. The cost for forms was 19.7 
'Cts. per baluster, and for making and finishing, each 27.5 cts., 
giving a total cost for labor of 47.2 cts. 

Sheet Piles. — In jetting down the sheet piles, which were 2x8 
ins. X 20 ft. long on an average, 100 pieces were put' in place per 
■day, or 1 piece every 6 minutes. This does not include moving 
machine from one pier to another, but does include moves while 
working on a single pier. The labor cost was : 

1 Foreman $ 5.00 

1 Engineman 3.50 

2 Hosemen, at $3.50 7.00 

2 Men preparing piles, at $2.50 5.00 

7 Helpers, at $1.75 12.25 

Total $32.75 



BRIDGES. 1677 

There being 2,000 lin. ft. of piling or 2,666 ft. B. M. gives a unit 
cost of 1 6/10 cts. per lin. ft. and $12.25 per M. ft. B. M. for the 
labor. 

Forms. — The labor costs for forms for the spandrel wall and 
ov^hanging sidewalk on the two sides of an arch were: 

Foreman carpenter, at $5 $ 20.00 

Building falsework : 

2 Carpenters, at $3.50 28.00 

3 Men, at $2 24.00 

Building forms : 

2 Carpenters, at $3.50 28.00 

6 Carpenters, at $3 . . 75.00 

2 Carpenters, at $2.75 22.00 

3 Helpers, at $2 26.00 

Total $223.00 

There was about 12,000 ft. B. M. of lumber used in these forms, 
thus giving a cost of framing and erecting per M ft. B. M. of 
$18.60. With 180 cu. yds. ^of concrete put in these forms the cost 
per cu. yd. was $1.24 for the labor on the forms. 

The cost of erecting the forms lor the arch, exclusive of the 
piling, was : 

Foreman carpenter, 6 days, at $5 $ 30.00 

Falsework, 8,300 ft. B. M., erecting 
crew: 

2 Men, at $3.50 $ 7.00 

2 Men, at $2.50 5.00 

2 Men, at $2.00 4.00 

2 Men, at $1.75 3.50 

Total, 4 days, at... $19.50 78.00 

Floor beams, 5,960 ft. B. M., carpenter 
crew: 

2 Men, at $3.50 $ 7.00 

4 Men, at $3.00 12.00 

3 Men, at $2.75 8.25 

1 Man, at $2.00 2.00 

2 Men, at $1.75 3.50 

Total, 2 days, at $32.75 65.50 

Erecting crews, 2 days, at $19.50 39.00 

Forms, bottom and sides, 11,000 ft. B. 
M., carpenter crew : 

Framing forms, 2 days, at $32.75 98.25 

Setting forms, 2 days, at $32.75 65.50 

1 man making patterns, 3 days, at $3.50. 10.50 

Total $386.75 

There was 25,000 ft. B. M. of lumber in the falsework and forms; 

exclusive of the piles, which makes a cost per M ft. B. M. of $15.4T 

for this labor. As there was 365 cu. yds. in an arch this gave a 

cost of $1.06 per cu. yd. for this labor. 

Concrete. — In mixing and placing the concrete for the arches,, 

one rib was done in a day so that it would be monolithic. There 



1678 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



were 73 cu. yds. in a rib. The following was the cost of labor per 
day when mixing and placing was being done : 

1 Foreman ? 5.00 

1 Sub-foreman 3.50 

1 Sngineman 3.50 

1 Man running mixer 2.59 

1 Concrete placer 2.75 

4 Concrete placers, at $2.50 10.00 

6 Men on cars, at $2 7.80 

2 Men on mixer platform, at $2 4.00 

1 Man at stock pile 2.00 

22 Men shoveling, at $1.75 38.50' 

Total .' ?79.55 

The actual time of placing a ring was from 6 to 7 hrs., thus 
giving a cost of mixing and placing of 85 cts. per cu. yd. When 
the concrete work was done, some of the crew was knocked off, 
and the rest were kept busy in changing tracks and other details. 
As stated, a larger ring could have been placed in a day, but the 




Fig. 25. — Casting Concrete Arch Rings. 

risk of some unforeseen accident that might have held up the work 
was considered too great to take. Fig. 25 shows how these rings 
were cast. 

Cost of a Concrete Ribbed Atrch Bridge at Grand Rapids, IVIich.* — 
The bridge consisted of seven parabolic arch ribs of 75 ft. clear 
span and 14 ft. rise. The five ribs under the 21-ft roadway were 
24 ins. thick, 50 ins. deep at skewbacks and 25 ins. deep at crown ; 



* Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 8, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 1679 

the two ribs under the sidewalks were 12 ins. thick and of the same 
depth as the main ribs. Bach rib carried columns which sup- 
ported the deck slab. Columns and ribs were bound together 
across bridge by struts and webs. All structural parts of the 
bridge were of concrete reinforced by corrugated bars. The abut- 
ments were hollow boxes with reinforced concrete shells tied in by 
buttresses and filled with earth. There were in the bridge includ- 
ing abutments 884 cu. yds. of concrete and 62,000 lbs. of reinforcing 
metal or about 70 lbs. of reinforcing metal per cu. yd. of concrete. 
Of the 884 cu. yds. of concrete 594 cu. yds. were contained in the 
abutments and wing walls and 290 cu. yds. in the remainder of the 
structure. 

Centers. — The center for the arch consisted of 4-pile bents spaced 
about 12 ft. apart in the line of the bridge. The piles were 
12 X 12 in. X 24 ft. yellow pine and they were braced together in 
both directions by 2 x 10-in. planks. Bach bent carried a 3 x 12-in. 
plank cup. Maple folding wedges were set on these cups over each 
pile and on them rested 12 x 12-in. transverse timbers one directly 
over each bent. These 12 x 12-in. transverse timbers carried the 
back pieces cut to the curve of the arch. The back pieces were 
2 X 12-in. plank, two under each sidewalk rib and four under each 
main rib of the arch. The back pieces under each rib were 
X-braced together. The lagging was made continuous under the 
ribs but only occasional strips were carried across the spaces be- 
tween ribs. This reduced the amount of lagging required but made 
working on the center more difficult and resulted in loss of tools 
from dropping through the openings. Work on the centers and 
forms was tiresome owing both to the difficulty of moving around 
on the lagging and to the cramped positions in which the men 
labored. Carpenters were hard to keep for these reasons. 

Concrete. — A 1 : 7 bank gravel concrete was used for the abut- 
ments and a 1 : 5 bank gravel concrete for the other parts of the 
bridge. The concrete was mixed in a cubical mixer operated by 
electric motor and located at one end of the bridge. The mixed 
concrete was taken to the forms in wheelbarrows. The mixture 
was of mushy consistency. No mortar facing was used but the 
exposed surfaces were given a great work. In freezing weather 
the gravel and water were heated to a temperature of about 100' 
F. ; when work was stopped at night it was covered with tarred 
felt and was usually found steaming the next morning. 

The cost data given here are based on figures furnished to us 
by Geo. J. Davis, Jr., who designed the bridge and kept the cost 
records. Mr. Davis states that the unit costs are high, because 
of the adverse conditions under which the work was performed. 
The work was done by day labor by the city, the men were all 
new to this class of work, the weather was cold and there was high 
water to interfere, and work was begun before plans for the bridge 
had been completed so that the superintendent could no* intelli- 
gently plan the work ahead. Cost keeping was begun only after 
the work was well under way. Many of the items of cost were 
Incomplete in detail. 



1680 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following were the wages paid and the prices of the ma- 
terials used : 

Materials and Supplies — 

No. 1 hemlock matched per 1,000 ft $20.00 

No. 1 hemlock plank per 1,000 ft 17.00 

No. 2 Norway pine flooring per 1,000 ft 19.00 

No. 2 yellow pine flooring per 1,000 ft 20.00 

12 X 12 in. X 16 ft. yellow pine per 1,000 ft 29.00 

12 X 12 in. X 24 ft. yellow pine piling per 1,000 ft.. . 27.00 

Maple wedges per pair 50 

V2-in. corrugated bars per 100 lbs 2.615 

%-in. corrugated bars per 100 lbs 2.515 

Ys-in. corrugated bars per 100 lbs 2.515 

Coal per ton 4.00 

Electric power per kilowatt 06 

Medusa cement per bbl 1.75 

.i^tna cement per bbl 1.05 

Bank gravel per cu. yd 85 

Sand per cu. yd 66 

Carpenters, per day $3 to 3.50 

Common labor, per day 1.75 

The summarized cost of the whole work, with such additional 
costs as the figures given permit of computation, was as follows : 

General Services — Total. Cu. Yd. 

Engineering $451 $0,512 

Miscellaneous 75 0.084 

Pumping — 

Coal at $4 per ton $210 

Machinery, tools and cartage 283 

Labor 497 

Total, 110 days, at $9 $990 

Excavation — Total Cost. 

Timber, cartage, etc $ 375 

Tools 69 

Labor at $1.75 1,687 

Total $2,131 

Filling (5,111 cu. yds.) — Total Per cu. yd. 

Earth $1,142 $0.20 

Labor, including ripraping 396 0.07 

Total $1,538 $0.27 

Removing Old Wing Walls — Total. 

Labor and dynamite. $346 

Tools and sharpening , 64 

Total $410 

Hand Rail (150 ft.) — Total. Per lin f t. 

Material $278 $1.S5 

Labor 29 0.19 

Total $307 $2.04 



BRIDGES. 1681 

"Wood Block Pavement (296 sg. yds.) — Total. Per sq. yd. 

Wood block, etc $695 $2.35 

Labor 57 0.19 



Total $752 $2.54 

Steel (62,000 Ihs.) — Total. Per.lb. 

Corrugated bars, freight, etc $1,498 2.41c 

Plain steel, wire, etc 75 0.12c 

Blacksmithing, tools and placing 438 0.71c 



Total $2,011 3.24c 

Per cu. yd. 

Centering — Total. Concrete. 

Lumber and poles $332 $1.14 

Labor 272 0.95 



Total $604 $2.09 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Forms $ 3,312 $ 3.75 

Concrete $ 5,532 $ 6.25 

Grand total $18,113 $20.50 

In more detail the cost of the various items of concrete work 
was as follows for the whole structure, including abutments, wing 
walls and arch, containing 884 cu. yds. : 

Form Construction — Total. Per cu. yd. 

Lumber and cartage $1,547 $1.75 

Nails and bolts 129 0.15 

Tools ^ 110 0.12 

Labor, erecting and removing 1,526 1.72 

Total $3,312 $3.74 

Concrete Construction — Materials — 

Medusa cement, at $1.05 $1,218 $1.37 

^tna cement, at $1.75 499 0.56 

Sand, at 66 cts. per cu. yd 37 0.04 

Gravel, at 85 cts. per cu. yd 915 1.04 

Total materials $2,669 $3.01 

Mixing — 

Machinery and supplies $ 569 $0.62 

Power, at 6 cts. per kw 52 0.06 

Tools 22 0.02 

Labor 737 0.83 

Total mixing $1,360 $1.53 

Placing concrete $ 609 $0.69 

Tamping concrete $ 481 $0.54 



1682 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Heating Concrete — 

Apparatus and cartage ? 47 $0.05 

Fuel 96 0.11 

Labor 270 0.31 

Total heating $ 413 $0.47 

Grand total $8,844 $9.98 

Considering the abutment and wing wall work, comprising 594 
cu. yds., separately, the cost was as follows : 

Forms — Per cu. yd. 

Materials $1.20 

Labor 1.09 

Total $2.29 

Concrete — 

Materials $2.92 

Labor 2.38 

Total $5.30 

Heating water and gravel $0.70 

Grand total $8.29 

Considering the arch span, comprising 290 cu. yds., separately, 
the cost was as follows : 

Forms — Per cu. yd. 

Materials $ 3.70 

Labor 3.03 

Total $ 6.73 

Concrete — 

Materials $ 3.32 

Labor 3.57 

Total $ 6.79 

Grand total $13.52 

Cost of Centering of a 233-ft, Arch. — In Engineering-Contracting, 
Jan. 6, 1909, are given design and data relating to the Walnut 
Lane Bridge, Philadelphia, as furnished by Mr. George H. Heller. 
Only a brief summary of the article is given here. 

Dimensions of Arch. — The main arch of the "Walnut Lane bridge 
consists of two arch ribs, each 18 ft. wide at the crown and 21 ft. 
6 ins. wide at the skewback ; these ribs are spaced 34 ft. c. to c, 
and are 5 ft. 6 ins. deep at the crown and 9 ft. 6 ins. deep at the 
skewback; the span is 233 ft. in the clear, and the height of the 
soffit at the crown above the springing line is 70 ft. 3 ins. 

The two main ribs carry spandrel piers and a series of spandrel 
arches upon which the spandrel walls are built up to the height 
to receive the floor, which consists of steel beams w'ith concrete 
arches between, and it is upon this floor that the roadway and 
sidewalk paving is laid, the roadway being 40 ft. wide and the 
two sidewalks each 8 ft. wide. The height of the soffit of the arch 
above the surface of the creek is about 136 ft., while the roadway 
of the bridge is about 14 ft. higher, making about 150 ft. 

It is necessary, while considering the nature of the design 
(Pig. 26), to remark the fact of the arch itself being composed 



BRIDGES. 



1683 



of two independent and separate ribs. This feature allowed the 
construction of each rib by itself and so presented an opportunity 
of reducing the cost of the centering by permitting one arch rib 
to be constructed first on centering necessary for one rib, and then, 
When the arch is completed, to move the same centering trans- 
versely so as to serve for the construction of the adjacent arch 
rib. This feature of construction was embodied in the design, and 
it was found not only to be feasible but also simple and easy of 
action, even though the mass of timbering was so great and cov- 
ered so large an area It was also thought proper to use steel in 
the construction of the bottom of the centering, for, as a material, 
it afforded better facilities for making joints capable of with- 
standing possible vibration in moving, and it formed a firm founda- 
tion, all parts of which acted together as a unit and allowed the 
whole mass to be moved true to line and without distortion or 
accident to its new position. 



I0''I6^50 



w'W'Soi 




EnjrCantir 



Csncreh P:sr5 
Fo^tff all Iron Benh fv be 
anchcreci n Pter 



biLhonal A, 

Fig. 26. — Centering for Walnut Lane Bridge. 



Beginning with the base of the centering, the steel trestle sup- 
ports were spaced 24 ft. and 30 ft. apart and were carried on con- 
crete piers founded upon and doweled into the solid rock. These 
piers were carried up to a uniform height above all danger of 
freshet, and they formed the basic foundation upon which the 
whole mass of steel and timber was designed to move. Bach steel 
trestle was securely anchored into its pier by 11/2 -in. steel rods, and 
these rods served to guard against freshets and wind and were re- 
leased when the centering was moved. 

The movement of the centering was accomplished by placing 
on each pier a series of ten steel rollers, each 6 ins. in diameter, 
rolling on steel plates built into the tops of the piers ; each roller 
was capable of bearing in safety 10 tons, making 100 tons, which 
was the total maximum weight at the center pier to be moved. 
The steel bents rested upon these rollers, and upon completion of 
the erection of one rib of the arch they were all moved in unison 
by placing jacks between the bottom end of each steel bent and a 
studded anchor chain which formed a cradle or saddle against which 



1684 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



the jack worked, the ends of the chain being attached to timbers 
previously built into the piers for that purpose.; this method of 
translation proved to be quite effective, and the whole distance of 
34 ft. was covered in the space of three days. 

The total weight moved can be fairly stated to be about 1,000 
tons. This amount is found by taking the total weight of bolts, 
steel trestle and timber trestle, and allowing in the case of timber 
5 lbs. per ft. B. M., the timber being probably very heavy from 
the absorption of water from the structure. This great weight, 
covering a length of say, 230 ft., and a width of 50 ft., was moved 
by jacks having a sum total capacity of 345 tons acting at 15 
points. 




Fig. 27. — Arch Centers. 



The quantities of material used in the construction of the center- 
ing were: 



Bolts, washers, nails 33,000 

Steel trestle and its floor 232,000 

Lagging and joists 88,000 

Upper trestle and bracing 116,000 

Lower staging and bracing 136,000 

Concrete piers 1,000 

The cost was : 

Timber 340,000 ft. B. M. at $65.00 

Metal 265,000 lbs. .04 

Masonry 1,000 cu. yds. 10.00 



Total 



lbs. 
lbs. 

ft. B. M. 
ft. B. M. 
ft. B. M. 
cu. yds. 

$22,100 
10,600 
10,000 

$42,700 



This centering served for two ribs, each containing 1,550 cu. yds., 
or a total of 3,100 cu. yds. Hence the centering cost $13.80 per cu. 
yd. of concrete ribs. 

The contract price for the "Walnut Lane bridge was $262,000. 



BRIDGES. 1685 

Design of Center for a 50-ft, Span Masonry Arch.* — With the 
present high prices of lumber, the designing of timber centers for 
arches becomes a problem that requires careful study to save 
material and labor. In the accompanying drawing we show a 
center designed for a 50-ft. masonry arch railway bridge to be built 
in central Ohio. Owing to the excessive cost of pine in this section, 
oak will be used. This timber costs here about $16 per M ft. B. M. 
The center, 36 ft. long, comprising two arch ribs, posts, cups, 
wedges and lagging, calls for 16,464 ft. B. M. of timber divided as 
follows : B ]yi 

3x 4 ins. X 4 ft. lagging 1,554 ft. 

140 2 X 12 ins. X 8 ft. 3% ins. straight ribs 2,332 ft. 

20 2 X 12 ins. X 5 ft. 6% ins. straight ribs 222 ft. 

20 2 X 12 ins. X 2 ft. 9% ins. straight ribs 112 ft. 

20 3 X 12 ins. x 7 f t curved ribs 420 ft. 

60 3 x 12 ins. x 8 ft. curved ribs 1,440 ft. 

40 3 X 12 ins. X 7 ft. braces 840 ft. 

40 3 X 12 ins. X 7 ft. 6 ins. braces 900 ft. 

10 2xl2insx26 ft. bottom chord 1,920 ft. 

40 2 X 12 ins. x 24 ft. bottom chord 520 ft. 

40 3 X 12 ins. X 111/2 ft. fillers bottom chord 1,380 ft. 

20 3 X 12 ins. x 7 ft. fillers bottom chord 420 ft. 

20 3 X 12 ins. x 21 ft. piece A 1,260 ft. 

40 2 X 12 ins. X 35/2 ft. bottom chord end con... 280 ft. 

20 10 X 12 ins. X 9 ft. posts 1,800 ft. 

2 6 X 12 ins. X 38 ft. wall plates 456 ft. 

2 8 X 12 ins. X 38 ft. caps 608 ft. 

Total 16,464 ft. 

660 % X 9 in. bolts for ribs. 

320 % X 9 in. bolts for bottom chord. 

120 % X 13 in. bolts for end con. bottom chord. 

160 % X 15 in. bolts for piece A. 
Figure 27 shows the framing very clearly. With carpenters re- 
ceiving $4 per day it is estimated that the framing and erecting 
will cost about $12 per M ft. B. M., including iron. The cost of 
bolts and nuts will run about $1.50 per M ft. B. M. Roughly, then, 
this center will cost about ?30 per M ft. B. M. in place. The center 
was designed by Mr. J. H. Milburn, Chief Draftsman, Oflice of the 
Chief Engineer, Baltimore & Ohio, R. R., Baltimore, Md. 

Data on a Concrete Viaduct. — A reinforced concrete viaduct 2,800 
ft. long has been recently built by John T. Wilson, of New York, 
for the Richmond & Chesapeake Bay By. Co., at Richmond, Va. 
It ranges in height from 18 ft. at each end to 70 ft. at the center. 
The reinforced concrete girders range in length from 23% ft. to 
67% ft. c. to c. of bents. The bents are two-post bents, with legs 
2 ft. square. The largest girder, having a length of 67% ft., 
weighs 54 tons, its cross-section being 20x70 ins. In this viaduct 
there were 2,650 cu. yds. of concrete, and it required 172 ft. B. M. 
of timber for the forms and falsework per cubic yard of concrete. 
Kahn bars were used for reinforcing. The forms on the sides 
of the girders were removed at the end of 7 days, but the column 
forms and those supporting the girders were not removed for at 
least 30 days. While it is a single track viaduct, it is so designed 
that, by adding another series of posts and girders, it can be made 

*Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 14, 1906. 



1686 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



into a double track viaduct. One little trick in filling the column 
forms is worth bearing in mind. They were built U-shaped, the 
fourth side being left open, and built up as fast as the concrete 
was poured in from that side. This method facilitated working the 
concrete in around the reinforcing bars. Mr. J. H. McLure is Chief 
Engineer of the R. & C. B. Ry. 

Cost of a Concrete Trestle and Three Concrete Girder Bridges 
With Abutments.* — The reinforced concrete trestle and the three 
bridges with concrete abutments that are referred to in this article 
were constructed near Easton, Pa., by Mr. M. P. McGrath, general 
contractor, of that place. The contractor or his engineer, Mr. J. P. 
Mooney, supervised the work so that while one man was employed 
nominally as a foreman and received $2.75 per day, he worked like 

" "I r«3 

I I -V 




o 

I 

,T I i\ ^ i '' -^ y'^p'z^ I I 

?j L X-S7'/' Y'sa'a" Z'21'io' 'UJ 



Fig. 28. — Details of Girder Rail Fastenings. 

the other laborers ; generally he was charged to placing or finish- 
ing. The costs given are actual costs except for the form lumber, 
which had been used before and the cost of which was approxi- 
mated. The costs are given separately for each structure. 

Coal Trestle. — The trestle was designed as a coal trestle and 
was constructed as shown by Figs. 28 and 29, except that the 
bents instead of being made solid, were built with a 4 x &-ft. open- 
ing in each to permit the coal to flow more readily. There were 
8 bents and two abutments and the trestle was 114 ft. long. It 
was designed to carry the rails directly on the girders without 
cross-ties, so that the girder reinforcement was made quite heavy, 
as is clearly shown by the drawings. It will also be seen that the 
rails had their bases partly embedded in the girders and were 
fastened by chairs. The chairs were of cast iron and were held by 



^Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 5, 1908. 



BRIDGES. 



1687 




1688 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bolts extending down into the girder and secured under the lower 
reinforcement bar. The chairs were spaced 2 ft. apart, those of 
one rail being staggered with those of the other rail. This con- 
* struction gave excellent results in operation and saved some 6 ins. 
in height over the ordinary cross-tie construction. The remaining 
structural details and dimensions of the trestle are clearly shown 
by Figs. 28 and 29. 

The wages paid on this trestle and also on the bridge construc- 
tion described later, were as follows : 

Laborers, per 10-hour day $1.50 

Blacksmiths, per 10-hour day 2.00 

Engineman, per 10-hour day 1.70 

Carpenter, per 10-hour day 3.00 

Foreman, per 10-hour day 2.75 

The location of the trestle being almost flush against a railway 
embankment and it being necessary to locate the stock piles some 
150 ft. from the mixer, made the cost of wheeling the materials 
high. The mixer was set up at the center point of the trestle and 
discharged into barrows which were hoisted by a pole and yard 
arm. The pole was provided with a yard and had a three-quarters 
swing. A rope passing over a pulley at the end of the yard arm 
was provided at one end with a three-line sling provided with a 
hook to attach to the wheel and two rings to slip over the handles. 
This rope hoisted the barrows to the top of the trestle by means 
of a horse hitched to the free end. The concrete used for the 
reinforced girders was a 1-2-4 mixture, the other parts of the 
trestle were made of 1-3-6 concrete in which were embedded 
stones ranging from the size of a man's head to the size of a half- 
barrel ; these rubble stones were thrown into the forms in l^^-ft. 
layers. The total amount of concrete in this trestle was 116 cu. 
yds. and its cost was as follows : 

Materials — Per cu. yd. 

1,069 bbls. cement, at $1.24 $1,325 

0.631 tons sand, at 70 cts 0.442 

1.11 tons stone, at $1.25 1.387 

131% lbs. steel, at 2 cts 2.630 

Lumber ($112.63 charged up) 0.971 

Total materials $6,755 

Labor and Supplies — 

Making and erecting forms $1.21 

Handling sand 0.180 

Handling stone 0.175 

Mixing concrete 0.184 

Placing concrete 0.300 

Finishing concrete 0.103 

Miscellaneous 0.246 

Total labor $2,398 

Total labor and materials $9,153 

In the item miscellaneous were included blacksmith's work on 
reinforcement, handling cement, coal, oil, etc. As will be noted 



BRIDGES. 1689 

the cost of reinforcement is distributed over the whole structure 
116 cu. yds. of concrete; to be strictly accurate, the total 15,250 
lbs. of reinforcing metal should be divided into the volume of con- 
crete in the girders which, figured from the drawings, was approxi- 
mately 24 cu. yds. This gives the great weight of 635 lbs. of rein- 
forcement per cubic yard of concrete in the girders. 

Bridge No. 1. — This structure had a clear span of 10% ft. and 
consisted of two concrete girders, one under each rail, with ends 
embedded into concrete abutments with wing walls. The girders 
were 3 ft. deep, 2 ft. wide on top and 1% ft. wide on the bottom 
and each was made of 1:2:4 concrete reinforced by five 1%-in. 
round bare, three straight and two bent, with stirrups every 
1 % ft. The abutments were made of 1:3:6 concrete. Conditions 
were favorable construction. As in the trestle rubble stones were 
incorporated in the abutment concrete ; some cinders were also used 
anG their cost is included in the cost of handling the stone. The 
bridge contained altogether 102 cu. yds. of concrete. The costs 
were as follows: 

Materials — Per cu. yd. 

Cement $1,264 

Stone 1.688 

Sand 0.444 

Reinforcement 0.098 

Lumber 0.383 

Total materials $3,877 

Labor and Supplies — 

Forms $0,479 

Handling stone 0.175 

Handling sand 0.077 

Mixing concrete 0.100 

Placing concrete 0.176 

Finishing concrete 0.094 

Miscellaneous 0.224 

Total labor $1,325 

Total materials and labor $5,202 

The item miscellaneous includes hauling cement and water, work 
on reinforcement and coal. As in the trestle, the unit cost of rein- 
forcement is got by dividing the total cost into the total yardage 
of concrete value as only the girders were reinforced. 

Bridge No. II. — This bridge had a clear span of 16 ft. and was 
13 ft. high, and like the bridge just described consisted of two con- 
crete birders with ends embedded into concrete abutments. The 
girders were 22 ins. deep, 2 ft. wide on top and 1 ft. wide on the 
bottom. Each girder was reinforced with five 1%-in. round rods, 
three straight and two bent, without stirrups. The ties were 
fastened to the girders by embedded anchor bolts. The costs of ma- 
terials changed somewhat from those given for the trestle and 
bridge No. 1. The cement cost $1.54 per barrel, and the stone 
(crushed on the ground) cost 73 cts. per ton. Rubble stones were 
incorporated in the abutment concrete as in the work previously de- 
scribed ; this stone had all to be collected by men and teams and 



1690 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

this fact is reflected in the high unit cost of handling stone. The 
mixer was located so that its discharge chute overhung and dis- 
charged directly into the forms for one abutment. To reach the 
further abutment an ordinary coal chute was provided and the 
concrete chuted directly into place. The bridge contained 98 cu. yds. 
of concrete, which cost as follows: 

Materials — Per cu. yd. 

Cement, at $1.54 ?l-596 

Stone 0.814 

Sand 0.453 

Reinforcement 0.176 

Lumber 0.316 

Total materials $3,355 

Labor and Supplies — ■ 

Forms ?0.520 

Handling stone 0.236 

Handling sand 0.180 

Mixing concrete 0.073 

Placing concrete 0.157 

Finishing concrete 0.092 

Coal and water 0.041 

Handling cement 0.1078 

Total labor $1,377 

Total materials and labor $4,732 

It will be noted that the cost of handling the stone for this 
bridge ran high because of the teaming referred to above. Rein- 
forcement is charged into the total yardage as in the structures 
previously described. 

Bridge No. III. — This bridge was built for the passage of farm 
wagons of 5 tons capacity. It had a clear span of 17 ft. and was 
15 ft. wide and 17 ft. clear height. The floor consisted of four 
12 X 6-in. girders carrying a 6-ln. floor slab. The concrete was a 
1:3:6 mixture throughout and was mixed by hand. The concrete 
was made with a broken tile aggregate obtained from a nearby tile 
works at the cost of handling only. This tile was very easily 
broken and left a rather poor finish to the concrete. There were 
107 cu. yds. of concrete in tlie bridge and it cost as follows: 
Materials — Per cu. yd. 

Cement $1,594 

Sand 0.459 

Reinforcement 0.127 

Lumber 0.280 

Total materials $2,460 

Labor and Supplies — - 

Forms $0.41 

Handling tile 0.692 

Handling sand 0.112 

Handling cement 0.105 

Mixing concrete 0.413 

Placing concrete 0.341 

Total labor $2,077 

Total materials and labor $4,537 



BRIDGES. 



1691 



In noting these costs the very heavy cost of handling the brolcen 
tile aggregate will be observed ; on the other hand this aggregate 
cost nothing itself. The lumber charge is only that for new lum- 
ber, the old lumber that was re-used was not charged in. The cost 
of sand was 94 cts. per ton. 

Cost of a Reinforced Concrete Trestle. — Mr. C. C. Mitchell gives 
the following data : 

The trestle replaced an old wooden trestle 286 ft. long on a cable 
incline railway up Catskill Mountain, New York. The main struc- 
tural features of the trestle and the slope of the ground on which 
it was built are indicated by Fig. 30. The work was done by 
contract after the cable incline had closed down on Oct. 17, 1908, 
for the season. Parts of the old timber structure were thus avail- 
able for supporting forms and for such other purposes as the con- 
tractor required this kind of timber. 




Concrete Trestle. 



.'vVhile waiting for the materials to arrive and the road to close 
down, excavation was begun on the footings, stone for the concrete 
was broken, a pipe line 1,000 ft. long was laid to a waterfall, a 
cement house and a shanty in which to fabricate the steel were 
built. 

In excavating for the footings it developed that there were alter- 
nate strata of slate rock and earth, with boulders in about half of 
them, so that to get a good foundation oh bedrock it was necessary 
to go from 4 to 10 ft. below the ground, the surface of which was 
so steep that it was very difficult to work on it. Slides and caving 
caused a much larger quantity of material to be handled than that 
represented by the holes excavated. 

The excavations were walled up in pyramidal form on a batter 
of 2 ins. to the foot outward to within 2 ft. of the ground surface, 
there narrowing to a section 30x30 ins., on top of which a wooden 
box 30 ins. square and 24 ins. high was set up. Every bent had 
two such forms for the batter post footings, and every alternate 



1692 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

bent had in addition a third for the diagonal bracing struts to meet 
on. Then footings were concreted with a mixture of 1-3-6, the 
stone being broken by hand to 1%-in. size and the wooden top 
forms being shifted ahead as the worli progressed, the stone- 
breaking, mixing board, etc., being likewise shifted ahead. Half 
of thfi lumber was stored at the lower end of the trestle and half 
at the middle ; half of the sand at the middle and half at the upper 
end ; half of the steel at the lower end and half at upper end, and 
all cement at the middle. 

Five mixing boards were established along the trestle, and stone 
was broken successively at each as it was needed for the concrete. 
The water pipe, which ran alongside, was shortened as the work 
progressed. The sand and gravel were separated by screening and 
sent to the mixing boards through temporary chutes, the super- 
structure concrete being 1 part cement, 2 parts sand, 2 parts %-in. 
gravel and 2 parts %-in. stone. 

Work was begun with a force of 10 men working 9 hours, of 
whom 1 was a foreman drawing $4 a day, 1 carpenter at $2.50, 1 
steel bender at $2.25, and 7 laborers at $1.75 each. When the road 
closed down the force was doubled, 8 more laborers being added at 
$1.75 and 2 carpenters at $2 and $3.25, respectively, these latter 
working for a bonus. 

Concreting the footings began on Oct. 18 and dismantling the old 
trestle at the same time, with some men fabricating steel, some 
building forms, some breaking stone and some excavating the upper 
footings. 

The pulleys were first removed from under the cable, and the 
latter supported by 2x4-in. plank spiked to the old trestle bents, on 
which were also preserved the line and grade. The guard rails and 
track rails were next removed, then the cross ties and four inner 
stringers were unbolted and lowered by ropes to the ground and 
piled so as to form mixing boards. The remaining outside stringers 
were then shifted out to the ends of the bent caps, leaving a clear 
space in the center 8 ft. 6 ins. by 26 ins. deep. In some places the 
tops of these stringers were 2 ins. above grade and in other places 
2 ins. below, otherwise they represented approximately the level 
for the new work and allowed a clearance of 3 ins. for the outside 
girder form of the new work. Next 2x6-in. spruce floor timbers 
for the girder forms were hung at 3-ft. intervals on a grade 27% 
ins. below by 2x4-in. battens spiked to the outside of the old 
stringers. The old bent caps were then gained out for each new 
girder to the grade of the floor timber, and a l%xl2-in. by 16-ft. 
bottom board for each of the three new girder forms nailed in 
place. These girder forms were then built up to a depth of 26 ins. 
of l%x9-in. spruce matched boards, Ii4x4-in. pieces being used for 
battens every 36 ins. These sides were braced internally at 3-ft. 
intervals by tablets taken from the footing forms and placed like 
cross-partitions between the girder forms. The outer sides were 
braced by wedging against the 2x4-in. hangers and old supporting 
stringers, the tops of the latter being held from gaping outward by 
l%x4-in. strips nailed across the top over the floor timbers. The 



BRIDGES. 1693 

three floor timbers at the center of each span were then further 
supported from below by struts composed of old ties and braces 
from the dismantled structure. 

The forms for the batter posts and bracing struts were made up 
In trough form, leaving the outer and upper side open, then set in 
place on the foundation, and the tops sawed to fit the bottom of the 
girder forms. The webs were then built between their tops, uniting 
the whole with the girders. The post and strut forms were then 
properly braced and supported, the reinforcing steel put in place, 
a section of the fourth side put in place and the whole securely 
clamped together by %x26-in. bolts passing tangent to two sides and 
drawing 2x4-in. yokes against the remaining two sides. 

The reinforcement having been placed in the girders, the concrete 
was then poured in and carefully rammed and spaded, and the 
third side built up and clamped directly ahead of the concreting 
so as to permit the most careful placing of the latter without chance 
of displacing the reinforcement. These posts were concreted to- 
gether up to the level of the girders for two bents usually. Owing 
to the 30° surface, the tops of the girders had to be boarded over 
continuously as the concreting progressed to keep it from running 
out, and a section of 1-in. pipe had to be left in place every 4 ft. 
in the outer girders through which to bolt the track to the new 
structure. When concreting stopped for the day bulkheads in the 
form of saddles were placed in the web at a bent, these bulkheads 
being removed the next day, allowing the concrete of each girder 
on the succeeding day to begin half way in the web of the preceding 
bent. 

Each batter post was reinforced by a rack composed of %-in. 
rods wired to dowels in the footing or let into holes drilled in bed- 
rock, extending up through the girder above it nearly to the top 
surface and bound together every 18 ins. by a rectangular hoop of 
%-in. corrugated bar, previously bent to the right form and se- 
curely wired together. These racks were made up as needed, and 
when set in place inside the forms had about 1 in. of clearance 
around them and had to be constantly watched by the man ram- 
ming the concrete to keep them centered. Each strut brace had a 
%-in. rod within 1 in. of each of its two lower corners, wired to 
the footing dowels and passing up through the central girder nearly 
to the surface, and requiring great care in placing the concrete to 
maintain them in place. 

Each girder had two %-in. bars suspended from the cross-batters 
on top of the forms by wire, so that they lay 1% ins. below the 
tipper surface continuously, and two intermediate 8-ft. bars over 
each web for continuity. At 6-in. intervals eleven stirrups were 
hung on them at the bent webs and two more were hung near the 
center of span, so that they lay in V-shape normal to the axis of 
each girder and 1 in. distant from its bottom and sides. Four %-in. 
bottom bars were then hung or laid in these stirrups, the length 
being 34 ft. ; two were made to break joints at each bent. When 
these bars were all in place and securely wired, two %-in. bars were 
sprung into the cross-struts at the center of span and four more in 



1694 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

each of the webs and wired in place. "Whereupon the girders were 
ready for concreting. 

The congestion of steel at the webs made it difficult to place the 
concrete and properly ram it at and near the webs, and particularly 
to place and remove bulkheads and clean out the forms before going 
ahead with the concreting. It was also hard to place the concrete 
in the top of the bracing struts. The best results in placing the 
concrete were attained with a very wet mix, poured so that the 
water would flow up the forms ahead and be followed by a grout, 
which ran all around and between the reinforcement, leaving the 
stone and gravel to be rammed down into it at last. 

The mixing was done by hand the gang being divided so 
that one batch was being separated while the other was being 
deposited. The sand and gravel were sent to the board by a chute, 
the stone broken at the edge of the board as used, and the cement 
carried to the board, each man taking a bag as he came to work 
and after lunch. Inclined runways of plank were shifted from bent 
to bent for the posts and others built from the mixing board to 
the top of structure and planks laid along the sides of the girder 
forms in such manner that the employes could return to the board 
without interfering with the loaded pails. Owing to the steepness 
of the ground and of the grade on the finished work, there was 
unusual danger of accidents and need of constant vigilance to pre- 
vent bad results from careless work, and this is the reason why 
only so many men were employed and in such a manner. 

Because of the unexpected depth_ of thirteen of the footings, a 
%-in. steel bar encased in 6 ins. of concrete was placed as a tie 
between the batter post feet wherever the latter did not reach 
directly to bedrock. This and 37 cu. yds. of extra concrete not 
indicated on the plans and a corresponding quantity of excavation 
not originally called for delayed the completion of the work, which 
was to have been finished on Dec. 1, so that it took until Dec. 12 
to complete it. The weather was unusually favorable, being dry 
and warm until Nov. 3, from which time on there were light squalls 
of snow, succeeded by mild weather till Dec. 1, when it became so 
cold that the aggregates had to be heated. An old section of steel 
smokestack, 4 ft. in diameter and 12 ft. long, was filled with fire 
and sand and gravel piled over it, the water being heated in pails 
over a fire. 

The 14 M. ft. of form lumber sufficed to complete about half the 
forms, and thereafter the forms first concreted, having been filled 
ten days, were stripped and the lumber used as the iform work 
progressed. When the clamps were removed the post forms came 
off in four pieces in good shape to be set up again at once, but 
the girder and web forms had to be taken apart and rebuilt. 

The top boards and tie strips were first pried ofE the top of the 
girders, the hangers and floor timber next removed, then the old 
stringers pried off and lowered with ropes, all the girder batters 
then knocked off, and the form boards taken off separately from 
both the outside and inside of girders, webs and struts. The bot- 
tom boards to the girders and diagonal strut braces were left in 



BRIDGES. 1695 

place two weeks longer, with props under them, and then the old 
T)ent caps were sawed in two and the bent timber unbolted and 
■dismembered, releasing the bottom boards, which were then re- 
moved, leaving the concrete completely stripped. 

There was very little pointing necessary, except on the posts, 
Tvhich was done from a ladder, after which the exterior surfaces 
"were given a wash of cement, alum and lye, rubbed in with a 
cement brick to waterproof the structure and remove board marks. 
The cable was blocked up on the concrete webs, the ties and guard 
rails bolted on, the pulleys rehung and track laid back in place by 
the Otis Railway Company, replacing track not coming under the 
contract. 

The amount of work done under this contract was as follows: 
Excavation called for 87 cu. yds. earth, and extra excavation un- 
called for 63 cu. yds. boulders, making a total of 150 cu. yds, ; dis- 
mantling and piling 34 M. ft. yellow pine structure; 37 cu. yds. 
concreting (1-3-6) in extra footings; 125 cu. yds. concreting called 
for (1-2-4), reinforced ; 13 tie rods for batter post feet; cleaning 
Tip and removal of debris; total cost, $4,332.14; contract price, 
?4,000 ; extras, ?677.75 ; total, $4,677.75 ; profit on contract, $345.61. 

Daily records were kept, showing kind of weather, temperature, 
amount of each kind of work done, with proportion of pay roll 
spent in doing it and the unit cost noted down for the immediate 
purpose of more economically planning the next day's work. A 
distribution statement showed the cost of both labor and material, 
charged up against each item of work performed during the week 
and the unit costs computed for each. A comparison was made 
between weekly average and daily rates, and the conditions pre- 
vailing on those days showing the most economic rates were then 
planned for the succeeding week's work. 

Separate records were kept for the items applying to the general 
contract, the costs on extra work being kept apart. Finally all 
the costs were referred to the quantity of work done under them 
in the form of unit prices per cubic yard and the percentage which 
each represented to the whole. 

The itemized cost of the work is given in Tables XXII, XXIII 
and XXIV. 

Table XXII. — Cost of Reinforced Concrete. 

Materials — Per cu. yd. 

Cement $2.31 

Sand 1.73 

Stone 2.00 

Gravel 0.33 

Water 0.35 

Total materials $6.72 

Labor — 

Mixing and placing $1.94 

Pointing up concrete 0.37 

Waterproofing concrete 0.60 

Total labor $2.91 

Grand total concrete $9.63 



1696 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Forms — 

Lumber, butts and nails $4.75 

Fabricating and erecting 3.58 

Total forms ?8.33 

Reinforcement — 

Materials, bars, wire, etc $3.77 

Fabricating 0.37 

Placing 0.74 

Total reinforcement $4.88 

Grand total for concrete work, 125 cu. 

yds $22.84 

Miscellaneous — 

Excavation, 87 cu. yds $0.56 

Dismantling old trestle 1.00 

Cleaning up at completion 0.40 

General expenses, superintendence, etc 4.45 

Total miscellaneous $6.41 

Grand total $29.25 

Table XXIII. — Cost of Extra Footings. 

Per cu. yd. 

Excavation, 63 yds. rock, at $2.89 $ 4.91 

Aggregates: Cement, $1.94; sand, $0.97; stone, $1.01 3.92 

Forms, material 1.20 

Forms, labor 1.44 

Concreting, labor 2.07 

37 cu. yds. concrete $13.50 

Table XXIV. — Thirteen Extra Tie Rods. 

Per cu. yds. 

Excavation $ 6.01 

Bending and placing steel rods 7.80 

Form labor 8.35 

Form material 8.30 

Reinforcement (steel bars), % in 5.10 

Concreting labor 5.00 

Aggregates: Cement, $2.70; sand, $1.35; stone, $3.. 7.00 

1% yds. concrete $47.50 

These tie rods were of concrete, 6x6 ins., reinforced by %-in. 
steel rods. The tie rods connected the feet of the batter posts, as 
shown in Fig. 30. 

Standard Designs of Reinforced Concrete Culverts, C, B. & Q. 
Railway.* — Standard culvert designs for use on the Chicago, Bur- 
lington & Quincy Ry. have been worked out in reinforced concrete 
for box culverts ranging from 4x4 ft. to 10x12 ft. in size and for 
arch culverts from 4x4 ft. to 6x6 ft. in size. Up to and including 
in box culverts clear openings 7 ft. wide the pattern of structure 
shown by Fig. 31 is used ; for clear openings of 8 ft., and over, the 



^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 3, 1906. 



BRIDGES. 



1697 











Table XXV. 














Box 


Culverts. 


Pattern Fig. SI. 


















Thick- 


Thick- 


Thick 






Length 


Cu-. yds. 


Cu. yds. 


ness. 


ness. 


ness. 


Inside 


of wing 


concrete 


cone, 


side 


roof 


floor 


dimen- 


walls. 


wing 


Lin. ft. 


walls. 


slab. 


slab. 


sions 


in ft 


. Ft. 


Ins. 


walls. 


Barrel. 


Ins. 


Ins. 


Ins. 


4x 


4... 


. 5- 


-10 


7.4 


0.75 


12 


12 


12 


4 X 


5. . . 


. 7- 


- 6 


9.2 


0.83 


12 


12 


12 


4 X 


6... 


. 9- 


- 2 


11.6 


0.9 


12 


12 


12 


5 X 


4. . . 


. 6- 


- 1 


9.0 


0.91 


12 


14 


14 


5 X 


5. . . 


. 7- 


- 9 


11.3 


0.99 


12 


14 


14 


5 X 


6. . . 


. 9- 


- 6 


13.9 


1.06 


12 


14 


14 


6 X 


5. .. 


. 8- 


- 


13.5 


1.18 


12 


16 


16 


6 X 


6... 


. 8- 


- 


16.5 


1.25 


12 


16 


16 


6 X 


8... 


. 12- 


- 9 


18.3 


1.60 


15 


16 


16 


7 X 


5... 


. 8- 


- 4 


15.65 


1.39 


12 


18 


18 


7 X 


7. . . 


. 11- 


- 5 


24.9 


1.72 


15 


18 


18 


7 X 


8... 


. 13- 


- 
Box 


29.13 
Culverts. 


1.82 
Pattern 


15 
Fig. 32. 


18 


18 


8 X 


6... 


. 10- 


- 


31.0 


1.89 


15 


20 


20 


8 X 


8... 


. 13- 


- 4 


39.7 


2.08 


15 


20 


20 


8 X 


10... 


. 10- 


- 5 


5.71 


2.51 


18 


20 


20 


10 X 


10... 


. 17- 


- 


62.3 


3.07 


18 


24 


24 


10 X 


12... 


. 20- 


- 4 


76.0 


3.3 


18 


24 


24 



pattern is modified as shown by Fig. 32. Figure 33 shows the 
pattern of arch structure used. The dimensions L and I in the box 
culvert designs are determined by the formulas, 
10 
2, = — h + X + 3 tt. ; and 
3 
10 
1 = — h + X. 
3 



7i>£ p£77e 



xV — 



-<-- X -■! 



^S^^^^^^^^SS^^S;^ 



^^ 



Ry.M.BcS.R 



■g's--x- 



—L 

Fig. 31. 




TABLE XXVI. 

Length Cu. yds. Lbs. of Cu. yds. Lbs. of 

of wing concrete metal cone, per metal per 

Inside dimensions walls. in wing wing lin. ft. lin. ft. 

in ft. Ft. Ins. walls. walls. barrel. barrel. 

4.X4 5—3 6 236 0.5 54 

5x5... 6—11 10 401.7 0.71 76.7 

6x6 8—6 12 553.5 1.00 103.4 

in which x = the width of roadbed at crown and h = the height of 
the fill above the culvert. In the arch culvert pattern the dimension 
L is determined by the formula, 

10 
L= — fc + a;-|-4ft. 
3 



1698 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Jop_of_77e 




pS^^':>^%ii^^^^^^^^:Mi 



I Ry.M.8c5. 




I |K--- I- 






Fig. 32. 

All other dimensions are determined by the cross-sectional size 
of the waterway. They are, for the various sizes adopted and with 
the exception of the reinforcement, shown in Table XXV. 

Structural details of the 4x6-ft. culvert of pattern Fig. 31 are 
shown in Fig. 34, and Fig. 35 shows the similar details for the 
10xl2-ft. culvert of pattern Fig. 2. The same general details are 
employed for the culverts of intermediate and smaller dimensions. 



Top of Tie S5 

'I ^^N. •^: 

['"wy.M.aiS.l I '-CI j. ;, 

Y^e'e"-^- L -■>\^-8-6"--A 

Fig. 33. 



Turning now to the arch culvert pattern, Fig. 36 shows the struc- 
tural details of the 6x6-ft. size. The main features of the other 
sizes of this pattern are shown by Table XXVI. 

For culvert work the company uses a 1-3-6 concrete composed 
of 1.08 barrel of cement, 0.45 cu. yd. sand and 0.9 cu. yd. broken 
stone, or 1.25 barrels of cement and 1 cu. yd. of gravel. 



... r I— , fSitr-; 




Part Longi+udlinal Sec+Jon. 
Fig. 34. 




f?/ 



Sec+Ional 
End E\evot+ion. 



BRIDGES. 



1699 



Cost of Concrete Culverts, References.— In Engineering-Contract- 
ing, Sept. 1, 1909, are given standard designs of box and arch 
culverts on the C, M. & St. P., together with quantities and costs. 
See Tyrrell's "Concrete Bridges and Culverts." 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Culvert.— The following data relative 
to the construction of a 4-ft. reinforced concrete box culvert in 
Missouri. The work was done under the supervision of P. S. Quinn, 
County Engineer. The culvert contained 28 cu. yds. of cement and 
2,500 lbs. of steel bars. The concrete was a 1-4-8 mixture. Com- 

K- -zor- ->i 



^^M-- 



^^^ 



4:^ 



tS (l^-'^JJJ.llLU'it Jt J R 

~-lcv, l''(^fi"j^_i U-LILU ' iUiL__7C ,-J*^ 

, '*'5^i ujaii.u-LJLU±iiL__llI l^'' 

' ifcirJ-Ll T"j_L.i > I I r I I 1 I mrr IC ItJ 

a^Udi. LiJ 1 j-uj J. LLi_rn.i!i|__/c -\ 

CL' !_! J X L ua J- q J. i.u JX Lmna t;-_=^ 

H ii.urvi_T±ia.xrdjrxiru 'lil^ESSiisS 







i Ml JLI_! ± 1. '_' J JL L l_i J?k I 
i I_Q J. i_U J. LUJ. J. L L-'J J 



Z,^"Bar3'- 



■SjfBcrrs 



>f/9,^- /d'/O"- >l 

Part Longl+udinod Section. 
Fig. 35 




%.M.a:S. 
Sectional 
End Elevation. 



Y-"^ 



/W5.^^^^^fc^ 



iLiIiUil 



jlLlJi" I "liUiL 

ririiiiiijiriujMr 



U'l-LllUlLlJJiUJ 
iTiiii 



I I I I I H I I 



i 



I I I I I I I ■> I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 ,X"e^„ 



K- -- lO'O""—^—-^ 



Part Side 



P 



I S9 




Bcrrs, . 
X.foC. 



Berrs, 
IZ"C.f(fC. 

■sBars, 



Ry.M.as. 



I Every Other Bent ''^^"dars.lStloe, 

K- lo'o"- >| 

Elevort-ion. Sectional End ElevorHon. 

Pig. 36. — ^Arch Culvert. 

men labor was paid 15 cts. per hour and carpenters 

hour. The cost was as follows: 

Material: , ^„ ."^ol^in 

Cement, 23 bbls., at ?1.50 ? 34.50 

Sand, 15 cu. yds., at $0.65. . . . . . . . . • • 9-75 

Crushed limestone, 28 cu. yds., at $1.75 4y.uu 

Steel, 2,500 lbs., at 2.3 57.50 

T „~,T,«« /^QliTr<i».orl aa.DU 



Lumber, delivered 

Total material $184.35 



35 ct5. per 

Per cu. yd. 

Concrete. 

$1.23 

.35 

1.75 

2.05 

1.20 



$6.58 



1700 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Labor: 

Carpenter, forms, 27 hrs ? 9.45 ?0.34 

Helper, forms, 34 hrs 5.10 .18 

Steel placing, 20 hrs 3.00 .11 

Concrete, mix and place, 101 hrst 15.15 .54 

Total labor ? 32.70 $1.17 

Grand total ?217.05 $7.75 

The cost of placing the steel was $0.0012 per lb. 

Cost of an Arch Culvert. — The cost of a concrete arch culvert, 
26-ft. span, 62-ft. barrel (exclusive of excavation), with wing walls 
and parapet, built near Pittsburg in 1901, was as follows, the con- 
crete being 1 to 8 and 1 to 10, hand mixed : 

Per cu. yd. 

0.96 bbl. cement, at ?1.60 $1,535 

1.03 tons coarse gravel, at $0.19 0.195 

0.40 ton fine gravel, at $0.21 0.085 

0.32 ton sand, at $0.36 0.115 

Tools, etc 0.078 

Lumber for forms and centers 0.430 

Carpenter work on forms (23 cts. hr. ) 0.280 

Carpenter work on platforms and buildings 0.050 

Preparing site and cleaning up , . . . 0.210 

Changing trestle 085 

Handling materials 0.037 

Mixing and laying, av. 15% cts. per hr 1.440 

Total per cu. yd ^ $4,540 

Wages per hour were: General foreman, 40 cts.; foreman, 25 
cts.; carpenters, 22% to 25 cts.; laborers, 15 cts. The finished 
structure contained 1,493 cu. yds., total cost being $7,243, including 
$463 for excavation. The work was done for a railway by company 
forces. 

Cost of Six Arch Culverts and Six Bridge Abutments, N. C. & 
St. L. Railway. — Mr. H. M. Jones is authority for the following 
data: An 18-ft. full-centered arch culvert was built by contract 
on the N. C. & St. L. Ry., near Paris, Tenn. The culvert was built 
under a trestle 65 ft. high, before filling in the trestle. The railway 
company built a pile foundation to support a concrete foundation 
2 ft. thick, and a concrete paving 20 ins. thick. The contractors 
then built the culvert, which has a barrel 140 ft. long. No expan- 
sion joints were provided, which was a mistake, for cracks have 
developed about 50 ft. apart. The contractors were given a large 
quantity of quarry spalls, which they crushed in part by hand, 
much of it being too large for the concrete. The stone was shipped 
in drop-bottom cars and dumped into bins built on the ground under 
the trestle. The sand was shipped in ordinary coal cars, and 
dumped or shoveled into bins. The mixing boards were placed on 
the surface of the ground, and wheelbarrow runways were built 



BRIDGES. 1701 

up as the work progressed. The cost of the 1,900 cu. yds. of con- 
crete in the culverts was as follows per cu. yd. : 

1.01 bbls. Portland cement $2.26 

0.56 cu. yd. of sand, at 60 cts 32 

Loading and breaking stone 25 

Lumber, centers, cement house and hardware 64 

Hauling materials 04 

Mixing and placing concrete 1.17 

Carpenter work 19 

Foreman (100 days at ? 2. 50) 13 

Superintendent ( 100 days at |5.50) 29 



?5.29 

It will be seen that only 19 cu. yds. of concrete were placed per 
day with a gang that appears to have numbered about 21 laborers, 
who were negroes receiving about $1.10 per day. This was the 
first work of its kind that the contractors had done. It will be 
noticed that the cost of 42 cts. per cu. yd. for superintendence and 
foremanship was unnecessarily high. 

The work in Tables XXVII and XXVIII was "company work" 
done by negro labor under company foremen. 

TABLE XXVII. — Cost of Six Concrete Culverts on the N. C. & 

St, L. Rt. 

No. of culvert 12 3 4 5 6 

Span of culvert 5 ft. 7.66 ft. 10. ft. 12 ft. 12 ft. 16 ft. 

Cu. yds. of concrete. .. 210 199 354 292 406 986 

Ratio of cement to 

stone 1:5.5 1:6.5 1:5.8 1:5.8 1:6.1 1:6.5 

Increase of concrete 

over stone 16.0% 9.9% 6.3% 12.3% 8.3% 5.3%i 

Bbls. cement per cu.yd. 1.02 0.90 1.06 1.01 1.00 1.09 

Cu.yds. sand per cu.yd. 0.43 0.49 0.44 0.46 0.46 0.47 

Cu.yds. stone per cu.yd. 0.86 0.90 0.95 0.89 0.94 0.94 

Total days labor (incl. 

foremen and supt. ). . 702 607 784 726 768 1,994 

Av. wages per day 
(incl. foremen and 

supt.) ?1.61 $1.33 $1.59 $1.19 $1.47 $1.46 

Cost per cu. yd. : 

Cement 2.18 1.94 2.27 1.82 2.11 2.01 

Sand 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.14 

Stone 0.52 0.52 0.47 0.54 0.47 0.58 

Lumber 0.88 0.43 0.48 0.43 0.31 0.57 

Unload, materials .. . 0.23 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.16 

Building forms 1.07 0.33 0.62 0.47 0.72 0.41 

Mixing and placing. 1.59 1.74 1.69 1.35 1.23 1.26 



Total per cu. yd . . $6.65 $5.30 $5.89 $4.97 $5.19 $4.97 

Note : — 'All these arches were built under existing trestles, and 
in all cases, except No. 2, bins were built on the ground under the 
trestle and the materials were dumped from cars into the bins, 
loaded and delivered from the bins in wheelbarrows to the mixing 
boards, and from the mixing boards carried in wheelbarrows to 
place. Negro laborers were used in all cases, except No. 5, and 



1702 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA, 

Tvere paid 90 cts. a day and their board, which cost an additional 
20 cts. ; they worlced under white foremen who received $2.50 to $3 
a day and board. In culvert No. 5, white laborers, at $1.25 without 
board, were used. There were two carpenters at ?2 a day and one 
foreman at $2.50 on this gang, making the average wage $1.47 each 
for all engaged. The men were all green hands, in consequence of 
which the labor on the forms in particular was excessively high. 
The high rate of daily wages on culverts Nos. 1 and 3 was due 
to the use of some carpenters along with the laborers in mixing con- 
crete. The high cost of mixing concrete on culvert No. 2 was due 
to the rehandling of the materials, which were not dumped into 
bins but onto the concrete floor of the culvert and then wheeled 
out and stacked to one side. The cost of excavating and back- 
filling at the site of each culvert is not included in the table, but 
it ranged from 70 cts. to $2 per cu. yd. of concrete. 

TABLE XXVIII. — Cost of Concrete Abutment, Retaining Walls 
AND Foundations. 

No. of structure 7 8 9 10 11 12 

Cu. yds. of concrete. 310 99 282 78 71 72 
Ratio of cement to 

stone 1:5.7 1:6.3 1:5.9 1:6.6 1:5.7 

Increase of concrete 

over stone 6.2% 10.0% 12.8% 4.0% 10.9% 

Bbls. cement per cu.yd. 1.09 0.95 0.99 0.96 1.03 1.39 

Cy.yds. sand per cu.yd. 0.47 0.45 0.44 0.51 0.45 0.56 

Cu.yds. stone per cu.yd. 0.94 0.91 0.90 0.96 0.90 1.09 
Total days labor (incl. 

foremen) 573 226 599 128 131 224 

Av. wages per day 

(incl. foremen) $1.43 $1.88 $1.46 $1.69 $2.05 $1.55 

Cost per cu. yd. : 

Cement $2.32 $1.66 $1.98 $2.07 $2.19 $2.95 

Sand 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.18 0.17 

Stone 0.52 0.18 0.22 0.48 0.18 0.65 

Lumber 0.56 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.51 0.34 

Building forms 0.35 0.40 1.09 

Mixing and placing. 1.94 3.38 1.36 2.21 1.74 2.59 

Totals $5.88 $5.91 $5.09 $5.23 $4.80 $6.70 

Note: — Structure No. 7 consists of two abutments to carry a 24-ft. 
span bridge made of I-beams. Bins to hold stone and sand were 
built on the railway embankment. At the head of the bin a part 
of the bank was dug away under the track, and long stringers put 
in to carry the track. The rock was dumped from the car into this 
opening and shoveled into the bin. The forms for the concrete 
were, of course, simpler than for the arches in Table XXVII ; hence 
the labor on them cost less. 



BRIDGES. 1703 

structure No. 8 consists of concrete side walls to support a cedar 
cover, forming a culvert. Slag was used instead of crushed stone 
In this structure as well as in Nos. 9 and 11. 

Structure No. 9 is a retaining wall. There was much handling 
of materials due to lack of room for storage near the work. Old 
material was used for the forms. 

Structures Nos. 10 and 12 are foundations for track scales. It is 
not clear why the labor cost of this work was so very high. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Railroad Culvert in Montana. — ^In 

Engineering-Contracting, July 1, 1908, Mr. Henry A. Young gave the 
following: The following cost data were obtained from the Huntley 
Project of the U. S. Reclamation Service, located at Huntley, Mont., 
and show in detail the construction costs for a culvert carrying the 
canal under the Burlington & Missouri River R. R. The culvert was 
known as the "1st Culvert under the B. & M. R. Ry.," and was of a 
type similar to the designs of W. •W. Colpitis, Assistant Chief Engi- 
neer, Kansas City, Mexico & Orient Ry., having two barrels, each 
barrel being 6 ft. 6% ins. x.7 ft. 6 ins. and 24 ft. long. The roof was 
flat, the walls provided with fillets at top and bottom, and the 
entrance and outlet consisted of warped -walls 20 ft. long opening 
into a canal section 20 ft. wide at bottom and having side 
slopes of 1% on 1. Th© entire structure was of concrete, heavily 
reinforced with Johnson high carbon corrugated bars, 1 in. and % 
in. in diameter. 

The work was not done cheaply, and the figures are given to show 
the outside cost for this class of structure, built under the most 
unfavorable conditions. This was the first structure built on the 
project, the entire gang, mechanics and laborers, was green, and 
the work was done in November and December, 1905, the weather 
being very cold. An 8-hour day was worked. After the experience 
on this culvert the same gang did work for about two-thirds of the 
costs recorded here. The forms for the warped walls in this case 
gave considerable trouble. 

A Municipal Engineering and Contracting Company's 1-3 cu. yd. 
cubical mixer was set about 50 ft. in front of the culvert. A gaso- 
line pump took water from a creek 60 ft. away and delivered it to 
a tank near the mixer. The delivery pipe froze often and delayed 
the work. The mixer was fed by and the concrete was carried by 
wheelbarrows. 

The concrete was put in wet and spaded. A 1-in. course of 1-2 
mortar was placed on floor, copings, etc., and troweled. Chamfer 
strips were used on all sharp angles and fillets in culvert. 

The earth was a sandy clay and was removed with slips, though 
considerable hand work was done in shaping up. 

Sand and gravel were obtained from a pit about 1% miles from 
the culvert. The wheel at pit was about 40 ft., the material being 



1704 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

screened into a bin. The haul was down hill. Cost delivered is 
recorded in table. 

Cement, steel and other materials were hauled from a station 
about 1 mile from culvert. 

The costs recorded do not include backfill, which was paid for 
under puddling, the trimming and finishing of exposed cOxicrete 
walls, nor the construction and removal of a temporary railroad 
bridge. The work was done by contract, but actual costs are given 
whether borne by the contractor or the government, and no allow- 
ance is made for depreciation or for engineering expenses. The 
quantities consisted of 338 cu. yds. of excavation and 162 cu yds. 
of reinforced concrete, the latter mixed in the proportion of 1-2 %-5, 
the maximum size gravel being 2 ins. 

Lumber was taken at its fu'l cost, which is not absolutely correct, 
as it was later used over again on other structures. Probably 
one-third of the lumber charge would have been more nearly cor- 
rect. 

Excavation: Days. Rate. Total. 

Superintendent 31/2 $166.67 $19.44 

Foreman 5 50.00 8.33 

Laborers (loading slips and excavat'g) 31% 2.00 62.75 

2-horse teams, slip and drivers : . 8% 3.60 31.50 



Excavating 338 cu. yds. (sandy clay, 

dry), at $0,361 $122.02 

Forms (162 cu. yds.) : 

Lumber, 10,550 ft. B. M $20.25 $213.64 

Nails, 2 kegs 3.20 6.40 



Total material for forms $220.04 

Carpenters 902/3 $3.00 $272.00 

Laborers 45% 2.00 90.25 

Hauling (teams) 3% 3.60 11.25 



Total labor, building and remov- 
ing forms $373.50 

Materials: 

Cement, 225 bbls $1.76 $396.01) 

Cement, 12% bbls 1.86 23.71 

Sand, 71 cu. yds 1.58 112.18 

Gravel, 134 cu. yds 1.58 211.72 

Coal, 31/2 tons 3.25 11.37 

Gasoline, 25 gals .35 8.75 

Total materials $763.73 

Labor: 

Laborers 141% $2.00 $282.50 

Foreman ISVs 2.40 43.50 

Cement worker 7 13-16 4.00 31.25 

Cement helper 2 % 1.60 4.40 

Teams (hauling cement and water) .... 2% 3.60 10.35 

Total labor, mixing and placing. . $372.00 

Reinforcement : 

Hauling (labor and teams) $16.25 



BRIDGES. 1705 



Bending bars: 

Laborers 11% $ 2.00 $22.25 

Blacksmith llVs 2.40 26.70 

Superintendent (working plans) 1 166.67 5.56 

Foreman 1 50.0'0 1.67 

Blacksmith coal, 3 sacks 1.00 3.00 

Total labor, bending $59.18 

Placing bars: 

Laborers 34 $2.00 $68.00 

Blacksmith 1% 2.40 3.90 

Total labor, placing bars $71.90 

Steel bars, 25,5 85 lbs $0,027 $690.79 

Installing and removing plant: 

Laborers ^V^ $2.00 $9.00 

Teams 5 3.20 16.00 

Total $25.00 

Superintendence : 

Superintendent 32 $166.67 $177.78 

Foreman 31 50.00 51.67 

Total $229.45 

Summary of Concrete, 

Per Cu. Yd. 

Material for forms $1,358 

Labor on forms ■ 2.306 

Materials for concrete 4.714 

Labor, mixing and placing 2,296 

Steel for reinforcement. 4.264 

Hauling steel 0.100 

Labor, bending steel 0.365 

Labor, placing steel 0.444 

Installing and removing plant 0.154 

Superintendence and foreman 1 1 1.416 

Total cost of concrete $17,417 

The cost of the steel reinforcement, in terms of the pound of steel 
as the unit, cost as follows: 

Per lb. 
Cts. 

Steel bars 2.70 

Hauling 0.06 

Bending 0.23 i 

Placing 0.28 

Total 3.27 

Cost of a Stone Arch Culvert.* — This culvert was erected by con- 
tract for the Chicago & West Michigan Ry., in 1891-1892. The 
culvert was built some distance from the original channel, and a 
new channel was cut through to the arch after it was completed. 
The excavation was carried 4% ft. below water level. A cofferdam 
was built of 2x8 in. x 8 in.x 7 ft. sheet piling, which was driven by 
hand. Pumping was done with a centrifugal pump, the power being 
furnished by a traction engine. The pump was run only one-quarter 
of the time, for the water did not come in rapidly. All excavation 
was done by men with shovels and wheelbarrows. 



*Engineering-Contracting, Jan., 1906. 



1706 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The stone for the culvert was a sandstone scabbled at the quarry, 
and but little work had to be done on the top and bottom beds. 
Joints and beds were laid for 10 ins. back of the face with Portland 
cement, and -the rest was laid with Louisville natural cement. Two 
derricks were used alternately and were run witli steam power. 

Work on the excavation commenced Oct. 5, 1891 ; a hand pump 
being used from Oct. 21 to 29 ; and a steam pump being used from 
Oct. 29 to Nov. 26, and from Jan. 29 to Feb. 3, 1892. The first stone 
was laid Nov. 7 ; the centers were raised Dec. 4 ; the keystone was 
finished Jan. 20; the last stone was laid Jan. 25; and the centers 
were struck Jan. 29. The plant was moved away Feb. 6. After 
Dec. 7, salt was used in hot water for mixing the mortar. 

The following was the cost to the railway and to the contractor : 

Price Paid to Contractor. 

1,041 cu. yds. dry excavation, at 25 cts % 260.25 

617 cu. yds. wet excavation, at 75 cts 462.75 

594 cu. yds. excavation for channel, at 25 cts 14 8.50 

16,740 ft. B. M. beech timber in foundation, at $30 502.20 

20,286 ft. B. M. 3-in. pine plank, at $22 446.29 

495.9 cu. yds. first-class masonry cut and placed (inclu- 
ding cement and sand), at $7.50 3,719.25 

504 ft. B. M. sheet piling protection for ends of arch, at 

$14 7.05 

140 hours' work driving sheet piling and riprapping at 

end of arch, at $0.15 21.00 

20 hours, engine and engineman, ditto, at $0.40 S.OO 

10% on $29 labor 2.90 

Total $5,578.19 

Cost to C. (S W. M. Ry. 

481.9 cu. yds. sandstone, at $6.82 $3,284.95 

Contractor's payment as above 5,578.19 

Total $8,863.14 

The above is the cost of sandstone f. o. b. La Porte. There were 
57 carloads of stone, of 272.4 cu. ft. of stone per car, weighing 157 
lbs. per cu. ft. 

Actual Cost of Material and Labor. 

4,000 ft. B. M. 2x8 in X 7 ft. T. & G.'sheet piling, at $14 $ 56.00 

16.740 ft. B. M. beech timber, 12 in. thick, hewed, at $10.. 167.40 

20,286 ft. B. M. 3-in. pine plank in foundation, at $14 283.92 

1,800 ft. B. M. rough hemlock, 3 x 12 ins., in centers, at 

$10 18.00 

1,500 ft. B. M. pine (dressed 1 side), 3x12 ins., in cen- 
ters, at $14 21.00 

1,600 ft. B. M. pine (dressed 1 side,) 2 x 4 Ins., lagging, 

at $14 22.40 

Old timber in bents under center 10.00 

Posts and walling for sheet piling (round timber) . . 10.00 

160 bolts in centers, % x 12 ins., 200 lbs., at 4 cts ^00 

3,000 boat spikes, % x 7 ins., 1,000 lbs., at 21/. cts 25.00 

65 cu. yds. sand, at 75 cts ". 48.75 

95 bbls. Louisville cement, at $1 . . . .' 95.00 

2 bbls. salt, at $1 2.00 

70 cords 16-in. wood, fuel for engines, at $1.25 87.50 

Total for materials $931.97 



BRIDGES. 1707 



Labor: 



34 days foreman of laborers excavating, at $2 % 68.00 

76 days foreman of masons, at $2.50 190.00 

73y2 days engineman, at $2 147.00 

2871/3 days stone cutters, at $3 1,162.50 

10 days carpenters, at $2 20.00 

622 days laborers, at $1.50 933.00 

23 days team, at $3 69.00 



Total for labor $2,589.50 

General expense: 

85 days timekeeper, at $1 $ 85.00 

Repairs to stonecuters' tools 65.00 

30 days traction engine and engineman, at $3 90.00 

60 days rent on engine when idle, at $1.50 90.00 

10% value of $2,000 plant 200.00 



Total general expense . $530.00 

Summary : 

Total materials $ 931.97 

Total labor 2,589.50 

Total general expense 530.00 



Grand total $4,051.47 

Profit to contractor 1,526.72 



Contract cost to railway $5,578.19 

Itemized Cost. 

Dry excavation $ 185.00 or 17.8 cts. per cu. yd. 

Wet excavation and driving sheet 

piles 202.50 or 32.8 cts. per cu. yd. 

Putting 16,740 ft. B. M. beech tim- 
ber in place 40.00 or $2.38 per M. 

Putting 20,286 ft. B. M. plank in 

place 45.00 or $2.22 per M. 

Building and erecting centers.... 31.00 or $6.20 per M. 

Unloading stone from cars 37.50 or $0.07% per cu. yd. 

Cutting stone, 496 cu. yds 1,282.25 or $2.59 per cu. yd. 

Setting stone, 496 cu. yds 483.50 or $0.97 per cu .yd. 

Handling and erecting plant 150.00 

Excavating channel 110.25 or 18.6 cts. per cu. yd. 

Sheet piling and riprap 22.50 

The foregoing record, while very complete, would be more satis- 
factory if it contained a detailed statement of the organization of 
the forces. For example, how many masons, how many mortar 
mixers, how many masons' helpers on the wall, how many tag-men 
slewing the derrick boom, etc., were there to each derrick? Then, 
again, a sketch of the plant layout, and a rough drawing showing 
the general design of the culvert would be a valuable addition. 

While the day of cut-stone arch culverts is rapidly passing away, 
such culverts are still specified. Concrete is cheaper than cut- stone 
masonry, but it is not always cheaper than rubble. We may ex- 
pect to see a greater use of rubble masonry when engineers come ■ 
to have a more detailed knowledge of costs. 

If the contractor is left to himself, he can often build rubble 
masonry at less cost than concrete. Engineers, however, often draw 



1708 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

indefinite or very exacting specifications for rubble, and get, as Sa 
result, prices that are higher than for concrete. Rubble is particu- 
larly cheap where the job is small and where broken stone can not, 
be hauled in except at great expense. 

In considering the cost of excavation above given, it should be 
remembered that conditions were such that the material could be 
moved in wheelbarrows. If a derrick had to be used, the cost 
would have been much more. 

Cost of Reinforced Concrete Subways.* — In 1903 the Lake Shore 
& Michigan Southern Ry. constructed, with its own workmen, three 
reinforced concrete subways at Elkhart, Ind., to carry a highway 
under its tracks and thus do away with grade crossings. 

The three subways had a length of barrel 40 ft., 60 ft., and 160 ft. 
long, respectively, exclusive of wing walls. They were built as 
arches of 30-ft. clear span and 13-ft. headway, with a thickness of 
28 ins. at the crown. 

Steel bars of the Johnson corrugated pattern, made by the St. 
Louis Expanded Metal Fire Proofing Co., were used for the rein- 
forcement, circumferential bars, spaced 6 ins. center to center, being 
laid 2 % ins. from the extrados and intrados ; across these were 
transverse rods, 2 ft. center to center, running the full length of the 
barrel. The steel rods were put in according to the Monier plan. 

The concrete used in the conctruction was mixed generally in the 
proportions of 1 part cement to 3 parts gravel and 6 parts sand. 
The gravel was dug from the foundations and was about one-half 
sand and one-half gravel. The latter component varied somewhat 
and the proportion of cement was varied accordingly, more cement 
being used when the proportion of sand in the gravel increased. 
The concrete was machine mixed and a wet mixture used. 

The three subways contained 4,833 cu. yds. of concrete, the cost 
per cubic yard of concrete being as follows : 

Total. Per cu. yd. 

Temporary buildings, trestles, etc $ 752 $0.15 

Machinery, pipe, etc 416 .08 

Sheet piling and boxing 1,006 .21 

Excavating and pumping 1,620 .33 

Arch Centers and Boxing — 

46 M. ft. at $25 1,150 .24 

10 M. ft. at $13 130 .03 

Labor in centers (carpenters at 22% cts. ; 

laborers, 15 cts.) 2,250 .46 

Concrete Masonry — 

Cement at $1.83 8,861 , 1.83 

Stone 1,788 .37 

Sand and gravel (obtained from founda- 
tion) 240 .05 

Drain tile 103 .02 

Labor 8,091 1.68 

Steel reinforcing rods, at 2% cts. per lb... 3,028 .63 

Engineering, watchmen, etc 508 .11 

Total $29,944 $6.19 

* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 17, 1906. 



BRIDGES. 



1709 



We are indebted to Mr. Samuel Rockwell, Chief Engineer Lake 
Shore & Michigan Southern Ry., ior the above data. 

Cost of a Dry Masonry Box Culvert. — Dry masonry box culverts 
have been used extensively in railroad construction, and their use 
will no doubt continue, especially where the haul of cement is long, 
as in new construction in mountainous sections of the country, also 
where the amount of work to be done does not justify the installa- 
tion of a rock crusher. Records of cost of such work are, conse- 
quently, of value. 

Among the many classes of culverts constructed, none is more 
lasting than a well-built dry masonry culvert. See Fig. 37. Where 
large stones with well defined faces can be secured, such as from 
rock cuttings on railroad work, these culverts can be built strong 
and with a very neat finish. Care should always be taken to secure 
good, firm bottom, and the foundation course should be placed well 
below the bed of the stream, and thus prevent undermining of the 
walls. The paving should not extend under the walls of the cul- 




Sngr.-Contr. 



Fig. 37. — Masonry Culvert. 



vert, for should a part of the paving become misplaced, the small 
paving stones will be washed from under the walls, causing the 
latter to cave in and ruin the culvert. The lower course of stones 
should be as large as can be conveniently handled, so that heavy 
floods, that may injure the pavement will not misplace the wall 
stones. 

We give here the cost of a 3x3-ft. dry masonry culvert, 36 ft. 
long : 

Excavation for foundation 20 cu. yds. 

Laborers, 22 hrs. at 20 cts $ 4.40 

This gives a cost of 22 cts. per cu. yd. for excavation. 

Masonry — 

Mason, 60 hrs. at 40 cts $24.00 

Laborers, 130 hrs. at 20 cts 26.00 

Team and teamster, 40 hrs. at 45 cts. . . . 18.00 
Derrick, 40 hrs. at 15 cts 6.00 

Total $74.00 

The culvert contained 50 cu. yds. at a cost of $74, or $1.48 per 
cu. yd. The stone for this culvert was taken out of a rock dump 
20 ft. away. Some of the large covers had to be handled 400 ft. 
The derrick used was the ordinary three-leg derrick, legs 20 ft. long, 



1710 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



and the derrick boom was 24 ft. long, one set reaching the full 
length of culvert, the derrick cable being operated by horse power, 
pulling through block and tackle. 

Cost of Concrete Culvert Pipe.* — The methods and cost of molding 
4-ft. concrete culvert pipe given in the following paragraphs have 
been obtained from Mr. O. P. Chamberlain, Chief Engineer, Chi- 
cago & Illinois Western R. R. 

During the summer of 1906 Mr. Chamberlain built a number of 
culverts, using a 4-ft. long concrete pipe molded in the form of 



V 



rJ.U.U.'.U.U. - 


T 


I --- 

aIU.UJ.'JJ.'. - 


1 

,,,4 


r '^ 


.... ^•. 



Elevation of Outer Form, 



Loose Wedge 
Shaped 
Staves. 




Section of Inner Form., 




Worizorrtal Section^ 

Fig. 38. — Forms for Culvert Pipe. 

hollow cylinders with square ends. They were molded with an 
interior diameter of 4 ft. and with 6-in. shells, giving an outside 
diameter of 5 ft. These pipes were laid end to end in trenches 
whose bottoms were cut as closely to a circle of 5 ft. diameter as 
could be done with pick and shovel and were covered with earth 
thoroughly tamped around the tops and sides. The pipes were 
used in low embankments, where their tops are but 18 ins. below 
the bottom of the ties, and thus far they have given satisfactory 
service under heavy freight traffic. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 13, 1907. 



BRIDGES. 171 1 

Figure 38 in a reproduction of the working drawings from which 
the forms used in the construction of these pipes were built. Both 
forms are of wood, of ordinanry wooden tank construction. The 
inner form has one wedge shaped loose stave which is withdrawn 
after the concrete has set for about 20 hours, thus collapsing the 
inner form and allowing it to be removed. The outer form is 
built in two pieces with 2 x % -in. semicircular iron hoops on the 
outside, the hoops having loops at the ends. The staves are fas-^- 
tened to the hoops by wood screws 1% ins. long driven from the 
outside of the hoop. When the two sides of the outer form are 
in position, the loops on one side come into position just above 
the loops on the other side, and four %-in. steel pins are inserted in 
the loops to hold the two sides together while the form is being 
filled with concrete and while the concrete is setting. After the 
inner form has been removed, the two pins in the same vertical 
line are removed and the form opened horizontally on the hinges 
formed by the loops and pins on the opposite side. The inner 
and outer forms are then ready to be set up for building another 
pipe. 

The concrete used in manufacturing these pipes was composed of 
American Portland cement, limestone screenings and crushed lime- 
stone that has passed through a %-in. diameter screen after 
everything that would pass through a %-in. diameter screen had 
been removed. The concrete was mixed in the proportions of one 
part cement to three and one-half parts each of screenings and 
crushed stone. All work except the building of the forms was per- 
formed by common laborers. In his experimental work Mr. Cham- 
berlain used two laborers, one of whom set the forms, and filled 
them and the other of whom mixed the concrete. The pipes were 
left in the forms till the morning of the day after molding. The 
two laborers removed the forms filled the day before, the first thing 
in the morning, and proceeded to refill them. The average time 
the concrete was allowed to set before the forms were removed was. 
16 hours. Mr. Chamberlain believes that with three men and six 
forms the whole six forms could be removed and refilled daily. 
Based on the use of only two forms with two laborers removing 
and refilling them each day, and on the assumption that a single 
set of forms costing $40 can be used only 50 times before being 
replaced, Mr. Chamberlain estimates the cost of molding 4-ft. pipes, 
as follows: 

2 per cent of $40 for forms $0.80 

1.1 cu. yds. stone and screenings at $1.85.. 2.04 

0.8 bbls. cement at $2.10 1.68 

10 hours' labor at 28 cts. 2.80 

Total per pipe $7.32 

This gives a cost of $1.83 per lineal foot of pipe or practically 
$7 per cu. yd. of concrete. The pipe actually molded cost $2.50 
per lin. ft., or $9.62 per cu. yd. of concrete, owing to the small 
scale on which the work was carried on — the laborers were not 
kept steadily at work. 



1712 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The pipes were built under a derrick and loaded by means of 
the derrick upon flat cars for transportation. At the culvert site 
they were unloaded and put in by an ordinary section gang with 
no appliances other than skids to remove the pipes from the cars. 
As each four-foot section of this pipe weighs about two tons, it 
was not deemed expedient to build sections of a greater length than 
four feet, to be unloaded and placed by hand. On a trunk line, 
however, where a derrick car is available for unloading and plac- 
ing the pipes, there is no reason why they should not be built in 
six or eight-foot sections. 

Basing his estimates on the above price of $7 per cu. yd. for 
concrete, Mr. Chamberlain has computed the accompanying table 
of comparative weights and costs of cast-iron and concrete pipes 
of various diameters. The cost of cast-iron pipe per pound is 
assumed to be 1% cts. 

Table XXIX. — Showing Relative Thickness, Weights, and Cost 

OF "Standard" Cast-Iron Pipe and Concrete. 

Thickness Weight lbs. Cost 

Size and kind of pipe. in ins. per lin. ft. per lin. ft. 

12-in. cast-iron 33/64 75 $1.22 

12-in. concrete 2 88 0.16 

18-in. cast-iron 47/64 167 2.72 

18-in. concrete 3 220 0.36 

24-in. cast-iron 1 250 4.07 

2 4-in. concrete 4^^ 420 0.68 

30-in. cast-iron 1 1/16 334 5.43 

30-in. concrete 41/2 602 0.88 

36-in. cast-iron 1 % 450 7.32 

36-in. concrete 4% 676 1.10 

4 2-in. cast-iron 1% 600 9.75 

4 2-in. concrete 5% 960 1.55 

48-in. cast-iron 1 7/16 725 11.78 

4 8-in. concrete 6 1131 1.83 

In Table XXIX. the thickness for concrete pipes of various diam- 
eters has been taken as approximately proportional to the thick- 
ness of "Standard" cast-iron pipes of the same diameter, the 4-ft. 
diameter pipes being used as a basis for calculation. 

The first cost of concrete pipes at the place of manufacture 
would, according to the above table, be less than one-sixth of the 
cost of cast-iron pipes. The cost of transportation and of in- 
stalling the pipes would, on account of the greater weight and 
greater number of pieces, probably be very nearly double that for 
cast-iron pipes. 

On account of the lack of reliable data regarding this cost, Mr. 
Chamberlain is unable to give a fair comparative estimate of the 
cost of the two styles of culverts in place. However, since trans- 
portation and installation of iron pipes is but a small proportion 
of the cost of the completed culverts, it is evident that cost of a 
concrete pipe culvert in place would be but a small fraction of the 
cost of a cast-iron pipe culvert of the same diameter, provided the 
pipes were hauled only moderate distances. 



BRIDGES. 1713 

Cost of Placing Cast Iron Pipe Culverts. — Mr. John C. Sesser. 
Engineer of Construction, C, B. & Q. Ry., gives the following data 
on the cost of unloading, hauling and placing cast iron pipe. In 
1905 that railroad on its extension from Centralia, 111., to Herrin, 
used for its culverts ordinary cast iron pipes up to a size of 48 
ins. in diameter. The contract for handling the pipe was let to 
a contractor at 75 cts. per ton per mile for the unloading and haul- 
ing and $2.00 per ton for placing. A careful record was kept of all 
labor employed in handling this pipe, and from these data the 
following results were obtained : 

Number of tons of pipe handled 591 

Cost per ton for unloading from flat and gondola cars $0.33 

Average miles hauled 3.82 

Cost of hauling per ton mile 0.44 

Cost per ton mile for unloading and hauling (av. haul 3.82 

miles 0.53 

Cost per ton for laying 0.55 

Cost per ton in place 2.39 

The greatest distance the pipe was hauled was about 10 miles. 
From the data obtained it was deduced that : The cost per ton for 
unloading the pipe is the same regardless of size ; that the cost of 
laying pipe per ton, for pipe under 30 ins. in diameter, is about 
30 per cent more than for pipe over 30 ins. in diameter. As a 
matter of fact it costs about twice as much per ton to lay 18-in. 
pipe as it does to lay 48-in. pipe. 

Cost of Cast Iron Pipe Culverts. — The labor cost of pipe culverts 
depends almost entirely upon the amount of excavation involved. If 
an existing railway embankment must be cut through, obviously the 
labor cost will be far higher than if the pipe is laid under a trestle 
that is to be filled in. 

For the weight of cast iron pipe, see the section on Waterworks. 
Also consult that section for the labor cost of handling pipe. 

Mr. A. W. Merrick gives the following data of work done in 
1898 on the Chicago & Northwestern. Where the embankment is 
more than 12 ft. high, an open trench is excavated from the toe 
of each slope to a point 6 ft. from the center of the track. This 
leaves a core 12 ft. wide under the track, through which a tunnel 
is dug. It is often well to insert two old stringers under the rails 
to keep the weight off the earth over the tunnel during construction. 
The trench is sheeted with vertical planks and braced. The roof 
of the tunnel is supported by 4-in. plank which rest on 3 x 12-in. 
posts whose feet stand on 3 x 12-in. mudsills running lengthwise of 
the tunnel. Wedges are placed between the posts and the mudsills. 
For a 2 4-in. pipe the tunnel is made 4 x 4 ft. Two planks are laid 
side by side in the bottom of the trench for dollies to run on, 
and each length of pipe is drawn in on a dolly at each end. 

The cost of a 2 4-in. pipe culvert, 48 ft. long, in a bank 13 ft. 
high, was : 

Per lin. ft. 

Cast-iron pipe, 250 lbs., at $16 per ton $2.00 

Labor 1.08 

Total $3.08 



1714 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of a 24-in. pipe culvert, 84 ft. long, in a bank 24 ft. 
high, was: 

Per lin. ft. 

280 lbs. cast-iron pipe, at $16 per ton $2.00 

Labor 1-73 

Plank and nails 0.07 

Total $3.80 

End walls, $69 0.80 

Total ?4.60 

The detailed cost of these two end walls was : 

2 cords stone, at $3.25 % 6.50 

18 footing stone, at $0.80 14.40 

20 coping stone, at $0.50 10.00 

6 sacks cement 1-37 

Mason labor 36.85 

Total $69.12 

Mr. A. S. Markley gives the following costs in 1898 of work on the 
Chicago & Eastern Illinois, laborers receiving $1.50 per day, and 
foremen $2.50. 



Size of Labor. 

pipe. Condition. Per ton. Per ft. 

48-in. Opening provided $1.25 $0.36 

36-in. Tunneling 15 ft. bank 4.96 0.88 

36-in. Trench, 8 ft. bank 3.18 0.63 

18-in. Trench, 41/2 ft. bank (7 tracks) 1.06 0.16 

16-in. Trench, 4% ft. bank ■ 1.06 0.16 

Mr. W. A. Rogers gives the following costs in 1898 on the 
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul. It is not stated just what the 
conditions were, but many of the pipes were drawn through existing 
timber culverts and earth tamped around then. Most of the pipes 
were cast in 6 ft. lengths, and the price was $14.50 per ton. 











Cost of each 


Diameter. 


Material. 


Labor. 


Total. 


masonry end. 


20 ins. 


1.00 


1.08 


$2.08 


$ 43 


24 ins. 


1.20 


1.38 


2.58 


53 


30 ins. 


1.72 


1.42 


3.14 


66 


36 ins. 


2.45 


1.64 


4.09 


78 


42 ins. 


3.35 


1.98 


5.33 


90 


48 ins. 


4.30 


2.36 


6.66 


■ 100 



No pipe smaller than 20 ins. is used, for this is the limiting size 
that a man can crawl through when it is necessary to clean a pipe 
out. Larger sizes than 48 ins. have caused trouble by breaking. 
Pipes were put in by the track department. 

Mr. Geo. J. Bishop gives the following cost in 1898 of work on 
the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific. The pipes were all laid under 
trestles that were to be filled in. Hence the labor cost was lower 



BRIDGES. 1715 

than in the .preceding cases. The price of pipe was $15.80 per ton. 
The following is the cost per lineal foot. 

Weight 

Diameter. per ft. lbs. Pipe. Labor. Total. 

20ihs. 211 $1.67 $0.09 $1.73 

24 ins. 223 1.92 0.17 2.09 

30 ins. 367 2.90 0.22 3.12 

36 ins. 467 3.69 0.42 4.11 

42 ins. 634 5.00 0.70 5.70 

48 ins. 797 6.29 0.72 7.01 

60 ins. 1,263 10.61 1.26 11.87 

In the R. R. Gazette, Vol. 19, p. 122, cast iron culverts made in 
quadrants bolted together are described. The quadrants are pro- 
vided with outside flanges, and with a recess in which tarred rope 
smeared with neat cement is placed before bolting together. No 
skilled labor is required. A 7-ft. culvert, 50 ft. long, contained 45 
short tons of cast iron. The labor of unloading it from the cars 
was $17.50, or 40 cts. per ton, and the labor of putting it in place 
was $150, or $3.30 per ton. 

Corrugated Metal Culvert. — The metal culvert was 18 ft. long and 

4 ft. in diameter, the bottom being 6 ins. lower than the grade line 
of the ditch. Concrete solid walls were built rising from bottom of 
culvert to the ground surface, and extending into both banks. These 
walls were 20 ins. thick to top of pipe, 18 ins. thick to within 8 
ins. of the surface, and the top 8 ins. was 12 ins. thick. The top 
8 ins. was of 1 :6 mortar and the remainder was of 1 :4 :4 broken 
tile concrete. Condemned tile was broken into 1 to 2-in. pieces. 
The walls were 12 ft. long at the level of the top of the pipe and 
20 ft. long at the surface. The forms were constructed by first 
placing the plank parallel to the slopes until the concrete was car- 
ried to the top of the pipe, and up the slopes to the surface. After 
this had hardened for 24 hours, the planking was taken down and 
laid horizontal to construct the center part of the wall. This 
method of constructing the forms required a minimum of lumber 
and no cuting of the lumber. The cost of the culvert was as fol- 
lows : 

1 corrugated metal pipe, 4 ft. diam., 18 ins. long, $6 per ft. $108.00 
Hauling culvert from depot, 2 men and team, 2 hrs. at 65c 

per hr 1.30 

Labor, preparing ditch for culvert, 2 men 3.5 hrs. ea. at 30c 1.40 
Bolting pipe together and lowering into ditch, 3 men, 3.5 

hrs. at 20c 2.10 

37.5 sacks of cement at 75c per sack 28.12 

5.6 cu. yds. of sand at $1.50 per cu. yd 8.40 

5 cu. yds. broken tile at 54c per cu. yd. for breaking 2.70 

Labor of building abutment, 82 hrs. at 20c per hr 16.40 

2 men and team grading, 5 hrs. at 65c per hr 3.25 

Incidentals 3.00 

Total $175.64 

Cost of Tearing Down a Small Bridge. — A small highway bridge 
of S5-ft. span, and roadway 25 ft. wide, contained 10 tons of iron 
in the trusses and 4,650 ft. B. M. in the flooring. The flooring was 
3-in. oak plank on 3 x 12-in. stringers spaced 2 ft. apart, and two 



1716 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

8 X 14-in. stringers under an electric car track. It took 6 men and 
1 foreman 3 days to tear down and store the bridge, at a cost of 
$36. 

A wooden footbridge, 6 ft. wide and 100 ft. long over a creek, 
contained 4,000 ft. B. M. It took 8 men and a team 3 hrs. to tear 
down and remove this structure, which was essentially a light 
temporary trestle floored with 3 -in. plank. The cost was ?1 per M 
for this tearing down. The same gang had originally erected this 
structure at a cost of $3.75 per M. 

Cost of Movinq a 65-ft, Bridge and New Abutments. — A steel 
highway pony truss bridge of 65-ft. span and 16-ft. roadway had 
been erected upon timber pile abutments that had rotted badly. 
New abutments were built adjoining the old abutments, by driving 
12 iron piles for each abutment and its wing walls. These piles 
were of old steel rails 30 ft. long, and were driven 20 ft. deep. A 
small pile driver operated by 5 men and 1 horse averaged 8 piles 
per 10-hr. day, for 3 days. Then 1 day was spent in building a 
falsework, and 2 more days raising and shifting the bridge from 
its old abutments to the new. The cost of pile driving was $30, 
or $1.25 per pile. The cost of building the falsework was $10, and 
the cost of moving the bridge was $20. 



SECTION XIII. 
STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION. 

Need of More Printed Data. — Notwithstanding that this has been 
called the Age of Steel, there have been fewer articles printed on 
the cost of steel work than on any other class of engineering con- 
struction. "We have had books without number on the design of 
steel bridges, but next to nothing in those books on the itemized 
cost of steel bridges. Indeed, aside from the articles on the cost 
of steel bridge erection published in Engineering-Contracting within 
the last four years, practically nothing on this important subject has 
ever appeared in the engineering journals. In the section on Bridges 
will be found the data just referred to. For some time to come, 
too much cannot be published on the methods and cost of steel con- 
struction of all kinds. 

Cross- References. — To avoid duplication, it seems advisable not 
to give In this section any of the data on steel and iron work given 
in other sections of the book, but rather to provide a very complete 
index of Steel Construction and another of Iron Work. Such an 
index will be found in the back of this book. 

As an indication of what will be found on steel and iron in the 
Various sections, it may be well to bear in mind the following facts : 
(1) The cost of shaping and placing steel for reinforced concrete is 
given in the sections on Concrete, on Sewers, on Bridges, on 
Buildings, etc. ; (2) the cost of laying cast iron and steel waterpipe, 
the erecting of steel standpipes, etc., will be found in the section on 
Waterworks ; ( 3 ) the cost of building steel bridges, and viaducts, 
iron and steel culverts, etc., will be found in the section on Bridges; 
(4) the cost of laying steel rails will be found in the section on 
Railways ; V, 3 ) the cost of putting on expanded metal lath, gal- 
vanized iron siding, tin roofing, etc.. will be found in section on 
Buildings. 

As above stated, use the index under Steel Construction and under 
Iron Work. 

Cost of Pneumatic Riveting. — ^Mr. A. B. Manning gives the fol- 
lowing data: 

One 12 hp. gasoline driven air compressor (Fairbanks, Morse & 
Co. ) ; two galvanized iron water tanks ; one galvanized iron gasoline 
tank ; one large main reservoir ; one small auxiliary reservoir ; hose 
and fittings; cost mounted on car $1,073. Operating at 90 lbs. 
pressure this compressor furnished air for 3 pneumatic hammers, 2 
drills, 2 rivet forges, and 1 blacksmith forge, all working at one 



1718 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

time. The 3 hammers and the 2 drills cost (in 1899) $627. The 
cost of repairs for 16 months averaged $3 per month on this 
$1,700 plant. The cost of operating was as follows per day: 

15 gals, gasoline, at 11.2 cts $1.68 

Oil, waste, etc 0.12 

Depreciation (estimated on 20% basis, for 313 

days) 1.09 

Repairs 0.11 

Total per day $3.00 

On the basis of running 3 rivet hammers, this is $1 per hammer 
for power. 

Power for one hammer per day $1.00 

Oil for one hammer per day 0.12 

2 men driving rivets, at $2.40 4.80 

1 man heating rivets 2.20 

Total for one hammer per day $8.12 

A pneumatic riveter on bridge work averages 500 rivets per 10-hr. 
day for $8.12, or $1.62 per hundred rivets. On one day 700 rivets 
were driven, by using an additional man to take out fitting-up bolts, 
etc. The above costs are based upon the erection of 22 bridge 
spans, aggregating 2,455 lin. ft. and 80,065 rivets. 

The cost of riveting by hand is as follows : 

2 men, at $2.40 $4.80 

2 men, at $2.20 4.40 

Total per gang per day $9.20 

Such a gang averages 250 rivets per day, which is equivalent 
to $3.68 per hundred rivets. 

Mr. P. S. Edinger states that with a 12 hp. gasoline driven' 
compressor and an 80 cu. ft. air receiver, five longstroke hammers 
were operated at one time without reducing the air pressure below 
75 lbs. The five hammers when driving 50 rivets (%-in. diam.) 
per minute are using air only about 5% of the time. The same 
compressor will run 2 hammers and 2 drills at one time. The 
drills use more air than the hammers as they run uninterruptedly. 
The drills can be used for boring timber by inserting an auger in 
place of a drill ; but the speed is not high enough for wood boring. 
Two men and a heater form a riveting gang and they drive twice 
as many rivets as three men and a heater drive by hand. The 
cost of fitting up and riveting on new steel bridges (all rivets 
%-in.) was 35 to 40% less than if the work had been done by hand, 
and the work was done better. 

Pneumatic and Hand Riveting. — Mr. Charles Evan Fowler gives 
the following. On the Northwestern Elevated Ry. construction, 
Chicago, percussion riveters were used, driving as high as 500 
rivets per day, with three men at the riveter and a heater. Hand 
gangs on that work averaged 300 rivets. 

In reinforcing the Manhattan Elevated, N. Y., the record is 465 
to 525 rivets per day with percussion machines, and careful tests 
showed that it required 5 cu. ft. of free air per %-in. rivet. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1719 

On the Boston Elevated Ry., in 1900, the long gun type of Boyer 
riveters were used. Owing to the cramped condition of much 
of the work, only 300 rivets per day were driven, two men at a 
riveter and a heater at the forge. Hand gangs drove as many as 
400 rivets per gang per day. 

Cost of Erecting Steel in N. Y. Subway. — The cost of erecting 
the steel posts and girders in the N. Y. subway was as follows on 
one section where 4,300 tons were erected: 

Per ton. 

Labor trucking $ 1.47 

Labor placing and riveting 11.68 

Labor painting 0.90 

Materials for painting 0.70 

Materials for placing and riveting 0.90 

Power 0.30 

Total $15.95 

Iron workers were paid $4 for 8 hrs. ; ' iron foremen, $5; 
painters, $2. There was 1 foreman to every 10 men. 

The contract price for erecting and painting was $13 a ton, so 
that money was lost by the contractor on this work. The men 
worked under difficulties, and with little energy. 

Weight of The Eiffel Tower. — The Eiffel Tower weighs 7,500 
tons. It is 906 ft. high, 33 ft. square on top, and 330 ft. square at 
the base. The power plant is 500 hp. 

Cost of a Gas Pipe Hand Railing. — ^A' gas pipe hand railing for a 
small stone-arch bridge was made of three lines of 1%-in. pipe 
rails and posts. The weight of the pipe was 800 lbs. for 100 lin. ft. 
of railing (5C ft. on each side of the bridge). The cost was as 
follows : 

100 lin. ft. of railing ready to erect $65.00 

Hauling 1% miles 0.60 

1 Qt. asphaltum paint 0.20 

Paint brush 0.20 

9 lbs. sulphur, at 8 cts 0.72 

Iron kettle to melt sulphur in 0.40 

Labor erecting railing, 17 hrs., at 35 cts 5.95 

Labor erecting railing, 2 hrs., at 15 cts 0.30 

Total for 100 ft. of railing. $73.37 

The principal cost of erecting was the drilling of 48 bolt holes 
(% X 2 ins.) in the stone coping. The bolts that passed through 
the cast-iron post bases were held with sulphur. The posts were 
made of 1%-in. gas pipe, crosses and tees. The 1%-in. pipe 
measured about 2 ins. outside diameter, which is a good size for 
hand railing. 

On another job 100 lin. ft. of hand railing were built along an 
embankment. The railing was made of 3 lines of %-in. gas pipe 
(1-in. diam. outside) made as above described, except that each 
post was fastened to an oak plank buried in the, ground, and an 



1720 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



inclined brace ran from each post to the plank. The cost of 100 
lin. ft. of railing was : 

100 lin. ft. railing and posts $37.50 

Labor erecting 31.50 

Total $69.00 

Cost of Erecting a 160-ft. Steel Stack.* — An exceedingly Inter- 
esting job of hoisting engineering is illustrated in Fig. 1. The job 
consisted in erecting a steel stack 66 ins. by 160 ft. in size in one 
piece, after it had been assembled on the ground, with an erecting 
plant consisting of a 72-ft. mast and a 7 x 10-in. Lidgerwood hoist- 
ing engine with the necessary tackle. 



/■-'■■■■-:: -^^^^^ 

1 

t . 








■■"'5*'' yi'~^'^^^'''''^~™^'-^Sf^.^^^^'^^^. "' ■■" 


^^■^^B^l 



Fig. 1. — Erecting Steel Stack- 



The stack was built of %-in. steel for 85 ft. from the base aud of 
%-in. steel for the top 75 f t. ; %-in. rivets were used The stack 
came to the ground in four 40-ft. sections. These were laid in line, 
with the base of the bottom section as close as practicable to the 
foundation, and riveted together on the ground. After beinf 
riveted and lined out the stack was braced or reinforced insiae te 
prevent buckling and crushing of the plates at the slings. T.ho 
bracing consisted of -(- frames of 4 x 6-in. timbers placed Insidi 



^Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 10, 1909. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1721 

the shell and spaced every 5 ft., beginning at a point 20 ft. from the 
top. These frames were wedged into the shell tight enough to hold 
firmly and yet not bulge the plates or seams. 

The next step was to place the hoisting plant. A 72-ft. mast 
was erected on top of the boiler house 20 ft. above ground, so 
that its total height was 92 ft. The mast guys consisted of five 
1%-in. galvanized wire ropes radiating from the spider casting 
at the top of the mast. In addition a sixth guy was attached to the 
mast 20 ft. below the top and carried back directly in line with 
the stack. This guy was designed to prevent the mast from 
buckling under the pull, which failure, if it occurred at all, was 
figured would occur at the point mentioned ; that is, about 2 ft. 
below the top. The mast was a 12 x 12-in. timber. At the top 
of the mast there was fastened a triple block shackled to the top 
casting and also lashed by a wire cable passing four times around 
the mast and securely clamped. The hoisting engine, a 7 x 10-in. 
Lidgerwood, was set 25 ft. to one side of the stack and 125 ft. from 
the base. 

The line used was 1,400 ft. of %-in. crucible steel rope spliced at 
one point with an 18-ft. splice. This line was rigidly inspected 
before it was run through the blocks. It was carried from the 
engine to and through the foot block casting sheave ; thence up the 
mast to the top sheave ; thence down to a single block lashed to 
the stack 30 ft. from its top ; thence up to the middle sheave in the 
triple block lashed to the mast head ; thence down to a second single 
block lashed to the stack 55 ft. from the top ; thence up to the 
right-hand outside sheave of the triple block ; thence down to a 
third single block lashed to the stack 80 ft. from the top ; thence up 
to the left-hand outside sheave of the triple block, and, the free 
end, thence to an anchor in the ground about 60 or 65 ft. from the 
base of the stack. 

The single blocks were lashed to the stack by several turns of 
wire rope passing around the shell and 6 x 6-in. timbers laid along 
it on the under side. These timbers acted both as longitudinal 
stiffeners and as spacers to keep the lashings from sliding up or 
down the shell. To prevent possible cutting of the line the thimbles 
were all removed from the shell of the triple block and the lines 
were kept clear by running them through the middle sheave, then 
to the right and to the left as described above. 

With everything ready as described hoisting was begun at 1 :30 
p. m. and at 5 p. m. the stack was in place with all guys fastened. 
The first lift made was 75 ft. Then hoisting was stopped until the 
permanent guys, 24 in all, each a %-in. wire cable, were fastened 
to the stack attachments. Lifting was then resumed and continued 
until the stack stood only about 15° out of plumb. Hoisting was 
then stopped and the guys secured to their ground anchors. The 
stack was then raised plumb, jacked over the stud bolts on the 
foundation and the guys permanently clamped. 

The cost of the work described was not kept in such a way that 
it can be itemized, but the total cost including riveting, erecting mast 
on the boiler house, raising, buying 4 pairs of cone clamps for the 



1722 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

guys and 4 sets of %-in. blocks for hauling in guys, and bracing the 
stack inside was $250. A gang of 8 men at $1.30 per day and one 
top man at $2.25 per day were employed, with some extra men for 
about 2 hours. 

The erection as described was planned and carried out by Mr. 
George B. Nicholson, a hoisting engineer. Incidentally it may be 
stated that Mr. Nicholson undertook the job after it had been 
rejected as impossible by expert riggers. "We consider this a 
rather remarkable job of hoisting engineering. Only one man, 
Mr. Nicholson, was a skilled man, all the others being ordinary 
laborers with no experience in hoisting and rigging. In addition 
the method of rigging the tackle, using only one line to run through 
three sets of blocks on the stack and one block on the mast, is 
notable. We are indebted for the information from which this 
description has been prepared to P. W. Raymond. 

Cost of Cast- Iron Work.* — The total weight of the cast-iron 
stairway trim, manhole covers, etc., in the U. S. Government 
Printing Office at Washington, D. C, was 80 tons. The total value 
in place was $221.25 per ton. The cost of erection was $62.50 per 
ton, which is an enormously high labor cost, attributable to the fact 
that the work was done by Government forces. 

The wages paid per eight-hour day were as follows : 

Superintendent $5.25 

Foremen 4.25 

Ironworkers 3.45 

Helpers 1.60 

Smith 2.25 

The total weight of the cast-iron frames and baseboard in the 
building was 743.4 tons of the total contract amounting to $107,800 
or $145 per ton. The cost of erection was practically $23 per ton. 

Cost of Shop Drawings for Steel Work.t — Mr. R. H. Gage gives 
the following: 

The data were gathered by the writer while in charge of the 
Drafting Department of A. Bolter's Sons' Structural Steel and Iron 
Works, of Chicago, 111., during the years 1904, 1905 and 1906. 

The works are divided into three different departments, the 
Structural Shop, the Architectural Shop and the Foundry. The 
Structural Shop has a capacity of 800 tons per month. The Draft- 
ing Department employs on an average seven or eight engineers. 
All the work is standardized with regard to details to as great 
an extent as possible, in order to decrease the work in the Drafting 
Room, yet not to such an extent that it would be difficult for the 
shop men to read the drawings. For example, all beam, steel and 
cast iron column connections, with the exception of special cases, 
are not drawn and dimensioned completely, but merely indicated. 
The shop and drafting room have been provided with a set of the 



*Engineering-ContracUng , Mar. 18, 1908. 
^Bngineering-ContracUng, Aug. 28. 1907. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1723 

firm's standards, which have all these connections drawn out com- 
pletely with dimensions and which give lists of the material. 

The data here presented were taken from a great variety of 
work, such as public and private school buildings, churches, 
breweries, malt houses and elevators, grain bins, warehouses, 
libraries, hospitals, apartment buildings, factories and manufac- 
turing .plants, train sheds, mill buildings, ofRce buildings, electric 
lighting plants and pumping stations. 

Table I shows the character of the buildings and also the average 
cost of preparing the drawings. The cost of drafting material 
and blue prints is not included. Where the material for the work 
is to be ordered from the mill and not taken from stock, the 
cutting bills or mill orders are taken as being part of the details. 
Table II (not reproduced here) shows the particulars of the build- 
ings from which the data in Table I were derived. 

Table I. — Cost of Shop Drawings. 

Av. 

cost 

per 

Type. Character of Building: ton. 

1. Entire skeleton construction, i. e., loads all carried to the 

foundation by means of steel columns $1.45 

2. Interior portion supported on steel columns ; exterior walls 

carry floor loads and their own weight 1.22 

3. Interior portion carried on cast iron columns ; exterior walls 

support floor loads as well as their own weight 0.70 

4. No columns and floor beams resting on masonry walls 

throughout 0.85 

5. Structure consisting mostly of roof trusses resting on 

columns 2.47 

6. Structure consisting mostly of roof trusses resting on 

masonry walls 1.25 

7. Mill buildings 2.56 

8. Plat one-story shop or manufacturing buildings 0.74 

9. Tipples, mining structures or other complicated structures.. 4.S8 

10. Malt or grain bins and hoppers 2.47 

11. Remodeling and additions where measurements are neces- 

sary before details can be made 1.87 

There is always a noticeable decrease in the cost of details when 
the plans for the iron work are made and designed by an engineer 
and separated from the general plans. On comparing the cost of 
picking out the structural steel and making the shop drawings from 
the architect's plans and the engineer's plans, it was found that the 
cost of the former is on an average of 35% higher than the latter. 
Where the engineer's plans are made with no dimensions, with only 
the outline and sections given, it being necessary to refer to the 
general plans for the location and dimensions, there is no saving of 
time, and the detailing runs as high as on the architect's plans. 

Inaccurate plans, where the draftsman is continually finding 
errors, cause an increase in the cost, as it is necessary to wait 
and refer the matter to the architect ; and in most cases he. In turn, 
has to check over his plans before he can settle the question, all of 
which causes considerable delay and takes time that might otherwise 
be spent in making the drawings. 



1724 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of structural steel details depends on so many things 
that it is hard to set any fixed rule for determining what this cost 
is. The type of the building is the first consideration ; then the 
architect and engineer, their methods of drawing up their plans; 
and finally the detailing drafting force one is obliged to depend 
upon. 

Cost of Sheeting a Foundation Pit with Steel Sheet Piling.* — 
The old U. S. Custom House on Wall St. in New York City was 
reconstructed in 1908 for the use of the National City Bank. The 
old building was four stories high with heavy stone walls founded 
on spread footings. In addition there were on the front 16 heavy 
stone columns, 12 in a row across the front and 4 inside the 
entrance. The plans for reconstruction involved the removal and re- 
newal of everything inside the main walls which were to be pre- 
served. The new interior was planned to be of steel frame construc- 
tion, the foundations for which would be some 7 ft. to 12 ft. below 
the level of the footings of the old walls and columns. 

The problem to be solved was the construction of the new and 
deeper foundations without undermining the old footings or causing 
any settlement which would crack or otherwise injure the structure 
supported by these footings. The soil was a mixture of clay and 
sand containing many 10 and 12 -in. stones. It also carried consid- 
erable water. Obviously careful precautions were under the con- 
ditions necessary. The plans adopted were to drive a row of Wem- 
linger steel sheeting all around the interior of the building about 
12 ins. from the edges of the footings and with its top left about 
18 ins. higher. 

The sheeting used was the Wemlinger corrugated double, consist- 
ing when driven of two thicknesses of 3/16-in. steel sheets; each 
sheet was 24 ins. wide and 14 ft. long. The two sheets were driven 
together, thus sheeting a width of 34 ins. each driving. The 
driving was done in two steps or nnoves. The first step was to a 
depth of 3 ft. and was made with an Ingersoll-Rand Type D sheet 
pile driver. The remaining depth of about 11 ft. was secured with a 
Vulcan No. 3 steam hammer having a 2,000-lb. ram. A steel plate 
was placed over the pile and on it was set a 2-in. steel block which 
took the blow of the ram. 

The mounting of the drivers was novel. A 1%-in. steel cable 
was stretched horizontally along the inside of the old wall and from 
it were suspended the two hammers and a light tackle for handling 
the sheeting. The lighter hamper was suspended on a differential 
hoist. The Vulcan hammer was suspended from a block operated by 
a crab so mounted that the mounting formed a guide and prevented 
the swing of the hammer. The maximum span of suspending cable 
used was 190 ft. 

Inside the driven sheeting there was built a wall of concrete. 
Pockets or sections about 10 ft. wide were excavated so as to lay 
bare the sheeting at regular intervals and have a supporting core 
between each pair of sections. As soon as tiie excavation of each 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 13, 1909. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1725 

pocket had been carried down about 3 ft. a 12 x 12-in. waling tim- 
ber was set against the sheeting and braced back to the rear and 
bottom of the pocket. The excavation was then carried down to a 
depth of 8 or 9 ft. and a wall or block of concrete was deposited in 
the pocket against the piling. After this concrete had set the cores 
between pockets were excavated and in turn filled with concrete. 
This completed a concrete wall 5 ft. thick entirely around the sheet- 
ing inside. The remaining excavation went on inside this wall and 
was accomplished with absolutely no disturbance of the old masonry 
walls and footings. 

The contractors for the sheeting were the "Wemlinger Steel Piling 
Co. of New York, N. Y. The cost of the work to the contractors was 
as follows : 

Rental of Plant: 

Boiler at $3 per 8-hr. day $ 134.37 

1 IngersoU-Rand hammer at $1.50 per day") 

!-.. 256.36 
1 Vulcan hammer at ?6 per day J 

Total rental ? 390.73 

Repairs to plant 184.18 

Permanent plant 319.09 

Coal at $5.76 per net ton 80.52 

Supplies 22.64 

Labor : 

Driving 1 

House shorers at $3.50 j- $1,089.32 

Foreman at $4.50 J 

Unloading piling laborers at $2.25 32.00 

Steam ] 

1 engineman at $4.50 }- 112.91 

1 fireman at $2.25 J 

Constructing and erecting plant 65.56 

Total labor $1,299.79 

Freight and Haulage: 

Freight $ 334.01 

Hauling 105 tons of sheeting 179.76 

Hauling supplies and equipment 38.16 

Total $ 551.93 

Liability insurance $ 50.77 

Grand total $2,899.65 

The amount of sheeting driven was 638 lin. ft, 14 ft. long, or 8,932 
sq. ft. Including the cost of the sheeting not given above, the cost 
was $0,885 per sq. ft. Exclusive of freight and hauling charges on 
sheeting, $513.77, which may be charged to the cost of sheeting 
ready for driving, the cost of driving was $2,385.88, or $0,267 per sq. 
ft. The labor cost of driving was $0,146 per sq. ft. 

In further comment on these costs the Wemlinger Steel Piling 
Co., which furnishes them to us, writes as follows : 

"You will note that the cost of doing this work was somewhat 
high which, in the first place, is explained by the fact that we had 



1726 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

to employ union labor at high wages. Furthermore the expense for 
rental and repairs of equipment were higher than they would have 
been if we had been regularly equipped for doing this class of 
work. This was, however, a contract which we took mainly for the 
purpose of introducing and demonstrating our material. You will 
note that we have charged the entire cost of the permanent plant 
against this contract, the reason for this being that most of the 
plant was purchased especially for this work. Another reason for 
the high cost is our own comparative inexperience and that all the 
labor employed, which in spite of the fact that members of the 
House Shorers' Union were employed, proved rather ineffective. We 
believe that considering the experience we have now we could 
easily do the same work for at least 25% less cost." 

Cost of Driving Steel Sheet Piling for Cut-off Wall of a Dam.*— 
Mr. Carl P. Abbott is author of tlie following: 

The construction of a concrete dam, with tide gates, to replace an 
old wooden dam on a salt marsh was comDleted in the summer of 
1906 by the Queens County Water Co., of Far Rockaway, N. Y. In 
planning the new work considerable thought was given to the kind 
of sheet piling that would best answer the purpose of keeping the 
water from getting underneath the dam and the choice was made 
of steel sheet piling of the form manufactured by the United States 
Steel Piling Co., of Chicago, 111. Besides supplying the requisite 
water-tight wall, this piling seemed likely to be more durable and 
more surely driven and certain to add considerably to the strength of 
the structure. 

The piling was driven lengthwise of the dam and in the center, 
and, as a turf dike was carried from each end of the concrete dam 
to shore, the piling was carried five lengths beyond the concrete to 
form a sort of bond at the junction of concrete and turf. There 
were two lengths of piling used, 25-ft. and 18-ft. ; the 25-ft. lengths 
at each end of the dam and one length between each gate, and the 
18-ft. lengths under the gates. The 25-ft. lengths were driven flush 
with the surface of the marsh, so the 18-ft. lengths were driven 
flush and then the pile-driver was moved back over the line and 
the 18-ft. lengths run down 7 ft. further with a 10-ft. piece used as 
a runner by bolting a couple of wrcught-iron plates on the lower end 
to hold it on the pile. A half-round pine filling strip was used. 
The material encountered was about 8 ft. of turf, then 3 or 4 ft. 
of sand, then a streak of hard pan and then sand again, and where 
the driving cap was used the piles were not battered at all. Some 
bids were put in for the driving, but as they looked pretty high 
we decided to do the work ourselves. 

We took an old well drilling machine, and with very little car- 
penter work it made a good pile-driver. A 1,500-lb. hammer 
was used and a driving cap made by the United States Steel Piling 
Co. was also used for most of the work. 

The driving gang usually consisted of three men, who were taken 
from the company's force and were very quickly broken in, with 



ilngineering-Contracting, Jan. 16. 1907. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1727 

some extra men for a part of the time to haul the piles across the 
channel from the railway track and to move the machine to the job. 
The cost of driving given below includes hauling the piles over and 
moving the machine to the job. The cost of moving the machine 
away was not included, as the machine and boiler were used for 
other purposes for some time after. 

The cost of labor, supplies, etc., was as follows : 

20 days' labor at $2.25 $ 45.00 

9% days' labor at $2.10 19.95 

■ 81/2 days' labor at $2.00 17.00 

2 days' labor at $1.75 3.50 

34 days' labor at $1.50 51.00 

Total labor cost $136.45 

17 days' use of machine at $2.00 34.00 

2 tons coal at $5.00 10.00 

Superintendence at 5 per cent 9.00 

Total machinery and supplies $ 53.00 

Grand total $189.45 

There were 55 piles each driven 25 ft., making a total of 1,375 lin. 
ft. driven at a cost of 13.8 cts. per ft. for the driving. As the men 
were inexperienced it cost more to drive the first few piles than 
afterward, and if the same number were to be driven again the cost 
of driving would be very much decreased. As a whole, the steel 
piling was very satisfactory and easy to handle and drive, even 
by men not accustomed to that sort of work. 

Cost of Steel Sheet Piling for Cofferdam,* — The cost of 140 steel 
'sheet piles in place was as follows. The piles were 26 ft. long, 
driven to an average penetration of 22 ft. 

The work was done by the U. S. Reclamation Service. 

The type of piling is that manufactured by the Carnegie Steel 
Company for the United States Steel Piling Co., of Chicago. The 
piling cost at the factory is 70 cts. per lin. ft., and as its weight is 
35 lbs. per running foot, the cost therefore was 2 cts. per lb. The 
freight rate from the factory at Pittsburg to Whalen, Wyo., was $1 
per 100 lbs., thus making the total cost f. o. b. cars at Whalen, 
about $1.05 per lin. ft. 

The line of piles under consideration was driven in August, 1907, 
and forms a part of the south side of the cofferdam used in the 
construction of the concrete diversion dam on the North Platte 
River, at the head of the Interstate canal. None of the piles were 
driven under water, and the matei'ial into which they penetrated 
consists of sand and coarse gravel. The piles were dragged from 
the railroad siding to the river bank, and carried across the river on 
cables. 

The pile-driver outfit used was a Lidgerwood single drum 20-hp. 
hoisting engine and a 2,800-lb. hammer, having an average drop ot 
8 ft. "When no hindrance occurred by accidents to the machinery, 
the average number of piles driven per twelve hours wa.s 27, with 
an exceptionally high run on August 9 of 29. 



*Engineering-ContracUng , June 10, 1908. 



1728 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The regular pile-driving crew consisted of one foreman, one 
engineer and four laborers. Bach of these men received 35 cts. an 
hour for his work except in transporting the piles from the railroad 
station to the driver, in which case the laborers were paid for at the 
rate of 25 cts. an hour and teams at the rate of 20 cts. per hour. 
The total labor cost of unloading and moving the piles from the 
railroad to the driver was $53.25, making a unit cost per linear foot 
of pile of $0,015. The total labor cost for driving was $190.05, mak- 
ing a unit cost of $0,052 per linear foot of pile. 

Below are tabulated the total and unit costs of the piles in place 
distributed under the headings of plant depreciation, labor, ma- 
terials and supplies. The depreciation on the engine was about 2% 
of its original cost, while that on the driver was about 30% of its 
original cost, including repairs made on it. The charge for materials 
contains in addition to the piling and freight thereon, $28 worth of 
wood fillers used in connection with the piling. The charges under 
supplies consist of coal and oil for the engine and labor for carrying 
drinking water. Six tons of coal were used, at $5.50 per ton. 

Unit cost Unit cost 
Distribution of Total 

costs. cost. 

Plant depreciation . $ 60.00 

Labor 243.30 

Materials 3,850.00 

Supplies 44.18 



Unit cost 


per foot per foot of 


per pile. 


of pile penetration. 


$ 0.416 


$0,016 $0,019 


1.742 


0.067 0.079 


27.508 


1.058 1.250 


0.312 


0.012 0.014 



Total $4,197.48 $29,978 $1,153 $1,362 

Cost of Driving Some Steel Sheet Piling.* — The work for which - 
the costs are given consisted of the construction of cofferdams, pre- 
liminary to building the substructure of a double track bridge for the 
Norfolk & Western Ry. at Chillicothe, O., the work being necessi- 
tated by a change of line at that point. 

The cofEerdams were built of the steel piling manufactured by the 
U. S. Steel Piling Co., of Chicago, the same piling being reused for 
the three piers. The cofEerdam was 16 ft. x 62 ft., and 156 pieces 
of piling, 16 ft. in length, were used. The piling was driven to a 
depth of 14 ft. below water level, the water being from 3 ft. to 6 ft. 
deep. The material into which the piles were driven consisted of 
coarse gravel ranging in size from % in. to 8 ins. in diameter. 

In driving the piling for the first cofferdam, the piling was picked 
up from the shore by means of a steam derrick and put into place 
for the pile-driver. An ordinary drop-hammer pile-driver, rigged 
on a scow, and having a 2,000-lb. hammer, was used. 

The piling in the first cofferdam was driven in three days, the 
crew and their wages per 10-hr. day being as follows: 

Foreman $ 5.00 

Engineer on derrick 3.00 

Tagman 2.00 

Engineer on pile driver 3.00 

Six men handling pile driver and boat 10.50 



Total $23.50 



* Engineering -Contracting, June 6, 1906. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1729 

The total cost of driving the 156 pieces of piling was $70.50, or 
45.2 cts. per piece. 

The same crew constructed the next cofferdam, five days, however, 
being consumed in the work. The main reason for the difference of 
time was in the facilities for handling the piling. In this coffer- 
dam the piling was picked off the shore by the derrick, placed on the 
scow on which the pile-driver was rigged, and then taken to the site 
of the cofferdam, where it was placed in position by the driver in- 
stead of by the derrick as in the first case. The cost of driving the 
piling for this cofferdam was $117.50. 

The above figures do not take into account fuel and plant rental, 
nor the cost of braces and waling which were used as described 
below. 

In order to make the cofferdam ready for pumping out a 6-in. x 
8' in. waling piece was bolted to the inside of the sheet piling and 
braces placed across from side to side at intervals. From three 
to five braces were used along the top, but were used at no other 
point. 

We are indebted to Mr. L. E. Sturm, Railroad Contractor, of 
Columbus, O., for the information in the above article and for the 
illustrations. 

Cost of Steel Sheet Piling in a Cofferdam and in Caissons.* — 
As it is only within the last few years that steel sheet piling has 
come into general use, the experience of the William P. Carmichael 
Co., Engineers and Contractors, of Williamsport, Ind., with this 
form of piling will be of interest to our readers. About a year ago 
this firm purchased enough sheet steel piling to construct a coffer- 
dam of a total perimeter of 132 ft. and a depth of 12% ft. This 
was first used in the construction of a pier foundation for the 
Wabash R. R., in the Huron River, near Detroit, Mich. The water 
at the point where the pier was to be constructed was from 5 to 
8 ft. deep. The bottom consisted of from 2 to 3 ft. of alluvium, on 
top of a blue sandy clay, partaking in a measure of the nature of 
quicksand. This being the company's first experience with steel 
sheet piling, they attempted to assemble the units and complete 
the box before driving. This was finally done, but at the expense 
of a good deal of unnecessary labor and time. At first it was 
proposed to drive six pieces at once by striking a cap covering that 
many piles, but it was soon found that a pretty stiff blow from a 
2,600-lb. hammer was required to drive two at a time. The piles 
were driven to a depth of 3 ft. below the proposed bottom of 
concrete. 

After the piles were driven to the required depth, an attempt was 
made to pump out the water from the caisson. A 6-in. centrifugal 
pump was used, but failed to lower the water level more than a few 
inches. An outer row of 2-in. wooden sheet piling was then driven 
about 5 ft. from the steel box, and the space filled with clay and 
puddled. This served its purpose, for with the exception of a few 



*Engineering-Contracting, Mav 9, 1906. 



1730 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



leaks, very little water came into the caisson. An attempt was 
made to stop these leaks with clay, but owing to the presence of 
sand in the clay, the attempt was only partially successful. 

The piles were withdrawn in practically as good condition as when 
driven, so that the cost of material was only charged at 2% on ac- 
count of the foundation. After the first piece was loosened, the 
piles in the foundation were withdrawn at a very small cost. Owing 
to an accident to the foremen, no accurate cost account was kept 
of this work. 

The next use of the steel piling by this firm was in caissons for 
four piers for a highway bridge across the Wabash River ; for this 




e«>.-cg4kTP^ 



Fi£ 



-Driving Steel Piling. 



work some excellent cost data are given further on. Three of these 
piers were upon an island. At the time the work was done these 
sites were not covered by water. The piles were driven into coarse 
sand and gravel. The plant used for the work consisted of a small 
land pile-driver, having derrick and steam hoist for handling the 
hammer, which weighed 2,000 lbs. A steel" bound wood driving 
head was fitted between leads and was used to protect the head of 
the piles in driving. An illustration of the plant is given in Fig. 2. 
In pulling the piling, it was often necessary to use a pulling lever 
with a 4 to 1 purchase, the derrick and hoist being hitched to lever. 
On this job strips of wooden batten were used in the batten or the 
groove between each two steel piles, and in this way the coffer- 
dam was made practically watertight. So much so, indeed, that 



I 

i 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1731 

an ordinary diaphragm pump would have handled all the water 
except for what came up from the bottom of the pit. 

The piling- was found to be in good condition after being pulled, 
only two pieces being in bad shape. And those could be fixed up 
by an ordinary blacksmith at a cost not exceeding one-half of the 
value of the pieces. 

Now as to the cost of driving and pulling the piling. Below is 
given the cost record on the third pier. Work on this was begun 
Oct. 6, 1905, and completed Oct. 11. The gang and rig worked a 
total of 55 hours and finished driving the piling in 4% days. Some 
days, however, the gang worked for 15 hours, as is shown in the 
labor cost below. The wages of laborers were from 17^^ cts. to 
20 cts. per hour, depending upon proficiency and length of service. 
The enginemen and derrickmen received 22% cts. per hour, and the 
foreman on the job for which the data below are given was paid 
25 cts. per hour. The low rate of wages paid to the foreman was 
due to the fact that he was a new man in that position and did not 
have to assume much responsibility, Mr. M. C Andrews, of the con- 
tracting firm, being in charge of the work in person. 

The cost of driving and pulling was as follows : 
Driving : 

Labor $ 93.00 

Use of machinery, fuel, etc., 5 days 15.00 



Total for driving $108.00 

Pulling : 

Labor $ 50.00 

Use of machinery, fuel, etc., 8 days 10.00 



Total for pulling $ 60.00 

As 130 piles were each driven 11% ft., or a total of 1,495 ft., the 
cost per foot of pile for driving was 7.2 cts. ; the cost per foot of 
pile for pulling was 4 cts., making the total cost for driving and 
pulling 11.2 cts. As is shown in the table below this 11.2 cts. also 
includes the cost of straightening bent and warped piles. The labor 
cost of driving the piles can be further summarized and in the 
tabulation below is given the rate of wages and the hours worked 
each day by the various classes of labor. 

Rate. 

Oct. 6 

Oct. 7 

Oct. 9 

Oct. 10 

Oct. 11 



Labor 


Driv- 


Straighten- 


Cost. 


ing. 


ing piles. 


;13.54 
28.92 
17.70 
22.17 
10.68 


$13.54 
21.00 
14.00 
22.17 
10.68 


v. 9 2 
3.70 



Totals ,. $93.01 $81.39 $11.62 

The work accomplished each day was as follows : Oct. 6, drove 
21 piles and worked straightening bent piles; Oct. 7, drove 25 piles 
and finished straightening bent piles; Oct. 9, drove 30 piles; Oct. 10, 
drove 35 piles; Oct. 11, drove 19 piles. 

In conclusion we would call especial attention to the Illustration 
showing the pile-driving plant. It will be noted that the hammer 



1732 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was suspended from the boom of a derrick, and that the engine 
used to opera.ts the derrick was also used to drive the piles. The 
hammer is shown outside the leads of the pile-driver, but, in driving, 
it is placed between the leads. In fact, the same engine operated 
the derrick, shifted the driver from place to place, placed the pile 
in position and handled the hammer. The fall was not usually 
greater that 20 ft., and consequently very little damage was done 
to the derrick. 

The steel piling used on the above work was made by the United 
States Steel Piling Co., of Chicago, III. We are indebted to the 
William P. Carmichael Co. for the information given in this article. 

Cutting Off Steel Sheet Piles with the Electric Arc* — In the in- 
teresting paper on steel sheet piling by Mr. Wm. A. Fargo, which 
was published in our issue of May 1, 1907, some data were given 
of the use of the electric arc in cutting off steel piles at the New 
Hoffman House foundation work in New York City. Since the pub- 
lication of this article we have received from Mr. Frank C. Perkins, 
Electrical Engineer, of Buffalo, N. T., a photograph of the work in 
progress, together with a brief account of the apparatus employed. 

The steel piles being cut are % in. thick in the web and 3 ins. 
at the interlocking points. It is stated that the time required in 
burning the %-in. steel is four minutes per foot and the time taken 
at the interlocking points is said to be 8 minutes. 

The arc light carbon is held in a metal clamp fastened to a 
metallic rod and socket, which is in turn bolted to a long wooden 
pole, the cable conducting the current being flexible and connected 
to the metal clamp of the carbon terminal. The steel to be cut is 
connected to the other conductor from the alternating current cir- 
cuit. As shown in the illustration the men are protected from the 
extreme heat and terrific glare by goggles and asbestos masks as 
well as gloves, as it has been found that the carbon fumes pro- 
duced by the high power electric arc, affected the lips and other 
parts of the face and hands. 

About 1,200 amperes are being utilized at 50 volts pressure, alter- 
nating current being employed stepped down to the above voltage 
from the high pressure service of 2,500 volts. Single phase alter- 
nating current is employed, taken from the street service mains, 
the frequency being 60 cycles per second. 

Referring to this work Mr. Fargo, in his paper says: "The cost 
of cutting steel piling with current at 10 cts. per kw. and the attend- 
ant at 50 cts. per hour, is stated to be as follows per foot of piling 
cut: 

Cost of current $2.56 

Labor 0.40 



Total $2.96 



* Engineering-Contracting, June 26. 1907. 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1733 

This is rather high, and the hack-saw would probably be cheaper. 
However, with current at say 3 cts. per kw.-hour the cost per foot 
would be but $1.17. Even at this rate, with labor competent to use 
a hack-saw at 25 cts. per hour, the saw would be the cheaper." 

Cost of Driving Steel Sheet Piling.* — ^A valuable record of ex- 
perience in driving steel sheet piling in hard soils was given re- 
cently by Mr. Wm. A. Fargo, Civil and Hydraulic Engineer, of Jack- 
son, Mich., in a paper read before the Michigan Engineering Society. 
Through the kindness of Mr. Fargo we have received some addi- 
tional cost data on steel sheet piling work, and these, with the 
original paper, are printed in the following paragraphs: 

Steel sheet piling is used for purposes entirely similar to wood 
sheet piling, but is m.uch more certain in results obtained. The 
principal applications of steel sheet piling are as follows: (1) 
Cofferdams: For building and structure foundations, including 
bridge piers and abutments. Also for mine shafts where the piling 
may be forced down in the manner of a caisson or shield. ( 2 ) Dams : 
For the dam itself, as for low dams ; thus requiring no other coffer- 
dam or pumping out of the foundation pit. As a cut-off across a 
valley under a dam or beneath a core wall. As a permanent en- 
closing wall down to an impervious stratum for the masonry struc- 
ture of the dam, or for power house or other building not neces- 
sarily part of a dam ; or as a downstream toe protection only. 
( 3 ) Retaining Wall : Temporary or permanent as required in ■ 
building footings close to an existing structure. This use is essen- 
tially similar to the cofferdam. 

The types or varieties of steel sheet piling are as follows : ( 1 ) 
Special rolled sections, composed of forms requiring special rolls for 
producing the piling. If there are return bends, or flanges transverse 
to the plane of rolling, the piling must pass through a series of spe- 
cial rolls. (2) Built-up sections. Usually built up from standard 
structural steel shapes. These may consist of single webs with 
riveted interlocking members, or of double parallel webs held in 
relative position by bolts and pipe separators. The double-web sec- 
tions are usually driven alternately with single web members. A 
number of forms of steel sheet piling are shown in Pig. 1. The fol- 
lowing points need to be considered in selecting a design of piling 
for any work: 

Water-Tightness. — In deep cofferdams a prime requisite is water- 
tightness. The clearance of interlock of adjoining piles must 
therefore be reduced as much as possible and still allow of driving. 
The clearances used on the built-up types are from %-in. to ^-in. 
all around the interlock. In hard soils ^-in. is none too much. In 
many sections of piling over 15 ft. or 20 ft. long there will be 
found such kinks and crimps, partly the result of handling on and off 
cars, that driving with a tight interlock is a serious problem. 
With such a close interlock, piles not true or perfect in alignment 
often refuse to drive when there is encountered a stratum of hard- 
pan or layer of small boulders. Under such conditions piling often 



*Engineering-Contracting, May 1, 1907. 



1734 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



refuses under the heaviest drop or steam hammer. If driving is 
persisted in it will result in the crippling of the pile either at the 
top or bottom. Crippling at the bottom means usually an escape 
from the interlock and a curving to one side exactly like a clinched 
nail except that the curve of the clinch may have several feet 
radius. 

TV JT \ 

No. 1 Friestedt. 



ii jr^ 



No. 2 Friestedt. 



I jrr^D. 



No. 3 Fargo .'<- 



o- 



■< 



^ 



No. 4 United States. 



¥ 

No. 5 Vanderl<loot. 



^ ^ 

I No. 6 Ql 

{ H 



No. 6 Quimby. 






No. 7 Williams. 




No. 8 Wemlinger. 



Wemlinger (Corrugated.) 
Fig. 3. — Representative Steel Sheet Pile Sections. 



Stiffness. — In locations where there are encountered strata of hard 
material such as often occur in river valleys, where the drift has 
been eroded and redeposited, the steel piling to be a success must 
possess considerable stiffness laterally to prevent crippling. There- 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 



1735 



fore examine the radius of gyration of the proposed section of 
piling. It is the writer's experience tliat for hard driving the free 
or unengaged edge (see X in No. 3, Fig. 3) of the pile being driven 
should be of a width (at right angles to the web) of one-third to 
one-half of the width of the engaged web (see T in section No. 3, 
Fig. 3). 

Methods of Driving. — The friction of long lengths of steel piling, 
with their inevitable crimps, will make necessary a heavy hammer, 
say a 4,500-lb. ram on a steam rig or a 3,000-lb. or heavier drop 




Fig. 



Half 
Top Plan j Bottom Plan 

-Cast-iron Follower for Driving Steel Sheet Piles. 



hammer. Most of the writer's experience in driving steel sheeting 
has been with the heaviest No. 1 Vulcan steam hammer (4,500-lb. 
ram) ; total weight of hammer resting on the pile, 10,000 lbs. These 
hammers are adjusted to strike about 65 times per minute with 
3 1/4 -ft. stroke. These large (No. 1) Vulcan hammers are prefer' 
ably fitted with a "McDermid base" consisting of a 1%-in. circular 
steel plate about 13 ins. in diameter. These plates are slipped into 



1736 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

a slot in the base of the hammer housing and receive the blow of the 
ram. Tlie wood striking block or cushion is set into the lieavy 
cast-iron follower on the pile and projects up into the socket of the 
hammer housing so that the McDermid base plate rests directly on 
the wood block. These wood blocks are made about 20 ins. long, 
15 ins. in diameter at the center, and are hewed to about 12 ins. 
at top and bottom to enter respectively the hammer housing and 
the follower. 

In driving through hard clay layers, or when the piling is bound 
slightly by crimps in the interlock, the blows of such a hammer may 
run as many as 30 to 60 to the inch of penetration on such driving. 
In hard driving, one or two fresh blocks per 30-ft. pile are often re- 
quired. The time consumed in stopping and changing blocks is from 
two to five minutes, provided the block is not badly split and 
wedged in. It is necessary to watch the failure of these blocks 
closely, as with a crushed or broomed block the efficiency of the 
hammer is very low. Therefore the blocks are removed as soon as 
they show signs of failure. The crushing usually takes place toward 
the middle of the length of the block, making a hot, steaming pulp 
of the tough oak or maple fiber for a length of 3 to 5 ins. Partially 
seasoned swamp oak, rock maple and blue gum have given the 
writer the best service. 

The form of cast-iron follower used with steel piling, and shown 
in Fig. 4, was designed by the writer, and patterns are owned by 
the Vulcan Iron Works, Chicago, 111., and the Jarvis Engine & 
Machine Works, Lansing, Mich. Fig. 5 shows a steel pile being 
driven, fitted with the cast-iron follower and the spindle-shaped 
follower block above described. Flat-base followers are some- 
times used, but do not hold the steel pile in position. 

Process of Driving. — In driving steel sheet piling, if the alternate 
sections are light and heavy (that is, the heavy piles having double 
webs or double "Z" bars), drive first a heavy section. Go slowly and 
take great care to have the initial pile plumb and exactly in position. 
Then interlock a light section with the first one driven. On account 
of time consumed in cutting off steel sheeting weighing 30 lbs. to 54 
lbs. per sq. ft., it is always desirable to back the driver away from 
the work. In close quarters approaching a wall, or in the end of a 
deep cut for a core wall, for instance, this is not always practicable. 
In starting small cofferdams, as for piers or foundations on build- 
ings where close adherence to the line is required, one of the 
manufacturers of piling recommends that temporary piles about 
4 ft. long be driven and taken out one at a time, and the long pieces 
of piling substituted, thus insuring starting correctly with the long 
piling. 

Borings in casings are made along the proposed line of steel sheet- 
ing at say 25-ft. intervals, and the steel ordered to length accord- 
ingly. Except when encountering rock, boulders or extremely 
tenacious hardpan, the piles can usually be driven to a fairly uni- 
form top level. When the objective foundation soil or rock bottom 
Is in an eroded river valley which has again been refilled with drift 
the hard bottom will frequently be covered with a generous number 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 



1737 



of boulders which have dropped out of the eroded material because 
too heavy to be washed down stream. This boulder stratum is, of 
course, quite irregular and not so desirable a material in which to 
terminate sheet piling as a good clay or slightly disintegrated rock 




Fig. 5. — ^View Showing Arrangement for Driving Steel Sheet Piles. 

(A) Bottom of Steam Hammer; (B) Wooden Block; (C) Cast 

Iron Follower ; (D) Steel Pile. 



covering sound bedrock. Often too sound bedrock is deeply chan- 
neled and filled with pot holes, so that piling may need some cutting 
If it cannot be allowed to extend above grade, as into concrete 



1738 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The process of cutting steel piling by means of the electric arc 
was employed on the construction of the foundations for the New 
Hoffman House, Broadway and 25th St., New York City. The cost 
of cutting steel piling with current at 10 cts. per kw. and the at- 
tendant at 50 cts. per hour, is stated to be as follows per foot of 
piling cut : 

Cost of current $2.56 

Labor 0.40 

Total $2.96 

This is rather high, and the hack-saw would probably be cheaper. 
However, with current at say 3 cts. per kw.-hour the cost per foot 
would be but $1.17. Even at this rate, with labor competent to use 
a hack-saw at 25 cts. per hour, the saw would be the cheaper. 
The current used was at 50 volts, which was stated to be more 
satisfactory than either 25 or 105 volts. Tests showed 650 amperes 
consumed at the arc, which at 50 volts equals about 32 kw. 

Boulders. — In passing a line of steel sheeting around a boulder of 
large size, special angle or bent piling sections are desirable to 
make the departure from and return to the line as planned. Some 
of the types of sheeting, like the Quimby or the United States, adapt 
themselves readily to such changes of alignment without using 
special pieces. Bending a %-in. or %-in. web longitudinally to 
short radius in the field is not an easy matter. When using rigid 
non-reversible interlocked piling in quicksand, and on work of such 
cliaracter tliat close water-tightness is required, special corner 
pieces should be kept on hand for emergencies. In some soils it may 
be permissible at times to turn corners by driving outside the i)iter- 
lock and tight against a projecting flange, placing the new piling 
at any angle required. Sometimes it may be feasible to fill gaps and 
make closures with specially prepared squared wood piles, with 
points beveled to make the wood piling hug the steel. 

In hard driving among stones, only a type of piling of great 
stiffness laterally and with perfect interlocking features will insure 
success. On such work there must be no alternate unstiffened sec- 
tions of piling. The interlock must be perfect and confining, diffi- 
cult to open up and permit the escape of the inside member. Even 
with the heaviest and most confining type of interlocked piling now 
on the market in this country, this opening of interlock will some- 
times occur when boulders are encountered. Small boulders in 
gravelly soils are usually displaced without trouble. Sometimes 
the aid of a water jet is a help. Usually steel piling will drive 
easily enough in ordinary soils without a jet. In hard clays a jet 
is not of much assistance and is very slow. Obviously it is not 
often required to drive steel sheeting far into hard clays. 

In driving four lines of steel piling across the valley of the 
Muskegon River in Mecosta and Newaygo counties, Michigan, the 
borings showed "floating" masses of clay hardpan sometimes several 
hundred feet across, and from 1 ft. to 12 ft. thick. Below was 
quicksand before reaching a bed of hardpan continuous across the 
valley at a depth of about 30 ft. Hence the necessity for driving 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1739 

through the floating hardpan. (See Fig. 6.) The hardpan in 
question consisted of about 70% of bluish clay and 30% of sharp 
sand, well mixed and compacted by water deposition and pressure, 
to the texture of frozen soil. In this hardpan were stones from 
gravel up to boulders of 5 tons weight. This material cost $3 per 
cu. yd. to trench, and angular fragments would lie for months in 
water moving with a velocity of 5 ft. per second without material 
erosion or change in form. This was at the Big Rapids dam of the 
Grand Rapids & Muskegon Power Co., in 1905. Lubricating the 
piling with grease before driving, and with a stream of water 
under pressure when driving, seemed to be of no special aid in the 
hardpan mentioned. 

On the work at the Big Rapids Dam, above mentioned, tlae single- 
channel Friestedt piling frequently buckled and recourse was then 
had to double Z-bar Friestedt sections entirely. This piling with 
two Z-bars on all pieces weighs about 54 lbs. per sq. ft., and to 
reduce the weight the writer has had a single Z-bar riveted to every 
channel instead of using double Z-bar channels exclusively or 



Fig. • 6. — Cross Section of Muskegon River at Big Rapids Dam. 

alternating with plain channels. The single Z-bar to every channel 
permits always having the free or uninterlocked edge of the pile 
being driven stiffened by a Z-bar. On this type, shown at No. 3 in 
Fig. 3, the writer has obtained a patent and has used over 1,000 tons 
with satisfactory results. Nearly all of this was driven into hard 
soils. On the Muskegon River work one carload was used of a 
special rolled type of piling having less radius of gyration than the 
built-up types above mentioned. Of this piling fully one-half 
buckled ; it was thrown away and replaced with the other type. 

Pulling Piling. — The manufacturers of steel piling place much 
stress on the ability to pull up the piles, but in his experience in 
hard soils the writer has never been able to get jacks enough on a 
piece of steel piling driven 12 ft. in the ground to pull it out. In 
soft river mud and silt, pulling with heavy tackle can be done. 
Probably a hammer striking upward blows in the manner similar to 
that used in pulling pipe casings from test bore holes would be oper- 
ative except in cases of badly crimped and bent piles. [Note. — Steel 
piles can be pulled with stump pullers, as described in the section on 
Timberwork.] 

Cost of Piling. — In lots of 500 tons, Friestedt steel piling sold in 
1904 and 1905 at $1.93 per 100 lbs. on cars at the mill ; this on 
alternate double Z-bar and channel and plain channel type. In 



1740 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

May, 1906, this type sold at $2.03, and $2.23 with a Z-bar on every 
channel, the additional price being on account of extra handling 
when every piece has to be riveted. The plain channels require only 
a 1-in. hole punched in the end for lifting. 

The cost of driving per lin. ft. of piling 13i^ ins. net width, with 
a steam hammer, on the Muskegon River work above mentioned ran 
from 714 cts. to 20 cts. per sq. ft. in place ; labor at 20 cts. per hour ; 
foreman, 25 cts. The 7% cts. cost was on land in sand and gravel 
with some clay strata; piling 20 to 40 ft. long. The average 
amount of piling driven per hour in fairly good ground is 40 to 50 
lin. ft, or 400 to 500 lin. ft. per day of 10 hours, including the 
time of moving the pile driver. In general the cost per sq. ft. for 
driving steel sheeting is 25% less than for driving wood. 

Splicing Piling. — The longest single lengths driven on the writer's 
work was 44 ft., but spliced lengths up to 5 8 ft. have been success- 
fully used. In doing spliced work it is not necessary actually to bolt 
or rivet the splices, the procedure being to use two lengths so as 
to break joints in the interlock. For 58-ft. piling, suppose we use 
36-ft. and 22-ft. lengths: First drive the 36-ft. piece down, then 
move back and drive a 24-ft. pile down within a foot of the top of 
the 36-ft. piece; now move forward and set a second 22-ft. piece 
on top of the first 36-ft. piece and drive both down to full depth. 
Now move back past the 24-ft. pile and drive a 36-ft. piece in No. 3 
position ; then a 32-ft. piece on top of the 24-ft. piece. By moving 
back and forth so as not to lose the interlock below ground only 
two different lengths are required. 

Supple AiENTART Data. 

In addition to the cost given above in the original paper the 
author furnishes us some figures of tlie comparative cost of oper- 
ating pile drivers by electric hoist and by steam hoist, and also 
further figures of the cost of sheet pile driving. These figures we 
give below. 

Cost of Operating Pile-Drivers. — The following figures show the 
relative cost of operating two 2,000-lb. drop-hammer pile-drivers, 
one equipped with electric hoist and the other with steam hoist. 
These drivers had 38-ft. leads and worked side by side under the 
same conditions on round piling in sand and clay : 

Driver with Electric Hoist. 

One foreman, at $3 $.3.00 

Six helpers, at $2 12.00 

One team delivering at % day at $4 2.00 

Interest on investment at 5% (100 days' 

service) 1.00 

Depreciation 1.00 

Superintendence and engineering 2.00 

Power 2.00 

Total $23.00 

In this driver the hammer was returned in the leads at a speed 
of 250 ft. per minv^e 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1741 

Driver with Steam Hoist, 

One foreman, at $3 $ 3.00 

Five helpers, at $2 10.00 

One engineer, at $i!.25 2.25 

One fireman, at $1.75 1.75 

One team delivering at % day at $4 2.00 

Interest on investment at 5% (100 days' 

service) 1.00 

Depreciation 1.00 

Superintendence and engineering 2.00 

Fuel, 1/2 ton coal, at $4 2.00 , 

Total $25.00 

In this driver the hammer was returned in the leads at a speed of 
360 ft. per minute. 

It will be noted that the electric hoist used was of considerably 
slower rope speed than was the steam hoist. Mr. Fargo notes that 
had the speed of the electric hoist been as great as that of the 
steam hoist it would have shown a lower cost record per lineal foot 
of piling driven on account of one less man at lower pay operating 
it. He states that any ordinarily bright man can be taught to oper- 
ate an electric hoist in a day's time, but that a steam rig takes two 
men of more experience. 

Cost of Driving Steel Sheeting with Steam Hammer. — The follow- 
ing figures show the cost per lineal foot of driving steel sheet piling 
in clay and sand, using a Vulcan steam hammer, with a 4,500-lb. 
ram and a total weight on the pile of 10,000 lbs. The driver had 
55-ft. leads. The figures are for a 10-hour working day. 

Cost of Operating Driver. 

One foreman, at $3 $ 3.00 

Four helpers, at $2 8.00 

One engineer, at $2.50 -. . 2.50 

One fireman, at $1.75 1.75 

One team delivering at % day at $4 2.00 

Interest on investment at 5% (100 days' 

service) 2.50 

Depreciation 2.00 

Superintendence and engineering 2.00 

Fuel, 1 ton coal, at $4 4.00 

Total $27.25 

The steel piling, consisting of one 15-in. channel and one special 
Z-bar as shown in sketch 3, Fig. 1, weighed 38 lbs. per lin. ft. and 
cost delivered 2.385 cts. per lb. The record for 16 days' driving,- 8 
days of fairly difficult work in strong soil and 8 days of fairly easy 
driving in sandy soil, was 6,400 lin. ft., or 400 lin. ft, or 15,200 lbs. 
per day. We can now summarize as follows : 

Item. Per day. Per lin. ft. 

15,200 lbs., at 2.385c $362.52 $0.9063 

Unloading from cars, at 1,^0 per lb.. . 76.00 0.1900 

Operating steam hammer 27.25 0.0682 

Total $465.77 $1.1645 



1742 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Cleaning Steel by Sand Blast and Painting by Com- 
pressed Air. — Dr. De Witt C. Webb gives the following: 

At the IT. S. Naval Station, Key West, Fla., are two large steel 
coal sheds whose vertical side walls are composed of %-in. steel 
plates, and are from 16 to 20 ft. high. The action of heat and im- 
purities in the coal, combined with that of the large quantities of 
salt water used for extinguishing spontaneous combustion fires 
rapidly corrodes the interior steel work and necessitates its thor- 
ough cleaning and painting every time the sheds are emptied. 

Shortly after the writer was detailed to this station his attention 
was attracted to this subject, and he concluded that the use of a 
portable sand blast cleaning and spray painting outfit would be very 
advantageous in point of efficiency and time as well as cost. This 
idea meeting with the approval of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, 
the following outfit was purchased, at a cost of $2,090, delivered at 
the naval station : 

1 horizontal gasoline engine, about 20 hp. 

1 air compressor, capacity about 90 ft. of free air per minute 

compressed to a pressure of 30 lbs. per' sq. in. in one stage, 

belt connected to engine. 
1 rotary circulating pump, belt connected to engine. 
1 galvanized steel water tank^ 

1 air receiver, 18x54 ins. 

(The above apparatus was all mounted on a steel framed 
wagon with wooden housing.) 

2 sand blast machines, capacity 2 cu. ft. of sand each. 

2 paint spraying machines, one a hand machine of % gal. 
capacity for one operator, the other of 10 gals, capacity for 
two operators. 
100 lin. ft. of sand blast hose. 

200 lin. ft. of pneumatic hose for sand blast machines. 
400 lin. ft. of pneumatic hose for painting machines. 
100 lin. ft. of air and paint hose for painting machines. 

4 khaki helmets, with mica-covered openings for the eyes. 
200 lin. ft. of 2-in. galvanized iron pipe. 

Previously to the delivery of this material shed "A"- had been 
emptied of coal and the work of cleaning the inside surface of the 
wall plates was begun by hand in the usual manner. About 7,000 
sq. ft. out of a total of 9,000 were thus cleaned at a cost of slightly 
over 4 cts. per sq. ft. On the arrival of the sand blast outfit the 
hand work was stopped and after a short preliminary trial the 
machine cleaning was started. The work proceeded rather slowly 
until the men became accustomed to it, yet the 2,000 sq. ft. of 
previously untouched surface was thoroughly cleaned and the 7,000 
sq. ft. of hand cleaning was all gone over and much improved at a 



STEEL AND IRON CONSTRUCTION 1743 

total cost for labor of $97.68 and for gasoline of $16.15, The force 
consisted of the following: 

Per day. 
1 engine tender $ 3.04 

1 helper (in charge of the work and tending 

machines) 2.24 

2 laborers on machines, at $1.76 each 3.52 

1 laborer drying sand, filling machines, etc 1.76 

^otal $10.56 

From 10 to 15 gals, of gasoline were required per day of 8 hours 
(costing 19 cts. per gal. here). 

For the painting the coal tar paint originated by Civil Engineer A. 
C. Cunningham, U. S. N., was used. This paint was prepared with 
the following proportions (by volume) : Coal tar, 4 parts ; kerosene 
oil, 1 ; Portland cement, 1. 

The Portland cement was first well stirred into the kerosene oil, 
forming a creamy mixture ; this mixture was then carefully stirred 
into the coal tar. It was freshly mixed as needed and kept well 
stirred. The cost of this paint at Key West is about 15 cts. per gaL 
It was found not to be so well suited to the pneumatic spraying 
machine as oil paint, but worked very well ; though, of course, 
the machine used considerably more than hand work. In all, on this 
shed, 64% gals, of paint were required for 9,000 sq. ft., or about 
1 gal. to 140 sq. ft. The force used in painting was the same as in 
cleaning, with the addition of a laborer, who followed up the paint- 
ers with a long handled brush and spread the paint uniformly. The 
cost of painting this shed was: For labor, $28.16; for gasoline, 
$3.80. 

On shed "B" a total area of 12,500 sq. ft. was cleaned and 
painted. This steel work was covered with a scale nearly % in. 
thick and was deeply pitted. The scale and rust were very tough 
and extremely hard to remove. On this work it was found econom- 
ical to keep men ahead of the sand blast with sledges, loosening 
and shaking off as much of the scale as possible. The labor cost 
of the whole work on this shed (cleaning and painting) was $460, 
including the cost of moving, setting up and removing. Gasoline cost 
$81. A total of 86 gallons of coal tar paint was used, covering 
about 145 sq. ft. per gal. Total cost of labor, fuel and paint, $553.90, 
or 4.4 cts. per sq. ft. It is impossible to separate the cost of clean- 
ing and painting on this work, as only small areas are painted at one 
time, the painting being done by one operator, the other working the 
sand blast. This was done in order to expose the cleaned steel to 
the atmosphere for as short a time as possible. 

A fine silica sand was used, that being the only kind available 
except coral sand, which was tried, but found to be too soft. A 
coarse sand would probably have been more effective. The sand 
was all saved, dried and re-used several times. About % cu. yd. of 
fresh sand was required daily. The sand must be kept perfectly dry 
for this purpose, and there are patent sand driers manufactured. 
Very good results were obtained on this work, however, by the use 



1744 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of a sheet of boiler plate set up on bricks with a wood fire under- 
neath. 

No claims are made of extreme economy in the above work. 
The extremely thick and tough scale to be removed, the high fuel 
and labor cost of compressing air simply for this work, and (prob- 
ably) the lack of the best kind of sand for the purpose, combined to 
make the work expensive. With these drawbacks it was, however, 
considerably cheaper than hand work and, what is more important, 
the cleaning was much more effective and thorough than could pos- 
sibly have been done by hand. 



SECTION XIV. 

ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS. 

Cost of Engineering. — When work is done by contract, engineer- 
ing costs from 3 to 10% of the total cost of construction. This in- 
cludes surveys, plans, estimates and inspection during construction. 
The major part of this cost is usually the supervision and inspec- 
tion of the contractor's work. Hence, if the job is small, and if the 
work drags, the cost of engineering will approach, or even exceed, 
10%. 

Throughout this book are given actual records of the cost of engi- 
neering, for which consult the index under "Engineering." 

Engineering Charges For Services.* — The following information 
as to the minimum charges for engineers' services in Iowa, was col- 
lected by the Secretary of the Iowa Engineering Society and printed 
in the Proceedings of the 21st annual meeting of the .society: 
Expert Services: 

One day $50.00 

Each additional day 25.00 

Expert testimony, per day 50.00 

Services of hydraulic or sanitary engineer in examinations, 

reports, estimates, per day 25.00 

Construction engineer's and detail work, per day 10.00 

Special rates for corps of engineers and inspectors to take 

charge of work according to importance and degree of skill 

required. 

City Surveys and General City Work: 

Field and office work, per day of 8 hours 8.00 

First assistant, per day of 8 hours 4.00 

Second assistant, per day of 8 hours 2.40 

Time taken going to and returning from survey to be included 

in above 8 hours. Not less than half a day to be charged. 

Surveys of single city lots, not less than 6.00 

Unless previous surveys have been made of adjoining lots in 

same plan, then 5.00 

No description to be drawn for less than 1.00 

No charge to be less than 1.00 

Laying out of additions of not less than 20 acres, $1.00 per lot, to 
' include working plats and plat for .record ; but owner must fur- 
nish the design of plat or else pay engineer for time consumed 

in determining method of division. 
All expenses, such as railway fare, hotel expenses, conveyances of 

any kind, posts, monuments, are to be charged for as extra. 
County Land Surveys hy County Surveyor: 
Fees prescribed by law. Surveyor, 50 cts. per hour; assistants, 

20 cts. per hour. All expenses are allowed and charged for as 

extra. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 20, 1909. 

1745 



1746 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



There seems to be doubt as to what constitutes a day for a County 
Surveyor, but, as the law prescribes 8 hours in county road work 
and various other service, it is safe to say that 8 hours is a legal 
day, and it has been held so in the courts. 

Cost of Engineering on City Work. — During the years 1901 to 
1906, some $2,133,000 were spent for sewers, waterworks and pave- 
ments in Salt Lake City, Utah, and the engineering cost 4.8% of this 
amount. 

Cost of Engineering in Reservoir Construction.* — On the East 
Branch, the Carmel, the Titicus and the Jerome Park reservoirs, 
for New York City, the cost of engineering averaged 10% of the con- 
struction cost of $9,532,000. This engineering includes all surveys, 
test borings, designs and inspection. However, 10% is a very high 
percentage of cost for work of such magnitude. 

Rations for IVlen Camping. — In the rules for a railway location 
prepared by McHenry for surveying parties on the Northern Pacific 
Ry., the following list of rations and supplies is given : The food 
is sufflcient to support 14 men at least 30 days. 



400 lbs. flour. 

50 lbs. buckwheat. 

40 lbs. oatmeal. 

30 lbs. cornmeal. 

25 lbs. rice. 

10 lbs. tapioca. 

10 lbs. sago. 

10 lbs. barley. 

10 lbs. cornstarch. 

10 lbs. baking powder. 

3 lbs. soda. 

12 packages yeast cakes. 

150 lbs. sugar. 

20 lbs. salt. 

50 lbs. coffee. 

10 lbs. tea. 

5 gals, syrup. 

1 gal. vinegar. 
400 lbs. potatoes. 

50 lbs. beans. 

20 lbs. onions. 

2 cases (24 qts.) tomato. 
2 cases corn. 

1 case peas. 

1 case pears. 

1 case cherries. 

2 cases peaches. 
1 case milk. 

1 case coal oil. 

2 lbs. mustard. 



1 

¥2 
V2 

% 
% 

1 
1 

6 
6 



lb. 



ground pepper, 
lb. ginger, 
lb. cinnamon, 
lb. allspice, 
lb. nutmegs, 
bottle lemon extract, 
bottle vanilla extract, 
bottles pickles, 
bottles catsup. 
- bottles Worcester sauce. 
100 lbs. ham. 
100 lbs. bacon. 
25 lbs. dried beef. 
25 lbs. codfish. 
40 lbs. lard. 
25 lbs. cheese. 
60 lbs. butter. 

1 case cornbeef. 
50 lbs. dried apples. 
50 lbs. dried peaches. 
50 lbs. dried prunes. 
10 lbs. dried currants. 
1 box raisins. 
1 box crackers. 
1 box macaroni. 
1 box soap. 
12 boxes matches. 

1 box candles. 

2 lbs. lye. 

10 lbs. sal-soda. 



The total net weight of food in this list is about 2,100 lbs., or 
about 5 lbs. of food per man per day, on the basis of 420 man-days. 
This is certainly ample. In fact men can live on much less if con- 
centrated food that swells on cooking is used. The following i$ a 



*Engineering-Contracting, July 8, If^J 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 



1747 



list used by the author on a 30-day camping expedition where every 
superfluous pound of weight was cut out : 

One man. One man. 

30 days. 1 day. 

Flour 25 lbs. 0.83 1b. 

Oatmeal 8 lbs. 0.27 lb. 

Rice 4 lbs. 0.14 1b. 

Beans (dried) 8 lbs. 0.27 lb. 

Sugar 12 lbs. 0.40 1b. 

Salt : lib. 0.03 1b. 

Butter 2 lbs. 0.07 lb. 

Bacon 10 lbs. 0.33 1b. 

Baking powder 1 lb. 0.03 lb. 

CofEee 2 lbs. 0.07 lb. 

Tea % lb. 0.01 lb. 

Dried prunes 2 lbs. 0.07 lb. 

Pepper ." % lb. 0.01 lb. 

Condensed milk 3 cans 0.10 lb. 

Total 79 lbs. 2.63 lbs. 

This list furnishes 0.23 lb. nitrogenous food, 0.30 lb. fat, and 1.30 
lbs. starch and sugar per man per day. Dr. Pavy (Encyclopedia 
Britannica) states that a laborer requires daily 0.25 lb. nitrogenous 
food, 0.10 lb. fat, and 1.18 lbs. starch and sugar (carbohydrates). 
If the trip is to be a long one, 1% ozs. of juice of lime per man per 
day should be taken to prevent scurvy, unless potatoes can be car- 
ried along. 

F. W. D. Holbrook, in Jour. Assoc. Bng. Soc, 1883, p. 180, gives 
the following rations for 20 men for 12 days, where all food has to 
be packed on the backs of men (1,400 lbs. of food for 240 man- 
days) : 

12 bottles prepared mustard. 100 lbs. granulated sugar. 

25 lbs. butter. 50 lbs. brown sugar for syrup. 

170 lbs. ham. 10 lbs. tea. 

75 lbs. canned cornbeef. 15 lbs. coffee. 

50 lbs. mess pork. 70 lbs. beans. 

300 lbs. flour. 25 lbs. rice. 

25 lbs. dried apples. % lb. ground pepper. 

25 lbs. dried peaches. % lb. ground ginger. 

50 lbs. prunes. 1 lb. ground cinnamon. 

25 lbs. raisins. 12 lbs. soap. 

10 lbs. currants. 15 lbs. candles. 

12 lbs. baking powder. 6 boxes matches (300 in box). 

10 lbs. salt. 

The U. S. Geological Survey ration list is as follows for 1 man 
for 100 days: 



1748 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

100 lbs. fresh meat, including fish and poultry. 
50 lbs. cured meat, canned meat, or cheese. 
15 lbs. lard. 

80 lbs. flour, bread or crackers. 
15 lbs. cornmeal, cereals, macaroni, sago or cornstarch. 

5 lbs. baking powder or yeast cakes. 
40 lbs. sugar. 

1 gal. molasses. 
12 lbs. coffee. 

2 lbs. tea or cocoa. 

10 cans condensed milk, or 50 qts. fresh milk. ■ 

10 lbs. butter. 

20 lbs. dried fruit, or 100 lbs. fresh fruit. 
20 lbs. rice or beans. 
100 lbs. potatoes or other fresh vegetables. 
30 cans of vegetables or fruit. 

4 ozs. spices. 

4 ozs. flavoring extracts. 

8 ozs. pepper or mustard. 

3 qts. pickles. 
1 qt. vinegar. 

4 lbs. salt. 

Eggs may be substituted for fresh meat in the ratio of 8 eggs lor 
1 lb. of meat. Fresli meat and cured meat may be interchanged on 
the basis of 5 lbs. of fresh for 2 lbs. of cured. Dried vegetables 
may be substituted for fresh vegetables in the ratio of 3 lbs. of fresh 
for 1 lb. of dried. 

This ration weighs 5.3 lbs. per day per man, and it costs about 
50 cts. per day per man. The list was based originally on the 
U. S. army ration, but has received some modifications dictated by 
experience. 

Cost of Rations, U. S. Reclamation Service.* — From the annual 
report of the U. S. Reclamation Service for 1904-5, the cost of 
rations for the employes of that body, engaged on several of the 
reclamation projects, were from 40 to 80 cts. per man per day, aver- 
aging about 55 cts. 

Equipment For and Cost of Railroad Surveys. — Mr. F. Lavis in 
his admirable book on "Railroad Location, Surveys and Estimates," 
has given valuable information on railway surveying and estimating, 
from which the following data have been abstracted: 

The following is a list of the camp outfit; 
1 office tent with fiy, 14 x 16 ft. 3 drafting and office tables. 
3 tents, 14 X 16 ft. 6 camp chairs. 

1 cook tent, 16 x 20 ft. Map chest with necessary sta- 

tionery, paper, etc. 



*Engineering-ContracUng, Oct. 24, 1906. 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 



1749 



Dining Table. 

3 dozen agate ware dinner plates. 
3 dozen agate ware cups. 

2 dozen agate ware saucers. 
2% dozen steel knives. 

2Va dozen steel forks. 

2% dozen German silver teaspoons. 

lYs dozen German silver dessert spoons. 

1 dozen German silver tablespoons. 

Va dozen tin salt boxes. 

V2 dozen tin pepper boxes. 

% dozen round agate ware pans, 2 qt. 

Va dozen round agate ware pans, 1 qt. 

1 dozen round agate ware pans, 1 pt. 

1 carving knife and fork. 

7 yds. oilcloth, 48 ins. wide. 

3 standard trestles. 

5 boards, 12 by 1% ins. by 18 ft. (dressed). 

Cooking Utensils. 



1 No. 8, 6-hole, wrought-iron 


1 


small frying pan. 


range. 


2 


griddles. 


1 tea-kettle. 


4 


tin pans with covers, 1 gal. 


1 large cast-iron pot. 




each. 


1 small cast-iron pot. 


2 


stewpans. 


2 large frying pans. 


1 


3-gal. coffeepot. 


1 gal. teapot. 


1 


chopping bowl. 


4 dripping pans. 


1 


bread board. 


6 baking tins for bread. 


1 


rolling-pin. 


12 tin pie plates. 


1 


biscuit cutter. 


2 butcher knives. 


1 


nutmeg grater. 


1 steel. 


1 


coffee mill. 


2 large meat forks. 


1 


spring balance. 


1 chopping knife. 


6 


galvanized iron buckets. 


1 meat saw. 


6 


tin dippers (one for each tent 


2 large iron spoons. 




and two in cook tent). 


1 soup ladle. 


2 


can openers. 


1 cake turner. 




corkscrew. 


1 flour sieve. 




broom. 


1 colander. 




scrubbing brush. 


1 5 -gal. tin dishpan. 




alarm clock. 


1 5-gal. tin bread pan with 




table (same as drafting tables). 


cover. 







Miscellaneous. 

Va dozen Dietz lanterns. 

3 large tin lamps (central-draft, round wicks). 

2 large galvanized-iron washtubs. 

1 washboard. 

(4 lengths of pipe with dampers, 12 lengths of 



Sibley stoves 
plain pipe), 
water kegs, 2 



6 washbasins. 



gals. each. 



Tools. 



1 grindstone and fittings. 
1 monkey wrench. 

1 pick. 

2 shovels. 

1 short crowbar. 
1 hand-saw. 

1 cross-cut saw. 

2 hand-axes. 



4 chopping-axes. 

% dozen axe handles. 

1 bundle sail twine. 

Va dozen sail needles. 

1 sail palm. 

10 assorted sizes wire nails. 

100 ft. manila rope, %-in. 



1750 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Lunch Box. 

2 dozen agate ware dinner plates. 

2 dozen agate ware saucers. 

1% dozen steel knives, 

li/i dozen steel forks. 

xy^ dozen German silver teaspoons. 

1% dozen German silver dessert spoons. 

1 2 -gal. coffeepot. 

Each locating party was organized as follows: 

Locating engineer $150 to $175 

Assistant locating engineer HZ to 125 

Transitman 90 to 100 

Leveler 80 to 90 

Draftsman 80 to 90 

Topographers, two* 80 to 90 

Rodman 50 

Head chainman 50 

Rear chainman 40 

Tapeman, two* 30 

Back flagman 30 

Stake marker 30 

Axemen (three to five as necessary) 25 to 30 

Cook 50 

Cook's helper 20 

Double teams and driver, furnish their own feed, driver 

board in camp 65 to 90 



*One of the topographers assisted by two tapemen, with a transit 
determined land lines and drainage areas. 

Each man was supplied by the company with subsistence when 
in camp, but was required to provide himself with an army cot 
and sufRcient bedding, and advised to provide a substantial canvas 
covering for the latter, an ordinary wagon cover, costing from $3 to 
$5, being the most easily obtainable and most satisfactory. 

Most of the lines ran through a rather badly broken up, rolling 
country (Indian Territory, Oklahoma and Texas), with short cross- 
drainage, about 75% being wooded. Topography was taken 300 ft. 
on each side of the line, a hand level and rod being used, dis- 
tances out were placed, and 5-ft. contours located and sketched. 
The average amount of grading was 100,000 cu. yds. per mile;; 
maximum grade, 0.5% ; maximum curve, 2°. The cost or the sur- 
veys was as follows for 563 miles of preliminary and 188 miles of 
located lines: 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 



1751 



Peeliminart Lines. 



87 days. 90 
Miles run and topography taken. 145.8 
Miles run, no topography taken. . 39.3 

Total miles preliminary run 185.1 

Total number payroll days 1380 

Average daily number of men. ... 15.9 
Average miles per day per party. 2.12 
Average daily cost, subsistence 

per man $0.37 

Average daily pay per man.... 1.81 

Daily cost for teams 6.00 

Contingencies 88.48 

Daily cost of party 41.72 

Cost per mile 19.61 

Located Lines 



No. 2. 
2 2d to 
er20th. 


No. 3. 
1st to 
19th. 


No. 4. 
21st to 
er21st. 


>>^'C5 


>> 


>> --S 


+J >i 




■^-'■^J 


t-'-'H 




H P.+-' 


d2 






) days. 


111 days. 


30 days. 


166.3 


164.1 


23.2 




16.0 


3.6 


166.3 


180.1 


31.8 


1323 


2033 


635 


14.7 


18.3 


21.2 


1.85 


1.62 


1.06 


$0.49 


$0.38 


$0.58 


2.03 


1.66 


1.66 


6.22 


6.92 


12.87 


112.95 


91.84 


125.73 


44.48 


45.57 


64.61 


24.07 


28.08 


60.95 


CO 


« 


■<i« 


d 


^1 


6 


Z 




Z 


>, 


•2 cs fi 


>v 


+j 




i- 


'-'nJ? 




ri 


cs a 


i* 


Ph 


fM 


Ah 



65 days. 37 days. S days. 48 days. 66 days. 

Miles located 56.0 37.8 7.6 42.6 39.2 

Total number payroll 

days 1400 709 151 1498 1283 

Average daily number of 

men 21.5 19.0 19.0 31.2 19.4 

Average miles per day 

per party 0.86 1.02 0.95 0.89 0.5? 

Average daily cost sub- 
sistence $0.37 $0.39 $0.39 $0.40 $0.45 

Average daily pay per 

man 1.72 1.61 1.61 1.71 1.60 

Daily cost for teams. .. 6.69 5.75 5.39 10.33 6.76 

Contingencies 143.36 46.76 15.70 196.00 133.84 

Daily cost of party 53.90 45.22 45.12 80.29 48.54 

Cost per mile 62.57 44.33 47.50 90.47 81.72 

The preliminary lines run by Party No. 1 were over a severe coun- 
try, involving the heaviest construction work on the whole line.. 
Party No. 3 also had much difficulty in getting a grade between 
certain points. Party No. 2 had the lightest country. Party No. 
4 worked only a short time and the cost of moving a long distance 
from other work is included. It is probable that the cost of work 
done by this party was really about 60% more than the others per 
mile, instead of 100% more. 

On the locating work, Party No. 1 had an expensive sounding 
party consisting of a man in charge, 4 or 5 laborers and a team> 



1752 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Parties Nos. 2 and 3 were combined, after each had run ", short 
distance of located line separately, which increased the unit cost 
of the located line, as shown. 

The total cost of 188 miles of located line was $192 per mile 
of located line, and this includes the cost of running the prelim- 
inary lines. 

Cost of 2,000 Miles of Railway Surveys — In a paper by Mr. W. S. 
McPetridge, published in Trans. Am. Soc. C E., 1909, and reprinted 
in Engineering-Contracting, May 19, 1909, is given a very complete 
description of the methods of making 1,400 miles of preliminary and 
600 miles of location surveys. The following is a very brief sum- 
mary of the cost. 

Field parties were made up as follows : 

Monthly Salary. 

Assistant engineer in charge $125 to $150 

Transitman 85 to 100 

Levelman 75 

Kodman 65 

Head chainman 50 

Rear chainman 45 

Rear flagman 40 

Stakeman 35 

Axeman (from two to five) 30' 

Topographer 65 

Tapemen ( two ) 45 

Draftsman (part time) 60 

Camp outfits were not used. The parties boarded at houses along 
the line. This was often a disadvantage, on account of difficulty in 
getting quarters, especially for a, full corps ; but, on the other 
hand, the party could frequently make its headquarters at some 
town and drive to and from the work, so that probably this method 
served just as well as furnishing camp outfits. 

It may appear to some that there was much unnecessary location 
and running of preliminary lines, but in rough country like this, 
and on work of this magnitude (in 220 miles of this line were 21 
tunnels, the longest being 4,000 ft., 5 viaducts from 400 to 1,000 ft. 
long, and more than 100 ft. in height, besides numerous other 
bridges), it is time and money well spent. In no other way can the 
exact data be gotten, and it leaves no question as to the available 
routes and the grades obtainable. The topography was taken (on 
practically all lines) accurately by using a metallic cloth tape for 
distances and a hand-level for elevations. Only in this way can one 
get a projected location to correspond closely with the actual one. 
The topography was ordinarily taken for 300 ft. on each side of the 
center line ; at particularly difficult summits or similar places a 
strip from 1,000 to 2,000 ft. wide was often shown. The lines were 
plotted to a scale of 200 ft. to 1 in. The topography was plotted in 
the field. A hollow drawing-board, 18x24 ins. was used. The 
sheet in use was tacked to the board, and the additional sheets 
were carried inside. A strap around the - shoulders of the 
topographer served to carry the board, and formed a support while 
plotting (Wellington's method). 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 



1753 



«> 


(0 


a 
o 




CO 


00 


o 


00 


CO 


0) 




CO 


M 


o 


N 


oq 


o 

V 


a 


O 




05 


00 

00 


o 

00 






> 




^ 




r-l 


r-l 


r-l 


rH 


*A 


p. 


t-i 

o 
















v, 






tH 


\a 


00 


O 


•<JH 




o 


/-S 


CO 


M 


in 


M 


CO 




u 


«5 


o 


eo 


r^ 


■W 


1H 




^ 


p. 


N-^ 




m 


lO 


lO 


«o 



C- 00 



«o in M 

^ '~' N ■* lo oq CO 

O "5 C^ tH lO M tH 

>^ ^-^ to to CO r-l CO 



fi O 



>> 




<1> 


c 


> 


n m CO o c- OS 




.S ^_^ 00 C^ C- rH N 

nj ■* CO in CO 00 rH 
CJ ^-' 05 O r-l CO in 



rH rH rH rH «0 



m 
Eh 



1 


05 


CO lO 


«o 


rH 


s 


!=^^'^ 


o t- 


in 


in 


^ c^ °° 


OS rH 


-*i 


OJ 


r-H 


d " irq 


O Tf 


00 


CO 


f , 


a ^'K 


U5 M 




rH 


(k 











CO t- 00 00 m 

00 t- to 05 05 

*^ _ to cq to r-i erj 
H '"• [- th to m ■* 

D <^ O 00 ■* to N 

Q. v-* „ « - - - 

rri in O^ O to 05 

eg rH ff<I -H 

: : :«■ : 

^ : :^tf^ 
o3 Qj : oi ^- pj 

p,^t^ fl^ w ^ w 

^ l^g oa pq c8 
J ^j n (li pq 



+-» 
o 
H 



1754 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost. — The greatest number of miles of preliminary line run in 
one day by one party was 7, and of location, 4%. The location 
averaged slightly more than 1 mile per day per party, except on 
two lines, where it averaged % mile. Stakes were set every 100 ft. 
on tangents, and every 50 ft. on curves. Special pains were taken 
with the instrument work and measurements, in order to avoid the 
chance of serious errors in the center line after construction com- 
menced. The speed of location parties was usually limited by the 
amount of clearing that could be done, but the number of curves 
and the rough character of the ground were also large factors in 
limiting the speed. 

Each party cost from ?35 to $40 per day, being allowed all ex- 
penses in addition to salaries. 

Table I gives the cost per mile of the completed surveys. It is 
to be noted that this is the total cost, and includes ofRce rent, 
purchase of instruments and supplies, general expenses, all sal- 
aries, field expenses, and the preparation of final maps, plans, 
profiles, and estimates, with everything in readiness to make con- 
tracts for the line. 

Column 7 gives the cost per mile of actual location, including pre- 
liminary lines. Columns 3 and 4 show that there were from 2 to 
5 miles of preliminary lines run for each mile of location, except on 
one line. Table I also includes 302 miles of check levels, the cost 
being distributed among the various accounts. The data for the 
Parkersburg Bridge and Terminal line include surveys and sound- 
ings for the Ohio River Bridge. The cost per mile includes the 
topography on practically all lines, except one where it was taken 
only on the located lines. 

The cost shown in Table I being the total charge against engi- 
neering from the inception of the project to the beginning of con- 
struction, contains a few items which might well be charged to 
other accounts than location. Instruments purchased could be a 
credit ; some elaborate property surveys and bridge surveys could 
be charged to construction, but they probably are not large enough 
to have much effect on the cost per mile. If taken into account, 
they would reduce the cost. 

A line run in midwinter may easily cost one-quarter more than 
If run during more favorable weather. 

Table II. 





Of pre- 


Of 


Of location incluc 


Company — 


liminary. 


location. 


ing preliminary. 


L,. K. R. R 

Z. M. & P. R. R 

B. & E. R. R 

B. & N. R. R 


$25 
23 
35 
31 


$ 74 

79 

105 

94 


? 99 
102 
140 
125 



The figures in Table II include all expenses, as in Table I. 

Table I shows a large variation in the cost of surveys on different 
divisions, the cost varying from $128 to $188 per mile, with an aver- 
age of $151. On the assumption that lines located for comparison 
or similar purposes should be included in the average, one-third 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1755 

should be added to these amounts, as previously noted ; the cost 

would then be as follows: 

Low $171 per mile 

High 251 per mile 

Average 202 per mile 

Throwing out of the account the mileage of abandoned lines, 
branch lines, etc., and charging the entire cost to the main line, 

$91,258.20 

terminus to terminus, would give =$278.23 per mile, 

328 
which would be rather expensive. This, however, is not a fair as- 
sumption, and should not be considered, because many miles of lines 
not needed to determine the main line were located for other reasons 
and purposes. Therefore, the plan of tbrowing out only duplica- 
tions, for comparisons, as shown in the preceding paragraph, gives 
the correct average cost per mile for the development of the coun- 
try, including actual comparative locations where needed. It should 
also be borne in mind that a large proportion of this duplication was 
necessary, owing to the laws of West Virginia, which require an 
actual line, located on the ground, and a complete map and profile 
of that line to be filed with the Secretary of State, and at the 
county seat, before a railroad company has any rights, of priority 
or otherwise, to that route or line. This required complete locations 
for all proposed branch lines, a large number of which were located, 
and also a complete location over any route for which it was de- 
sired to obtain rights. For these reasons, the lines located account 
for the excess of the mileage over the actual length of the main 
line. 

On the basis of Table II, it may be assumed that, where the route 
has been previously determined within such narrow limits that the 
preliminary and location lines are of equal lengrth, the surveys will 
cost from $100 to $140 per mile. This is borne out by the results 
on the Buckhannon and Northern line, where the location and pre- 
liminary lines were practically equal and the cost was $127 per mile. 

These two statements may be combined and put in the following 
form : 

To locate one mile, including an equal length of preliminary 
lines, cost from $100 to $140 ; average $115 

To locate one mile, final location, including from two to five 
times as great a length of preliminary lines, cost from $128 
to $188 ; average. . 151 

To locate one mile, final location, including from two to five 
times as great a length of preliminary lines, and one-third 
of a mile of location for comparison, cost from $171 to $251; 
average 202 

A tabulation of the mileage of the Buckhannon and Northern line, 
with reference to the actual length of line to be built, and showing 
how the results agree with the averages deduced from Table I, is 
as follows, the Buckhannon and Northern line being used because 
the conditions there make it the best average of "all conditions" 
encountered on the various lines. 



175G HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Total miles located 151.29 

Miles of main line contracted for 80 

Miles of main line not contracted for 4 

Miles of connecting line located, but which may- 
or may not be built, about 26 110.00 

Making actual miles 110 

Leaving duplications, comparisons, etc 41.29 

110 miles cost $19,249.94 = $175 per mile. 

Cost of a Railway Survey, Canada.* — The following data relate 
to a survey made in Canada in 1906 for the Grand Trunk Pacific 
Ry. The lines were run through gently rolling prairie country, with 
three rather difficult river crossings. The topography was taken 
800 ft. on each side of the line, locating 5 ft. contours. The maxi- 
mum grade was 0.4%, and the maximum curve was 4°. Some rather 
fast work was done in the survey, for on Oct. 10 12.46 miles of line 
was located in 8 hours and 20 minutes. An average of 8.4 miles 
per day was also made in 22 days worked. The organization of the 
party and wages paid were as follows: 

Per month. 

Locating engineer $ 175.00 

Transitman 100.00 

Levelman 75.00 

Topographer 75.00 

Draughtsman 75.00 

Head flag 45.00 

Level rodman 45.00 

Head chainman 45.00 

Rear chainman 30.00 

Topog. chainman 30.00 

Topog. rodman 30.00 

Rear flagman 30.00 

Stakeman 30.00 

Axeman 30.00 

Cook 60.00 

Cookee 30.00 

One saddle horse 30.00 

Three teams at $100 300.00 

Total , $1,235.00 

The following is a record of the cost of the survey and the work 
accomplished : 

Preliminarj'. Location. 

24 60 

Days. Days. 

Miles run and topography taken 175.3 - 308.0 

Total miles location and alternative location 308.0 

Total miles preliminary run 175.3 

Total number payroll days 384.0 ' 960.0 

Average daily number men 16.0 16.0 

Average miles per day 7.3 5.13 

Daily cost of subsistence per man $ 0.41 $ 0.41 

Average daily pay per man 1.85 1.85 

Daily cost for teams 10.67 10.67 

Contingencies 18.00 77.00 

Daily cost of party 47.83 47.87 

Cost pei' mile 6.55 9.32 

* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 19, 1908. 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1757 

The survey was made under the direction of Mr. C. J. Seymour, 
Kansas City, Mo., to whom we are indebted for the above infor- 
mation. 

Cost of Reconnaissance Survey for Railway in Alaska.* — Mr. Fred. 
Lavis is author of the following: 

The following costs of a reconnaissance survey for railroad loca- 
tion in Alaska in the winter of 1906-7 were furnished the writer by 
Mr. H. R. Gabriel, Locating Engineer, Katalla, Alaska. The pay- 
roll was as follows: 

Per month. 

Chief of party ? 250 

Transitman . 125 

Topographer 100 

Draftsman 100 

4 dog mushers 400 

2 axemen 200 

1 rodman 100 

Cook 100 

Total $1,375 

The total cost of the survey was $13,500, distributed as follows: 

Salaries $ 8,050 

Subsistence 2,810 

Cost of 22 dogs at $60 each 1,320 

Feed for dogs 1,320 

Total $13,500 

Average cost $50 per mile. 

The survey covered a route 270 miles long between Fairbanks and 
Seward, Alaska, and was made between Jan. 1 and May 25, 1907. 
For a period of three weeks no work was done, the temperature 
ranging from 60° to 70° below zero, but work was carried on when 
the temperature was 36° below. The dogs were worked in four 
teams and on newly broken trails hauled 500 lbs. per team; they 
were fed on bacon, rice and fish which cost 40 cts. per day 
per dog. 

The camping equipment was very light, consisting of one 10x12 
ft. and two 14 x 16 ft. tents, two Yukon stoves and but very few 
dishes. 

The average distance between camps was 10 miles, and but 4 or 5 
days were spent in each camp. 

The following is the list of rations allowed : 

* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 9, 1908. 



1758 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Lbs. 

Flour per man per day 1 to 1.25 

Beans per man per day 0.25 to 0.50 

Rice per man per day 0.12 

Bacon per man per daj' 0.12 to 0.25 

Ham per man per day 1.00 

Dried fruit per man per day 0.20 to 0.25 

Dried corn per man per day 0.10 

Sugar per man per day 0.30 

Butter per man per day 0.16 

Salt per man per month 0.75 

Pepper per man per month 0.05 

Other spices in proportion to pepper. 

Tea per man per month 0.50 

Coffee per man per month 0.67 

Cocoa per man per montli 0.33 

Dried potatoes per man per day 0.08 

Rolled oats per man per day 0.08 

Corn meal per man per day 0.08 

Canned milk (can) per man per day 0.16 

Macaroni per man per day 0.14 

Cheese per man per day 0.08 

Lard per man per day 0.05 

Crystal eggs per man per month 0.33 

Baking powder 1.5 lbs. per 50 lbs. flour. 

Yeast cakes, 12 men per month, 10 pkgs. 

Soda, 12 men per month, 1 pkg. Sour dough bread 

was used. 
Concentrated vinegar, 12 men 6 months, one 6-oz. 

bottle. 
Mustard, 12 men 6 months, 4.5 lbs. 
Olive oil, 12 men 1 month, 0.1 pal. 
Beef tea, 12 men 1 month, 20 jars. 

This reconnaissance was a stadia survey, all distances both ver- 
tical and horizontal being measured with the transit, no level was 
used ; topography sufRcient to make a rough projected location and 
fairly accurate profile where it varied from the main line run, was 
taken with a clinometer. 

It will be noted that all the information necessary to make a 
fairly accurate projected location was obtained on this .survey at a 
comparatively small cost. Its value lies somewhere between the 
ordinary reconnaissance and the so-called preliminary location which 
should properly be a preliminary survey. 

A preliminary survey of this line if properly made would have 
given more accurate detailed information, but its cost would have 
been between $250 and $350 per mile according to statements of 
. actual costs of preliminary surveys in Alaska, made by Messrs. 
Cryderman and Kyle in a paper read before the Pacific Northwest 
Society of Engineers early this year. 

The stadia furnishes accurate (within the really necessary prac- 
tical limits) information as to distance, direction and elevation, 
which can be obtained in no other way as cheaply, and without 
any one of which it is impossible to form any reliable estimate of 
the practicability of any line or its cost, the addition of a very 
limited amount of topography taken by an experienced topogrrapher 
enables a projected location to be made which should be well within 
a close approximation of the final line. 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1759 

In regard to the salaries given they seem too low. The transit- 
man, topographer and draftsman were not paid any more than 
good men get in the older parts of the United States where condi- 
tions of existence are not so -rigorous; without intending any 
reflection on the men composing the party, the writer believes that in 
these positions competent men would be worth at least 50% more 
than was paid on this survey. 

Cost of Locating Two Railroad Lines in Michigan and Wisconsin.* 
One line was located from Traverse City to Elk Rapids and from 
Williamsburg to Petosky. The survey was begun Sept. 1, 1889, 
and finished May 1, 1890. The country was covered with heavy 
hardwood and hemlock timber and dense cedar swamps. The 
ground was alternately flat and very rough, in sections of 6 to 10 
miles in length. About 25 miles of the 91 were located on the shores 
of small lakes bounded by steep bluffs which came down close to the 
shore, the latter being very irregular. The winter was a light one, 
except in February, when the snow was 3 ft. deep, which consid- 
erably reduced progress. 

The following was the organization of the part, and the monthly 

co-st of making the survey : 

Per month. 

Chief of party $ 100.00 

Transitman ; 75.00 

Leveler 100.00 

Rodman 40.00 

Chainman, head 40.00 

Chainman, rear 30.00 

Back flagman 30.00 

4 axemen at $30 120.00 

Cook 40.00 

Cookee 15.00 

Team and driver 90.00 

% time of Division Bng., at $125 62.50 

Expense of camp 270.00 

Total $1,012.50 

The survey occupied 8 months, making the total cost $8,100, which 
is equivalent to $89 per mile of located line, there being 91 miles 
located. The total number of miles of line run, including" prelim- 
inary lines, was 250 miles. Stated otherwise, there were nearly 
2 miles of preliminary line run to each mile of located line. 

In all there were 208 working days, but, in moving and on ac- 
count of bad weather, 20% of this time was lost, thus reducing the 
actual number of days worked to 188. The following was the 
amount of line run per day : 

, Miles. 

Total line per day (208 days) 1.20 

Located line per day (208 days) 0.44 

Total line per day (188 days) 1.33 

Located line per day (188 days) 0.48 

It will be noted that there were 14 men and a team of horses, 
and that the expense for food, etc., was $270 per month. Counting 



* Engineering-Contracting, January, 1906. 



1760 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

each horse as the equivalent of a man in expense of feeding, we have 
a daily expense of slightly less than 60 cts. per man per day for 
food. That is a liberal estimate for present conditions, but on the 
other hand, salaries and wages are somewhat higher now than they 
were 15 years ago. 

Another line, 227 miles long, was run in November and Decem- 
ber of 1891, for the Saginaw & Western R. R., from Sparta to How- 
ard City. The country was in part very rough. The timber was 
principally very light, with some brush. The ground was generally 
covered with logs and stumps. Considerable of the line was in old 
pine choppings. No team was provided for carrying the men to and 
from the work. The following was the monthly payroll : 

Per month. 

Assistant engineer $125.00 

Transitman 100.00 

Leveler 100.00 

Rodman 40.00 

Chainman, head 45.00 

Chainman, rear 30.00 

Flagman 30.00 

3 axemen ■ 90.00 

Cook 45.00 

Total $605.00 

The party, which was composed of 11 men, was paid for 48 work 
days. The actual number of days worked, however, was 36, Sun- 
days and rainy days accounting for the other 12. The party was 
in camp for 42 days ; on the remaining 6 days they boarded and 
roomed at hotels. The total cost of the field work was $1,307.97, 
divided up as follows: 

Payroll $972.00 

Supplies 167.77 

Board and hotel bill 50.25 

Axes, grindstone, etc 16.00 

Miscellaneous expenses 98.75 

To the cost of the field work must be added the cost of the office 
work for maps, profiles and estimates. This amounted to $219.75, 
making the total cost of the survey $1,524.72. A total of 71.4 miles 
of line was run, of which 4 8.7 miles was preliminary line and 22.7 
miles was located line. The actual number of days worked on the 
preliminary line was 25 ; actual number of days on located line was 
11. The following table gives the average amount of line run per 
day worked • 

Stations. Miles. 

Preliminary line 102.8 1.947 

Location . . .• 109 2.064 

Average line per day • 104.7 1.983 

Average line per day out 78.5 1.486 

Location line per (36 days) 33.3 0.634 

Location per line (48 days) out 25 0.473 

The cost of the survey per station and mile was as follows : 

Per station. Per mile. 

Field work $1.09 $57.50 

Office and field work 1.77 67.17 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1761 

As was stated previously, the party was composed of 11 men and 
was in camp for 42 days. The total cost of food, supplies, etc., 
including the cook's wages for this time, amounted to $228.70. The 
cost per man per day for supplies only amounted to 36 cts. ; includ- 
ing the wages of the cook, the cost per man per day was 49 cts. 

Cost of a Railroad Re-Survey, Canada.* — In a paper read before 
the Ontario Land Surveyors' Association, Mr. W. E. McMuUen, de- 
scribes a re-survey of the Canadian Pacific Ry. line in New Bruns- 
wick, and the following notes have been taken from his paper : The 
general scheme of the survey was to make a center line traverse 
and tie in right-of-way fences, lot lines, parish and county bound- 
aries, locate the properties of the various owners along the line, 
run rail levels, obtain approximately the original ground line, and 
note the dimensions of culverts, etc. For the field work two box 
cars were fitted up. The one with bunks and a drawing-table, and 
the other with a dining-table, stove, and quarters for the cook. The 
party was composed of an engineer in charge, transitman and two 
picketmen, a draftsman, a leveler and rodman, and three chainmen, 
who went ahead and paint-marked one rail every hundred feet. 
These last could cover eight or nine miles a day without much 
trouble, and, after getting their work well ahead of the party, were 
recalled to locate right-of-way, fences, culverts, etc. The leveler 
would cover about 4l^ miles per day, and when he got too far 
ahead of the transit was recalled and ran a spare transit for a while. 
The transitman was paid ?75 per month and draftsman the same; 
leveler, $60, and the others, most of them engineering students, $1.35 
per day. The cook got $40 per month. Tha average progress of the 
field work was a little over two miles a day, and the average cost 
of the field work, exclusive of car furnishings and inclusive of 
wages and board, was $14 per mile. The cost of fitting up the cars 
with stoves, bunks, blankets, mattresses, tables, dishes, etc., amount- 
ed to about $150. 

Cost of Two Railway Resurveys.t — The resurvey of a railway 
is a task which may involve little or much work, depending on the 
comprehensiveness of the records required. When the task is 
merely that of retracing alignment and locating tracks and struc- 
tures the work is simple. When, however, the task comprises in 
addition, the topographical mapping of the line, right of way, build- 
ings and structures and the recording of all co-ordinate informa- 
tion, an organization of the highest character and efficiency Is 
absolutely necessary. In the text which follows we give from actual 
records the methods adopted in resurveying 581 miles of the Chi- 
cago & West Michigan Ry. and 389 miles of the Detroit, Grand 
Rapids & Northern Ry. These methods are not only of interest in 
themselves, but they are lent particular value by the figures of cost 
which accompany them. In studying these figures, however, it must 
be kept in mind that they represent wages and prices of 1893 to 
1898. 



^Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 14, 1908. 
■{Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 5, 1906. 



1762 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Chicago & West Michigan Survey. 

In 1893 the Chicago & West Michigan Ry. started a resurvey of 
its road. The object of the survey was to obtain data for the 
preparation of a set of maps to show in as complete and accurate a 
manner as possible all of the company's track, right of way, build- 
ings and other property, and all such other information relating to 
these items as could be obtained. The purpose was also to obtain 
similar information relative to the track and property of other 
roads at junction points. 

Field Force and Outfit. — The field party consisted of three men : 
the assistant engineer in charge of the work and two rodmen. They 
were supplied with the following outfit : one double velocipede car, a 
transit, two 100-ft. steel tapes, one 50-ft. steel tape, one 50-ft. cloth 
tape, one small hand instrument for taking fence angles, etc., an 
axe, a maul, a set of branding irons, a set of steel dies, a tinner's 
stove, a paint pot and brush, a spade, a pick and a stock of pickets. 
The men boarded at hotels or, when more convenient, at private 
houses and usually moved every 10 or 15 miles accordingly as it 
was convenient to get board. Very little use was made of trains to 
get to or from work ; the party, however, generally moved by train 
when going to new headquarters. 

Chaining the Line. — The first work was to chain the track. This 
was done very carefully, and one of the 100-ft. steel tapes was re- 
served for this work alone. Ten (3/16-in. diam. ) 12-in. chaining 
pins were used, and at every tally an 8d. nail was driven into the 
ballast or into a tie for reference in case a pin was lost or mis- 
placed in the next 1,000 ft. The chain was carried in the center 
of the track and the half-gage was laid off from the right-hand 
rail at each station. For this purpose a 6-ft. picket was arranged 
with a lug on one end and a center mark. No corrections were 
made for grades or temperatures. 

A paint mark was put on the flange of the right-hand rail oppo- 
site every station and at every 500 ft. a stake was driven 5 ft. to the 
left of the center line. These stakes were of oak, 3x3x30 ins., 
with 8-in. points, and were purchased already sharpened. They 
were distributed by freight train in lots to suit the distances covered 
by the field party from the various headquarters. All the stakes 
used from any one headquarters were marked at one time ; for 
this purpose there were provided a firepot or tinner's stove, as noted 
above, and a set of from to 9 cast-iron branding irons fixed to a 
handle of round iron some 15 ins. long. Section men usually 
helped to deliver the stakes between station stops. The stakes were 
driven so as to project from 4 to 6 ins. above ground and with the 
branded face toward the track. 

It may be noted here that this work furnished incidentally an op- 
portunity to study the advantage of using stakes treated with 
some preservative from decay. The stakes placed in 1893-4 were 
untreated and those placed in 1895 were dipped in hot coal tar and 
pitch. Similar stakes used on the Detroit, Grand Rapids & Northern 
survey in 1896 to 1898 were treated, those used in 1896 with 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1763 

"Woodiline" used cold and those used in 1897-8 by dipping in hot 
Carbolineum. It was found upon examining in 1899 the stalces 
placed in 1893 that fully one-third were rotten or missing, and all 
of them had to be removed. It was also found that none of the 
treated stakes set in 1895 showed any signs of decay. 

The stakes, as before stated, were spaced 500 ft. apart. At every 
mile a piece of T-rail 5 ft. long was set 20 ft. to the left of the 
center line, with the base facing the track and marked with the 
mile number by means of a steel stencil. Station and mile numbers 
were both continuous and read from the actual end of the rail at the 
terminal where the survey was begun. 

Retracing Alignment. — The alignment was retraced by means of 
a transit, but not by running a continuous line. On tangents the 
direction was checked often enough to find all swings, by setting the 
transit over the gage side of the rail and taking a back sight on the 
rail and then reversing and sighting on the rail ahead. If any 
change in direction showed it was noted as an angle. When a curve 
was reached a point was marked in the center of the rail at or 
back of the point of curve, and then deflection angles were read to 
such station on the curve. When the transit had to be moved up the 
vernier was set at zero for a back sight on the last point and then 
the angles ahead were read on as before. When the point of tangent 
was reached a point was worked in the c«nter of track between 
rails at or just ahead of the point of tangent ; the angle was read 
to this and then the transit was moved up and the angle from the 
last rail point or chord to the tangent ahead was read. The direc- 
tion of tangents was kept as azimuth, south being assumed as zero 
and angles recorded around by the west or clockwise. 

Azimuth was determined by Polaris, stations for observations 
being selected so that the meridian would intersect a tangent. The 
angle to the tangent was then measured. An observation was taken 
about every 15 miles and the course of the tangents calculated from 
the angles measured along the center line. Tlie two usually lacked 
from 0° to 0°-10' of checking, and the difference was distributed 
among the angles around the curves. The method of determining 
the true meridian from Polaris was the one in the manual issued to 
surveyors by the Government Land Office, and known as the hour 
angle method. Whenever the difference in the longitude of two ob- 
servations exceeded about 5 miles the correction made necessary by 
the divergence of the meridians was introduced. This amount was 
distributed over the line by adding or subtracting from the azimuth 
of tangents at their ends. By reason of this a long tangent which 
was in reality straight would have a difference of azimuth at its 
two ends. The determining of the azimuth of the line at different 
points was intended only as a check on the transit work, but prob- 
ably the course of each tangent was correct with 0°-l' or 0°-2'. 

Topography. — The topography was in nearly all cases taken by 
measurements referred directly to the center line. All structures 
belonging to the permanent way, such as bridges, were recorded by 
plusses to each end or by a plus to the center and size. The length, 
size and kind of pipe or other culverts and of trestles, bridges. 



1764 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

open culverts and cattle guards were recorded. Right of way fences 
were carefully located by stations and plusses on line and by dis- 
tance out at all points where any change in direction or distance out 
occurred. Track signs were located in the same way and usually 
the terms used to note them, as "Wh. Post," "Mile Board" and "Hy. 
Cross. Sign," indicated the use and construction in each case. Prop- 
erty line fences were shown by noting by stations and plusses the 
points at which they would intersect the center line and by measur- 
ing the angle of intersection. Highways and farm roads, highway 
crossings, farm crossings, gates, side drains at crossings, and ditches 
were all shown. The kind and make of rail and the date of rolling, 
with a description of joints and fastenings ; the kind and condition 
of the ties ; the kind and quality of the ballast ; the kind of fence, 
and the location and number of wires in the telegraph line were all 
shown and noted at the points where any change occurred. The 
kind of switch stand and kind and size of frog were noted. For 
buildings belonging to the company, the class, use, kind of foundation 
and point were noted. If possible, note was also made of the date 
of erection. Water stations, interlocking plants, etc., were usually 
described in detail. 

Section lines, property lines and street lines were determined as 
accurately as possible. All monuments that could be found were 
located, the usual method being to produce the lines as indicated by 
the monuments to an intersection with the center line and record 
the angle with the distance measured along the monument line. 
For the purpose of tying the line to the village plots the field party 
was furnished with copies of all recorded plots, and with the aid 
of these sufficient tie lines were run to form a network on which 
the streets and lots could be plotted on the maps. Any additional 
information as to the company's right of way that could be found 
was secured. In these tie lines and also for all cross lines that in- 
tersect the center line on curves, the angle was read with the chord 
between the two adjacent transit points, but the plusses and dis- 
tances out are from the actual center line intersection. No attempt 
was made to show the natural topography except in case of streams 
and of some very prominent ravines that intersected the line. 

Mapping. — The maps were drawn on sheets of mounted egg-shell 
paper; the map sheets were 18x42 ins. and were bound in books 
containing about 25 to 30 miles of line. Three scales were used 
In mapping, 2,000 ft, 200 ft, and 50 ft to the inch. The 2,000-ft 
scale was used for an index map bound in the front of the book as 
a title page. On this sheet the railway was designated by a blue 
line on which tenth stations were numbered and mile posts shown 
by red lined blocks, with numbers referring to the particular large 
scale map (200 ft. or 50 ft.) on which the post came. The 
maps on the 200-ft. scale showed everything in the open 
country, but in cities where the same territory was cov- 
ered by maps on the 50-ft. scale, much of the detail was left off 
In order that (1) what the company owned, (2) all recorded plots 
and (3) the lines to monuments in those plots might stand out 
clearly. As a rule, all buildings, etc., were put on and all figures 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1765 

left off, the latter being confusing wliile outlines are not. Every 
fifth station was indicated by a red dot. The center line of the 
railway was shown by a ruled red line. Any territory shown also on 
the 50-ft. scale map was enclosed by a broken line in blue, with a 
designating number inside corresponding to the number of the 
special map. These special or detail sheets were inserted imme- 
diately after the general sheet referring to them. On the 50-ft. scale 
maps it was attempted to show everything that appeared in the note 
books; center lines were drawn in solid red and base lines in solid 
black. 

The stations on all maps were numbered from right to left. In 
the upper right-hand corner of each sheet was lettered the first and 
last station number included in that sheet and also the number of 
the note book and its page numbers where the notes corresponding 
to the map data were to be found. The number, length, total angle 
and degree was written near each curve. Reverse curves counted 
as two curves. Station numbers were written across the center line 
and the numerals designating angles were written on an arc connect- 
ing the two legs. Azimuths were noted at each point of curve 
and point of tangent. 

An abstract of such deed and indexed paper for right of way rep- 
resented on any sheet was written on that sheet. In this abstract 
the following order was followed where possible : ( 1 ) Kind of 
deed and number by which it is known : (2) grantor; (3) grantee; 
( 4 ) date of transfer ; ( 5 ) description ; ( 6 ) consideration ; ( 7 ) agree- 
ment, and (8) date, book and page records. 

The coloring used on the maps was as follows : For fences, yel- 
low lines ; for water, blue lines ; for frame structures, gamboge ; 
for brick structures, light red ; for stone structures, a neutral tint ; 
for platforms, sidewalks, farm crossings and for iron and steel 
bridges, Payne's gray ; for railway property. Lake red ; for streets, 
Vandyke brown. The tinting on the 200-ft. scale maps was ruled, 
but on the 50-ft. scale maps only a narrow wash around the edges 
was used. 

Time and Cost of Survey. — The resurvey described was begun in 
April, 1903, and was completed in October, 1905, the work in the 
field occupying only eight months of the year. Paying the assist- 
ant engineer in charge $116.67 per month, rodman $65 per month, 
and chainman $60 per month, the following records of time and 
cost of surveying 152 miles were obtained: 

Days. Cost. 

Chaining and setting stakes 28% $279 

Topography, taking notes 57% 561 

Running section lines and corners... 24 237 

Survey of station grounds 28% 233 

Runming lines to village plots 20% 204 

Total 205 $1,564 

The totals give the labor cost per mile surveyed as $10.22, ex- 
clusive of leveling. The labor cost of leveling 127.8 miles was $166, 
making the cost per mile $1.30, and the time required for the work 



1766 HAXDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was 20 days. The total cost of labor and materials for surveying 

5 SI miles was as follows: 

TotaL Per mile. 

Fleldwork, on survey $ 5.238 i 9.01 

Fieldvrork, material 392 0.67 

Fieldwork, setting monuments 899 1.55 

Material, setting monimaents 415 0.71 

Office work, plotting maps 5,546 9.54 

Office work, materials 446 0.77 

Copying vUlage plots at county offices. 752 1.30 

Office work, copying notes, tables, etc.. . 1,050 1.81 

Totals n4,"38 J25.36 

A total of 609 monuments were set at a unit cost of $1.25 for 
labor and 44 cts. for materiaL 

Deteoit^ Grand Rapids & Koetherk StrEVET. 
The resurvey of the Detroit, Grand Rapids & Northern Ry. for 
389 miles began in July, 1896, and was completed in December, 
1898. The method of work was the same as that described for the 
Chicago & "West Michigan Ry., and the wages paid were the same 
except that the engineer in charge received $100 per month. The 
total cost of the survey and mapping was as follows : 

TotaL Per mile. 

Fleldwork, on survey S3, 363 % 8.64 

Fieldwork, material 437 1.25 

Fleldwork, setting monuments 765 1.97 

Materials, setting monuments 265 0.68 

Office work, plotting maps. 3,323 8.55 

Office work, materials 279 0.78 

Copying xUlage plots 215 0.55 

Office work, copying notes, tables, etc... 234 0.73 

Ffeldwork, running levels, 351 miles. ... 437 1.25 

Fieldwork, plotting profiles 125 0.S6 

Totals ?9,364 $24.06 

Cost of Railway Surveys. — In making a railway survey along the 
Colimibia River, in open rolling country, niy records show that a 
topographical party, consisting of 1 topographer and 2 rodmen, 
averaged 1% miles a daj-, taking a strip 400 ft. wide, contours 5 ft. 
apart. A hand-level and tape were used- In this same country a 
leveler and rodman could readily run 6 miles of profile levels in a 
day, although it was safer to count on 4 miles. 

On another similar survey in southern Xew York state, in com- 
paratively level country, a transitman. 3 chainmen and a stake 
artist, averaged 2 miles of transit line per 8 hrs. Station stakes 
were set every 100 ft. This same party, later, took a belt of 
topography 500 ft. ■wide, at the rate of l^i miles a day, setting a 
transit up at each station and taking telemeter readings for dis- 
tance and level readings for elevation with long bubble of transit. 

The cost of a preliminary raUroad survey, near Lake Erie, waa 
as follows, using stadia measurements: 

Chief of party $ 5.00 

Transitman 3.00 

Recorder 3.00 

5 rodmen, at $2 10.00 

Total salaries per day $21.00 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1767 

This party ran 46 miles in 30 days, several of which were 
stormy, and they took a belt of topography 800 ft wide. The cost 
was about $14 a mile, or $90 a square mile for the field work. 

Using the chain method it took a party 24 days to run 45 miles. 

In Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 31, p. 81, Mr. M. L. Lynch states 
that one mile of line a day is a fair average in partly timbered 
country, for preliminary work. He gives the average cost of surveys 
at $60 a mile of located line. 

Mr. Kenneth Allen states that in Kansas prairies he ran 312 miles 
of stadia line in 5.7 months, or 2.1 miles per day, a- party costing 
as follows per day: 

Transitman ? 6.00 

Leveler 4.00 

2 rodmen, at $2.50 5.00 

Axman 2.00 

Teamster and team. '. . . . 3.00 

Total per day $20.00 

The cost was $11 a mile. Bench levels were run ahead of the 
transit. The best day's run was 8 miles. 

The Cost of Transit Lines in Heavy Timber. — In running transit 
lines through the dense timber of western Washington, for roads 
and railways, I have found that a party of 6 men (consisting of a 
transitman, two chainmen, two axmon and a flagman, who also 
served as an axman) averaged about 1,800 ft. of line run per 10 
hours. It was exceptional that 2,000 ft. were averaged even for two 
or three days. No trees more than a foot in diameter were chopped ; 
but the growth of great fiirs and cedars (occasionally one was. 10 ft. 
In diameter), and the mass of fallen timber under foot made the 
advance slow. Where the timber was not so dense, it was possible 
to run from 3,000 to 5,000 ft. a day, setting station stakes every 100 
ft. In running a traverse along a country road, where there was 
no tree-chopping at all, the same party would run 6 miles a day. 

In running profile levels over these transit lines, a leveler and rod- 
man would average 4,000 ft. a day in rough and densely wooded 
country; and 6,000 ft. in wooded country where the fallen timber 
did not retard walking so much. In all cases the actual time either 
on transit or level work averaged 8 hrs. per day, and about 2 hrs. 
per day were consumed in going to and from camp. 

The foregoing records apply to lines aggregating several hundred 
miles in length, and are given partly from memory as my original 
detailed notes were lost in a iire. 

Cost of Topographic Survey for 160-Acre Park. — In the State of 
Washington the author was in charge of a survey for a small city 
park of 160 acres. The work was done in August, 1892, with a party 
of 5 men, whose daily wages were as follows: 

Transitman $ 5.00 

Recorder 3.00 

2 chainmen, at $2.50 5.00 

1 axman 2.00 

Total per day $15.00 



1768 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This party was engaged 26 days in field work. In addition, a 
draftsman and computer was engaged for 40 days reducing the notes 
and plotting the map to a scale of 100 ft. to the inch, contours 10 ft. 
apart. The cost of the survey and map was, therefore, as follows: 

Field work, 26 days, at $15 $390 

Office work, 40 days, at $3 120 

Total, 160 acres, at $3.20 $510 

This is at the rate of $2,040 per sq. mile. This high cost was due 
to the roughness of the ground and to the fact that about half the 
area was densely timbered. The area surveyed was a hill about 350 
ft. high, cut up by a number of gulches. A traverse line, 2 miles 
long, was first run to enclose the hill, station stakes being set every 
100 ft., using a tape and transit. Then 10 parallel cross-lines were 
run along ridges through the woods over the hill, using tape and 
transit. The aggregate length of these cross-lines was 3 miles. 
Profile levels were taken with a T-level along all the transit lines. 
Contours were located by means of the stadia, the transit being set 
upon hubs on the transit lines. The density of the timber greatly 
retarded the stadia work, due to the axe work necessary. "Were 
1 to repeat this work, I should run a traverse around the area as 
before, chaining and leveling ; then all the necessary cross-lines 
over the hill would be run, using the stadia. "Where woods are 
heavy it is necessary to run such cross-lines close together. I should 
increase the number of axmen, and have rodmen also serve as 
axmen. 

Cost of Topographic Survey of St. Louis. — Mr. Oliver W. Connet 
gives the following: The area covered by triangulation was 30 sq. 
miles, the average length of the sides of the triangles being 1% 
miles. ■ About 9 2 Vis miles of precise levels were run in duplicate at 
a cost of $30 per mile, four benches per mile. The stadia method 
was used for .topography, contours being 3 ft. apart, about 300 
points being located by a party in a day. The party consisted 
of 1 topographer, 1 recorder, 3 stadia men, and 1 utility man. The 
average was 3.65 points per acre. The time of a party occupied in 
field work for 2Sy3 sq. miles was: Triangulation, 62 days; precise 
levels, 114 days; topography, 248 days; total, 424 days. The cost 
was: 

Triangulation $ 1,812 or 11% 

Precise levels 2,762 or 16 % 

Topography 6,060 or 36% 

Office work (reduction of notes and 

plotting) 6,266 or 37% 

Total $16,900 or 100% 

This is equivalent to $725 per sq. mile, or $1.13 per acre. 
The average cost of the party per day, including transportation, 
instruments, etc., was : 

Triangulation $29.25 

Precise levels 24.25 

Topography 24.50 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1769 

Cost of a Stadia Survey, Baltimore. — Mr. R. A. MacGregor, In 
Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 44, p. 112, gives the following on the 
coat of a stadia survey of the City of Baltimore, Md. The map was 
plotted on a scale of 200 ft. to the inch, and fences, roads, houses 
(with some details of houses), 5-ft. contours, wooded and cultivated 
areas, creeks, etc., were shown. Everything was plotted in the field. 
The average error of closure was 1 in 700. The average number 
of shots was 6,400 per sq. mile. The number of shots per day 
averaged 180, the maximum was 349, all the plotting and sketching 
being done in the field. The shots were taken and recorded by the 
recorder, and plotted by the draftsman, who stood nearby ; the 
topographer in charge did the sketching. The cost of this field work 
alone was $850 per sq. mile for an area of 33.3 sq. miles. 

Cost of Topographic Survey, Westchester Co., N. Y. — ^Mr. G. L. 
Christian, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., "Vol. 44, p. 115, gives the cost of 
making a survey in July, 1896, of a 57-acre tract of land in West- 
chester County, N. Y. Three-fourths of the tract was wooded, with 
much thick underbrush. The land was much broken, having a total 
rise of 150 ft, with slopes of 2% to 40%. The transit lines (12,750 
ft.) covered the controlling points, stakes being set every 50 ft., and 
profile levels taken with Y-level. From these lines, with a hand 
level and tape, the 5-ft. contours were located. The map was plotted 
on a scale of 100 ft. to the inch. The cost per acre was as follows: 

Running transit lines $0.40 

Running Y-levels ." 0.19 

Contours with hand level 0.53 

Stakes 0.07 

Plotting transit lines 0.13 

Plotting contour lines 0.15 

Total per acre $1.47 

This is at the rate of $9.40 per sq. mile. 

Cost of Topographic Survey Near Baltimore. — Mr. Kenneth Allen, 
in Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 44, p. 113, gives the following rela- 
tive to the cost of stadia surveys made for the Baltimore Sewerage 
Commission : 

Survey. I. II. III. IV. V. 

Contour interval 5 ft. 5-ft. 5 ft. 2.5 ft. 2.5 ft. 

Scale of map 1"=800' l"iz=800' 1"=400' 1"=:200' 1"=:200' 

Area, square miles 2.04 2.75 4.83 0.823 0.733 

Area, timbered 47% 27% 

Area, water surface 3% 12% 18% 

Area, per day, water 

surface 0.157 0.131 0.079 0.052 0.052 

Sal. per sq. mile $54.90 $78.00 $140.20 $323.61 $256.21 

Exp. per sq. mile 11.91 16.49 28.54 30.73 13.50 



Cost per sq. mile $66.81 $94.49 $168.74 $354.34 $269.71 

These costs do not include mapping done in the office, but do in- 
clude maps made in the field. In surveys I and V the ground had 
gentle slopes ; in III the range of elevation was 125 ft., but in the 
other areas it did not exceed 40 ft. Comparing I and IV shows the 
increased cost where 2. 5-ft. contours are located. Comparing I 



1770 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

and II shows the economy of reading bearings with a compass (in- 
stead of with a vernier) and setting up on alternate points which 
was done in survey I. 

Mr. Kenneth Allen, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. 30, p. 614, 
gives the following data : A stadia survey made for the Philadelphia 
Water Department, in 1884, covered 446 square miles and occupied 
162 days field work in the Perklomen Water Basin, in Bucks, Mont- 
gomery and Lehigh Counties. The contours were 10 ft. apart 
plotted on a scale of 400 ft. to the inch. All roads, buildings and 
timber outlines were showm The party consisted of 1 transitman 
and 1 rodman ; the average area covered per day taking notes in the 
field was 0.434 square mile ; the average area covered per day plot- 
ting in the field was 0.31 square mile. 

On a survey in the Connellsville coke region, a survey similar to 
the above, but more detailed and plotted to a scale of 600 ft. 
to the inch, contours 10 ft. apart, covering an area of 168 square 
miles, cost $116 per square mile, including the location of farm 
boundaries, coal outcrops and areas, and the reduction of all pre- 
vious surveys to the same scale. The cost of the field work on the 
topography alone was, however, only $40 per square mile, or about 
one-third the total cost. The cost of engraving and publishing 
was about $30 per square mile more. 

Cost of Three Stadia Topographic Surveys — ^Mr. F. B. Maltby, 
in Jour. Assoc. Eng. Soc, 1896, has an article on "Methods and Re- 
sults of Stadia Surveying," from which the following abstracts have 
been made : 

A party should consist of an observer, a recorder, and 2 to 4 rod- 
men. A good observer in open country can locate 500 points a day 
for a map of 500 ft. to the inch. This means about 5% or 6 hrs. of 
actual observing, and gives an average of 1% shots per minute. 
Two men using the Colby protractor (one calling off and one plot- 
ting) plotted 216 shots per hour, as the average of 2514 hrs. 

A stadia line, 15 miles long, over which levels were run, checking 
on each stake, showed discrepancies between consecutive stakes as 
high as 0.2 ft., but the total error for the 15 miles was less 
than 1 ft. 

The cost of stadia surveys varies widely. The topographical sur- 
vey of Baltimore, for topography alone, excluding triangulation and 
precise levels, cost $1.50 per acre. The scale of the map is 200 ft. 
per in., and all buildings, streets, alleys, etc., are located. The cost 
of the topography of the survey of St. Louis was 73 cts. per acre, 
scale of map the same, but few buildings and few street corners 
were located. A topographical survey of 3,000 acres, near Madi- 
son, 111., in 1893, cost 50 cts. per acre including mapping; scale was 
400 ft. per in., and all buildings, fences, railroads, etc., were located. 

Several different tracts of land near St. Louis, of 100 to 200 acres, 
were surveyed for 20 to 40 cts. per acre. In these cases a scale of 
400 ft. per in. and a 2-ft. contour interval, and only the configura- 
tion of the ground were required. 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1771 

A survey of 9,300 acres in southwest Texas, in 1894, was made; 
2-ft. contours; and 400 ft. per in. scale; ground was rolling and 
partly covered with brush ; condition favorable ; cost, 7 cts. per 
acre. 

Topographical work on the Mississippi River, in 1891, cost $36 
per sq. mile; on the Missouri River, in 1895, $31 per sq. mile, or 5 
to 5% cts. per acre. Scale was 1,000 ft. per in., contours 5 ft. apart, 
all buildings, roads, fences, limits of culture, etc., located. This 
cost includes a system of tertiary triangulation, but does not include 
mapping. 

Cost of Surveys, Erie, Canal.— Mr. D. J. Howell gives cost of 
making surveys for the Mohawk Ship Canal, 90 miles along the 
Mohawk Valley from the Hudson River westward to Herkimer. The 
work was done by stadia parties, consisting of 1 chief, 1 observer, 
1 recorder and 4 rodmen. The area mapped was 47,400 acres, of 
which 6,600 are river. The average cost was 86 cts. per acre, includ- 
ing soundings of the river, field and office work, but excluding test 
pits and borings. Contours were 2 ft. apart; map scale 1 in 2,500. 
A cross-country survey, 25 miles long, embracing 7,600 acres (no 
villages or cities), cost 27 cts. per acre for the field notes and the 
reduction of the notes ready for plotting. The cost of the plotting 
was estimated to be about 23 cts. per acre more, making the total 
cost about 50 cts. per acre. The men were well trained and the 
weather was favorable on this 25-mile stretch. 

Mr. William B. Landreth, in Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. 44, p. 
92, discusses the methods and cost of stadia topographic surveys 
made to determine the location of reservoirs and conduit lines for 
the Rome level of the Deep Waterway on the Oswego-Mohawk- 
Hudson Route. The surveys were made between Aug. 1, 1898, and 
June 1, 1899, scarcely any time being lost from bad weather. A 
party consisted of 1 engineer in charge, 1 transitman, 1 recorder, 3 
or more stadia rodmen, 2 or more axmen, 1 draughtsman, and 1 
computer. Bach rodman was given a particular class of work, one 
following streams, another taking roads, another woods, and so on. 
When convenient all rodmen kept on the same side of the transit. 
Contour intervals were 10 ft. on the Salmon River and the Black 
River surveys, and 5 ft. on the Fish Creek line. At the close of 
each day the field party reduced the stadia notes. The scale of the 
Salmon River and the Black River maps was 1 : 10,000, and of the 
Fish Creek map, 1 : 5,000. About 65% of the Salmon River area is 
covered with small second growth timber and swamps. The country 
is rough. The Black River Valley, between the villages of Carthage 
and Lyons Falls was surveyed up to the 790-ft. contour. Only 25% 
of the area is wooded, and the country is not very rough. The Fish 
Creek Valley, from 2 miles above Williamstown, to 2 miles below 
Taberg, a distance of 21 miles, was surveyed, the survey covering 
the valley and a portion of the side slopes to an elevation of 75 ft. 
above the creek. The ground was mostly grazing and farm land, 
40% of which was timbered. The cost of the three surveys, includ- 
ing finished maps, traveling expenses, etc., was as follows : 



1772 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Salmon Black Fish. 

River. River. Creek. 

Area, square mile 15 85 19 

Set-ups 771 600 451 

Shots 3,838 11,166 11,776 

Square miles per day 0.32 1.81 0.45 

Field work per square mile $66.00 $16.50 $54.00 

Map work per square mile. 14.00 7.00 25.00 

Total per square mile $80.00 $23.50 $79.00 

Note.— The cost of the base line surveys for the Salmon River and 
Fish. Creek work, and for one-third of the Black River, is not 
Included in the costs above given ; the costs include no leveling, 
but only the stadia field work and mapping-, excepting on the Black 
River where base line and leveling costs for two-thirds the terri- 
tory are included. 

Cost of U. S. Deep Waterways Survey, N. Y. — Mr. A. J. Himes, in 
Trans. Am. Soc. C. E., Vol. 44, p. 105, gives the following data on 
the U. S. Deep Waterways Surveys for a 30-ft. canal along the 
Oswego and Mohawk Rivers, a distance of 91 miles. A sufficient 
number of stadia readings was taken to develop 2-ft. contours. 
About 83% of the area was mapped on a scale of 1 : 5,000 ; the other 
17%, on a scale of 1 :2,500. There were 12 sq. miles of soundings 
made in Oswego Harbor and Oneida Lake, and plotted ; and an area 
of about 78 sq. miles of OneiJa Lake and Oswego Harbor was de- 
termined by triangulation. There were, besides, 121 sq. miles of 
land topography taken. All buildings, roads, railroads, property 
lines, streams, orchards, swamps, etc., were located. A stadia party 
consisted of 1 instrumentman, 1 recorder and 3 rodmen, with some- 
times 1 laborer for cutting brush or rowing a boat. Each night 
the party reduced the stadia notes and calculated the co-ordinates. 
The error of closures was readily kept within 1 in 700 ; and errors 
in elevation seldom exceeded 1 ft., being usually less than 0.5 ft. 
Sights 2,000 ft. long were often taken. Charts were found to be 
much better than tables for stadia reductions. The work was begun 
Oct. 23, 1897, and finished Nov. 5, 1898. In no month were more 
than 5 days lost on account of bad weather. The average number 
of readings was 1,440 per sq. mile. The minimum average area 
covered per day by one party on a single piece of work was 0.058 
sq. mile. The maximum was 0.257 sq. mile. The average for the 
whole survey was 0.123 sq. mile per party per day. The cost was as 
follows per sq. mile : 

Fieldwork $179 

Mapping ' 101 

Total per sq. mile $280 

This is exclusive of swamps and lakes not sounded. 
Cost of Government Topographic Surveys. — Mr. Marcus Baker, in 
Trans. Am. Soc. C. B., Vol. 30, p. 619, gives the cost of Government 
topographic surveys in many European countries, to which the read- 
er is referred. The U. S. Geological Survey of New Jersey was 
begun in 1877 and finished in 1887, covering an area of 7,894 square 
miles, with contours 10 and 20 ft. apart. The cost was $6.93 per 
square mile, which includes all expenses in producing a map ready 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1773 

for the engraver. The engraved map is on a scale of about 1 mile 
per inch. A similar survey of Massachusetts, made 1884-1888, 
contour interval 20 ft., cost $13 per sq. mile. A similar survey of 
Khode Island, made 1888-1889, cost $9 per sq. mile. A similar 
survey of Connecticut, 5,004 sq. miles, made 1889-1890, on a scale of 
1 mile per inch, 20-ft. contours, cost $9.80 per sq. mile for map 
ready for engraver. 

A topographic map of the banks of the Mississippi River, from 
Cairo to the Gulf of Mexico, was completed by the Government in 
18S4, at a cost of $51 per sq. mile for 1,954 sq. miles of land and 
water surface. The manuscript map was on a scale of 1 : 10,000, 
embracing the river and a strip of land % mile wide on each side. 
The river was carefully sounded. 

Mr. Baker gives estimates of the cost of surveys made by the 
Coast Survey, but these estimates are strongly disputed, more- 
over they are of minor value to engineers in general practice, so the 
reader is referred to the Transactions for the data. 

The N. Y. State Engineer's Report, 1897, gives the cost of 
topographical surveys, for the Dept. of the U. S. Geol. Survey, as fol- 
lows per square mile, contours 20 ft. apart, and map on a scale 
of about 1 mile to the inch : Sq. mile. 

Triangulating (1,370 sq. miles) $2.00 

Topography 8.70 

Office work 0.60 

$11.30 

The total cost of 15,118 sq. miles, for field and office work, had 
been $11.06 per sq. mile. A table giving the cost of 2,200 sq. miles 
shows a range of $4.35 to $25 per sq. mile, the average being $10.05 
for field and office work, of which $8.43 was the cost of field work. 
The cost of office work ranged from $1.15 to $4.05 per sq. mile, and 
averaged $1.62. 

Cost of Triangulation and Plane Table Surveys.* — During the 
spring of 1908 a triangulation system consisting of 48 signals and 
controlling about 150 square miles was installed on the Grand Val- 
ley Project (U. S. Reclamation Service), and during the field season 
of the same year a plane table survey of approximately 127 square 
miles was made and maps prepared on a scale of 1 in. to 1,000 ft. 
with 10-ft. contour intervals. A careful record of expenditures was 
kept and the itemized costs are shown below. 

In the triangulation survey the signals consisted of 2 by 4-ln. 
posts 14 ft. high, erected over pieces of %-in. gas pipe driven from 
18 to 24 ins. in the ground and held erect by three guy wires to each 
post. The signals were arranged 2 % miles apart and where stations 
were required more frequently or section ties were required out- 
side of the area mapped the charge for such work was made against 
the topographic mapping. The costs of triangulation survey shown 
Include the cost of measuring base lines and of making Polaris ob- 
servations. No camp was established, and subsistence was obtained 
at hotels and farm houses in the vicinity, 

^Engineering-Contracting, May 26, 1909. 



sq. 


Rate 


Cost per 


days. 


per day. 


sq. mile. 


1.11 


$7.50 


$0.80 


.14 


3.33 


.46 


.05 


3.00 


.14 


.05 


3.00 


.15 


.25 


2.25 


.56 


.05 


2.25 


.12 


.01 


2.25 


.02 


.08 


.50 


.04 


.40 


.25 


.10 
.03 
.05 

.29 
.18 
.45 
.02 
.22 



1774 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Triangulation Survey, Grand Vallbt Project. 

Av. time 

Distribution. ir 

Transitman 0.11 

Transitman 

Office engineer 

Recorder 

Flagman 

Computer 

Draftsman 

Hired horses 

Government horses (depreciation) . . 

Depreciation of equipment 

Travel 

Subsistence 

Supplies, miscellaneous 

Supplies, stakes and monuments.... 

Supplies, repairs 

Supplies forage 

Total cost per square mile $3.63 

In the plane tabl© survey the field party usually consisted of 1 

plane table man, 1 recorder and 2 rodmen, but at times a driver 

was necessary for teams used by level and topographic parties. The 

camp teamster hauled the supplies necessary, but the men furnished 

their own subsistence by organizing a club. The cost of hay was 

$15 per ton and of oats $1.90 per hundred weight. The area mapped 

was fairly rough on the average, but the cost was quite variable. 

On level mesas the cost was as low as $18 per sq. mile, but where 

the area mapped consisted of small fruit farms with numerous 

buildings, roads, fences and irrigation and waste ditches, the cost 

ran as high as $75 to $80 per sq. mile. 

Cost of Plane Table Topographic Survey, Grand Valley Project. 

Av. time 
per sq. 
Distribution. mile, days. 

Project office expenses 

Transitman : 0.02 

Flagman 02 

Levelman 47 

Level rodman 51 

Driver 31 

Topographer 2.90 

Recorder 3.06 

Stadia rodman 6.15 

Hired horses 5.83 

Government horses (depreciation) ... 4.84 

Computer 45 

Draftsman (chief of party) 58 

Camp cook and teamster 3.70 

Depreciation of equipment 

Veterinary service 

Supplies, miscellaneous 

Supplies, stakes and monuments 

Supplies, repairs 

Supplies, forage 

Supplies, shoeing 

Traveling expenses for field party 

Subsistence for field parties remote 

from camp .... .41 

Total cost per square mile $57.79 



Rate 


Cost per 


per day. 


sq. mile. 





$1.63 


$3.33 


.07 


2.00 


.04 


3.00 


1.41 


2.25 


1.15 


2.00 


.63 


3.00 


8.69 


2.25 


6.90 


2.00 


12.32 


.50 


2.92 


.25 ■ 


1.21 


2.25 


1.02 


3.33 


1.93 


2.00 


7.41 


.... 


2.68 


.... 


.04 


.... 


. 1.28 


.... 


.63 


.... 


.51 


.... 


4.50 


.... 


.39 


.... 


.02 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1775 

Cost of Topographical Survey, Texas.* — The survey covered about 
900 acres of roiling hiils near San Antonio, Tex., the range of ele- 
vations being something over 100 ft. The ground was heavily 
wooded with mesquite brush. Three roads in each direction which 
had been previously staked and cleared, provided a skeleton for 
horizontal control. Levels were run from a distance of two miles 
and bench marks established at intervals of one-third of a mile 
along the roads, the profiles of the latter being taken simultaneously. 
The details were then filled in by random stadia lines, run by com- 
pass and with short courses in such a manner as to avoid clearing. 
No permanent marks were used at set up points and only the alter- 
nate points were occupied by the instrument. The whole survey 
was made by a party consisting of instrumentman and rodman. 
Five-foot contours were obtained and the tract was mapped on a 
scale of 200 ft. to the inch. 

The itemized cost of the survey and mapping was as follows : 

Field work: Total. Per acre. 

Party of two, 7 days, at $7.20 $50.40 

Labor extra 2.00 

Total $52.40 $0,058 

Offlce work: 

Platting and mapping, 1 man 10 days. $35.00 
Offlce expenses and materials 5.60 

Total $40.60 $0,045 

Grand total $93.00 $0,103 

For the above information we are indebted to Mr. Terrell Bart- 
lett, C. E. 

Cost of Two Small Surveying Jobs.t — The first job consisted of a 
transit traverse up Town and Hanging Kettle Creeks in Clay County, 
Miss., the work being done in November, 1907. A summary of the 
work is as follows : 

Number courses Town Creek 34 

Total distance 1.97 miles (10,415.4 ft) 

Number courses Hanging Kettle Creek 19 

Total distance .126 miles (6,629.3 ft.) 

Number of courses in both creeks 53 

Distance, both creeks 3.23 miles (17,044 ft.) 

Average course 321.7 ft. 

In the field work 3 % days were spent ; while the offlce work, 
computing and mapping was 6 days. The working day was 9 hours. 
The cost of the field work was as follows: 

Instrument man, at $5 $17.50 

Two chainmen, at $1 7.00 

Two rodmen, at $1 7.00 

One axman, at $1 3.50 

Total, 3% days '. $35.00 

* Engineering-Contracting J Nov. 11, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, April 22, 1908. 



1776 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The office work cost $30 ; a draftsman and computer at $5 
being employed for 6 days. The total cost was, therefore, $65.00, 
and the cost per mile was $20.12. The 1/16 section, % section and 
section lines had been run across creeks, and ties were made to all 
such lines. All lines were run with transit and steel tape and all 
angles and lines checked before areas were computed. The map 
shows the acreage on each side of center line of creek in each 1/16 
section (40 acres) crossed. The traverse was made on one bank, 
the creek being too deep to cross. The country was flat with scat* 
tering woods and bushes. The second job consisted of the survey 
of a convict farm in Mississippi, for a lumber company, the work 
being done during January, 1908 ; a summary of the work is as 
follows : 

Cultivated land: 

Number cuts ■. . . . 58 

Smallest acreage per cent 5 acres 

Largest acreage per cent 16.54 acres 

Total acreage 414.77 acres 

Average acreage per cut 7.15 acres 

The time in the field was 3% days, and the time in office, com- 
puting and mapping, was 5 days ; an 8-hour day was worked. The 
cost of the field work was as follows: 

Surveyor, at $5 5)17.50 

Four helpers, at $1 14.00 

Total, SVa days $31.50 

The office work cost $25, a draftsman being employed for 5 days 
at $5 per day. The total cost was, therefore, $56.50, or 13.5 cts. per 
acre. For the above information we are indebted to Mr. Charles 1*. 
Wood, C. E. 

Cost of a Level Survey for a Drainage Plan.* — In August, 1904, the 
U. S. Department of Agriculture had a level survey made in Clay 
and Yankton Counties, South Dakota, for the purpose of developing 
a plan for the drainage of the bottom lands of the Missouri River 
In those counties. A description of the manner in which this survey 
was made was given in the Annual Report of Irrigation and Drain- 
age Investigations of U. S. Department of Agriculture and is repro- 
duced herewith. 

The first step was to collect such information concerning the 
land in question as could be obtained from the county records. 
Convenient plats for field use were made upon land office township 
blanks on a scale of 2 ins. to the mile. Upon these were traced all . 
land office data and such roads, ditches, and sloughs as were 
shown on the county maps. A day was then spent in making a gen- 
eral reconnoissance by driving over the area, in order to become 
somewhat familiar with its general topography. In this reconnois- 
sance it was seen that the section lines could be easily followed, as 



*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 12, 1906. 



ENGINEERING AND SURVEYS 1777 

where they were not marked by highways there were fences or 
turning rows located on them, and nearly all the one-quarter and 
one-sixteenth section lines could be approximately located on the 
ground by fence or field lines. 

From the reconnoissance and the field plots it was found that 
field measurements could be obviated by using land lines for loca- 
tions, and all additional data necessary could be obtained by run- 
ning levels. The plan decided on and carried out consisted in run- 
ning levels along parallel north and south section lines two miles 
apart, extending from the ridge which marks the high-water bank 
of the Missouri River to the foot of the bluff. A permanent bench 
mark of the Missouri River Commission survey furnished the datum 
for the levels. Levels were recorded at each one-quarter mile along 
the lines surveyed, the instrument being set midway between the 
one-quarter mile turning points. Turning points were taken on short 
wooden pegs driven to the natural surface of the ground. A target 
rod was used and read by both levelman and rodman. 

A light two-horse rig, with driver, was kept on the line and used 
to convey the rodman from one turning point to another. As the 
rodman moved one-quarter mile at a time and there was usually a 
good road, there was a considerable saving of time in the use of the 
rig, which was also used for conveying the party to and from work 
and for carrying water, lunch, and such survey stakes as were 
needed. 

From five to ten miles of level lines were run per day. The growth 
of high grass and weeds often retarded the work. The number of side 
shots which were necessary to secure desired data also cut down the 
days' run. Side lines were also run to the lowest points in sloughs or 
depressions one mile each side of the main line. Where there was 
water in the sloughs the elevation of the water surface was taken 
and the depth found by sounding from a boat or wading. 
The level of the surface of the water of both Missouri and 
James Rivers was also obtained. The high-water marks were also 
obtained from points located by residents, and the low-water marks 
were determined from the plots of the Missouri River Commission. 
Bench marks were established at nearly all section corners and were 
made by driving 30-penny spikes into corner fence posts or telephone 
poles at the surface of the ground, a blaze being made about 4 ft. 
above the spike and the elevation marked upon it. Each night the 
elevations were recorded in their proper locations upon the field 
plots. 

After the completion of the level work, the line between the culti- 
vated and wet land was sketched upon the field maps by personal in- 
spection. After the data had all been collected and platted the 
interior watershed boundaries and lines of proposed ditches were 
located on the field maps. A corrected map on a scale of one mile 
to one inch was afterwards made up from the field maps. The 
cost of this survey (82 miles of levels) was as follows: 



1778 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA., 

Survey: Per mile. 

Engineer, leveling, at $6 per day $1.06 

Engineer, special field examinations, at $6 per day... 0.40 

Rodman, at $1.75 per day 0.31 

Livery hire, team and driver, at $3 per day 0.73 

Railway fare 0.03 

Total cost of survey $2.53 

Plans: 

Engineer, office work, at $6 per day $0.88 

Drafting supplies 0.016 

Total cost of plans $0,896 

Total cost of survey and plans $3.43 

Regarding this preliminary survey, it should be said that only 
sufficient work was done to furnish the information required for 
developing a general plan, yet all levels are accurate and are con- 
nected with and checked upon Government river survey bench 
marks. A list and description of bench marks, which were fixed 
at each section corner of the surveyed lines, accompany the report 
and map which were filed with the auditor of Clay County, the ex- 
pense of which is not included in the above memorandum. The 
survey was inexpensive, yet sufficiently full for forming a compre- 
hensive plan for the drainage of 70,000 acres of land, and estab- 
lished a sufficient number of points from which future surveys for 
detail and construction work can be made whenever required. 

Cost of Sounding Through Ice. — Mr. Joseph Ripley gives the fol- 
lowing relative to the use of an ice boring machine, operated by 
bevel gear, for boring 3-in. holes through ice. Before the use of 
this machine, holes were chopped by axes at a cost of about 8 cts. 
per hole through 2 ft. of ice. With the machine, operated by two 
men, the average time was less than % min. per hole, through 
26 ins. of ice, overlaid by 2 ft. of snow, including all delays. The 
time of actual boring was about 8 seconds per hole. The sounding 
party consisted of 1 chief, recording soundings, 2 men sounding, 6 
men operating three boring machines, 2 men moving tag lines and 
marking places for holes, 3 men shoveling away snow after holes 
were bored, 1 gage observer and 1 cook. Such a party averaged 
3,000 holes per day of 8 hrs. at a cost of $1,000 per month, the 
working day being 8 hrs. "With 25 working days in a month, the 
cost is 1^4 cts. per hole. 

In U. S. Eng. Report, 1903, Vol. 10, Part 2, p. 1896, the follow- 
ing is given : 

An ice boring machine will bore a 2% -in. hole through 2 ft. of 
solid ice in 5 sees. A party can take 300 soundings per hr. through 
ice 2 ft. thick, in water 23 ft. deep, holes spaced 10 ft. x 50 ft. 
The best record for 8 hrs. was 2,749 soundings, ice being 13 ins. 
thick. The cost of soundings was 3 cts. each for field work. Includ- 
ing locating the holes. 



SECTION XV. 
MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA. 

Prices of Materials, Supplies and Plant. — Prices are subject to 
such fluctuation that I prefer to prepare a complete schedule an- 
nually, which is published in Engineering-Contracting, the first issue 
in April of each year. Rates of wages of different classes of work- 
men in different parts of America are also given in that issue. 

The Cost of Fences. — A barbed wire fence was built under the 
following specifications : 

"Posts to be oak or tamarack, 5 ins. diameter and 8% ft. long, 
spaced 16% ft. apart, c. to c, and set 3% ft. deep in the ground. 
The height of fence to be 4 ft. 9 ins., formed of four lines of 4 -barb 
wire, spaced 12, 14, 15 and 16 ins. apart measured from the 
ground up." 

Per mile. 

350 posts, including braces, at 10 cts ,$ 35.00 

1,500 lbs. 4-point barbed wire, at 5 cts 75.00 

40 lbs. staples, at 5 cts 2.00 

Labor 43.00 

Total $155.00 

This 10 cts. per post was a very low price, due to the fact that 
posts were cut from trees near the work. Posts are frequently 
5 to 10 cts. per lin. ft. of post, where they are imported by rail. 

Where rail fences are built, the posts are usually spaced 8 ft. 
apart c. to c, and set at least 3 ft. deep. The fencing specified by 
the Mass. Highway Commission consists of cedar or chestnut posts, 
not less than 6 ins. diam. and 6% ft. long, set 3 ft. in the ground, 
and spaced 8 ft. c. to c, bark peeled off. A top rail, 4x4 ins., and 
a side rail, 2x6 ins., are specified to be of dressed spruce ; and both 
rails are notched into the posts and spiked. The fence is painted 
with one coat of white lead and oil. The usual contract price for 
such a fence in Massachusetts is 15 cts. per lin. ft., or $890 per mile. 
There are 660 posts, and 12,300 ft. B. M. of spruce per mile. 

The wire fences of the Louisville & Nashville Ry. have posts 7 ft., 
long, with seven wires spaced 4, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 12 ins. from the 
ground up. For one mile of fencing the following materials and 
labor are required: 

1779 



1780 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Per mile. 

3 barbed hog wires (7.7 lbs. per 100 ft.) 1,218 lbs. 

2 barbed cattle wires (7.14 lbs. per 100 ft.).. 754 lbs. 
2 plain ribbon wires (6.66 lbs. per 100 ft.).. 704 lbs. 

Total wire per mile 2,676 lbs. 

Staples 49 lbs. 

Posts, 10 ft. apart 528 

Bracing, 1 x 6-in. yellow pine, ft. B. M 440 

Labor $105 

In soft soil a good workman, using an 8-in. post hole digger, will 
dig 100 post holes, 2 ft. deep, per day of 10 hrs. 

Cost of Barbed Wire Fences.* — The practice in spacing posts la 
variable, sometimes being 15 ft. centers, sometimes 24 ft. Farmers 
usually space fence posts a rod apart (16% ft.). When the posts 
are spaced 20 ft. apart it is customary to support the wires between 
the posts by means of two wooden slats or wire stays, each 4 ft. 
long, and spaced about 7 ft. apart. These slats or stays prevent 
animals from spreading the fence wires apart in their efforts to 
get between them. 

Bill of Material. — The standard fence used on the O. R. & N. has 
posts 7 ft. long, 20 ft. c. to c, and bedded 28 ins. in the ground. 
The first wire is 13 ins. above the ground and the rest are 13 ins. 
apart, except the space between the upper two, which is 14 ins. 
The bill of material is as follows per mile of fence : 
265 posts, 7 X 7-in. x 7-ft., split cedar. 
530 slats, 1 X 3-in. x 4-ft. fir. 
21,120 lin. ft., or 1,410 lbs., two-point galvanized cattle wire. 
16 lbs. staples, li/o-in., No. 9 polished. 
26 lbs. staples, 11/4 -in., No. 9. 
The following is a bill of materials and their estimated cost (not 
including labor) for the standard "second class fence" on the N. P., 
per mile : 

1,340 lbs. (21,120 lin. ft.) galv. barb wire, at 2% cts $30.15 

280 lbs. No. 7 galv. wire stays (675 stays, 4 ft. long), at 

2.8 cts 7.84 

16 lbs. 2-in. galv. wire staples (950 staples), at 2.35 cts... 0.38 

2,800 galv. anchor fence clamps, at 80 cts. per M 2.24 

10 diagonal braces, 4 x 4 in. x 12 ft., 160 ft. B. M., at $15.. 2.40 

225 cedar posts (6-in.), 7 ft. long, at 10 cts 22.50 

6 lbs. 60d nails, at 2.25 cts 0.14 

1 Eureka tubular gate, $4 4.00 

Total materials -. . .$69.65 

For the last ten years the contract price for the labor of build- 
ing such fences as this has not varied much from $75 a mile in the 
far "West. 

We shall now give the actual cost of a number of jobs of fence 
work on a western railway, showing the range of costs : 

Cost of a Seven-Mile Fence. — This fence was 7 miles long, built 



'Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 21, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1781 

on ground that was rather rocky, making the cost of digging post 
holes quite high. The cost of the fence was as follows per mile : 

1,300 lbs. barb wire, at 2.65 cts $ 34.45 

400 lbs. fence stays (100), at 2.75 cts 11.00 

90 lbs. fence clamps (3,900), at 6 cts 5.40 

16 staples (1,390), at 2.70 cts 43 

352 posts (15 ft. c. to c), at 11 cts 38.72 

12 lbs. 40d nails, at 2.25 cts 27 

Total $ 90-27 

Labor: Loading and Moving: 

3 hrs. foreman, at 25 cts $ .75 

16 hrs. laborers, at 15 cts 2.40 

Total ? 3.15 

Removing Brush: 

1 hr. foreman, at 25 cts $ .25 

30 hrs. laborers, at 15 cts 4.50 

Total $ 4.75 

Distributing Fence Material: 

3 hrs. foreman, at 25 cts $ .75 

10 hrs. laborer, at 15 cts 1.50 

Total $ 2.25 

Building Fence: 

38 hrs. foreman, at 25 cts. $ 9.50 

240 hrs. laborer, at 15 cts 36.00 

Total $ 45.50 

Grand total labor $ 55.65 

Cost of labor and materials $145.92 

It will be noted that the cost of moving the gang of men once on 
this job was $3.15 per mile of fence, or $22 for this one move, in 
lost time of men. Such losses as this should not be forgotten, espe- 
cially in estimating the cost of small jobs. 

Cost of a 2,000-Ft. Fence. — This was a short fence with posts 16 ft. 
apart, 4 wires to the post. The exact length of the fence was 1,932 
ft., or 120 panels of 16 ft., exclusive of 2 gates. There were 4 
posts used for the gates and 8 posts used for braces. The cost 
of this 1,932-ft. fence was as follows: 
Material: 

129 cedar posts, 7 ft., at 7 cts $ 9.03 

7,755 ft. barbed wire, 426 lbs., at 2 cts 8.52 

500 fence staples, 6% lbs., at 1.75 cts 11 

360 stays (4 ft), 122 lbs., at 3.15 cts 3.86 

1,440 fence clamps, 36.6 lbs., at 5.25 cts 1.89 

Freight on posts 2.00 

Total for 1,932 ft $25.41 

Two Gates: 

4 cedar posts ( 7 ft. ) , at 7 cts $ .28 

12 pes. Ix6-in. xl8-ft. = 96 ft. B. M., at $15... 1.44 
4 lbs. lOd nails, at 2.82 11 

Total for 2 gates $ 1.83 

Labor: 

2.6 days foreman, at $2.50 $ 6.50 

7.8 days laborers, at $1.50 11.70 

Total labor $18.20 



1782 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Excluding the gates, the cost of the materials was $69.40 per mile, 
and the cost of the labor was. $49. 70 per m|le, or a total of $119.10 
per mile. 

Cost of a 9,000-Ft. Fence. — This fence was of the same design as 
the one just described, the actual length being 8,974 ft. 
The materials cost: 

2,154 lbs. barb wire, at 2.76 ct $ 59.45 

649 lbs. fence stays, at 2.75 cts 17.85 

149 lbs. fence clamps, at 5.95 cts 8.87 

26 lbs. fence staples, at 2.70 cts 70 

577 posts, at 11 cts 63.47 

15 lbs. 40d nails, at 2.25 cts 34 

1 lb. lOd nails, at 2.30 cts 02 

2 lbs. 5d nails, at 2.25 cts 05 

24 pes. I"x6'-16' 192', at $8.50 1.63 

Total cost of material $152.38 

This makes a cost of $89.63 per mile of fence, including farm 
gates, there being 4 such gates in the 9,000 ft. An additional cost 
was 32 posts used for anchoring and for braces, the 15 lbs. of 40d. 
were also used on the anchors and braces. All the fence material 
had to be hauled from one to two miles on push cars by the crew 
to distribute it, and some brush had to be cleared away to build the 
fence. This and the other labor costs were : 
Distributing Material for Fence: 

Foreman, 7 days, at $65 $ 1.52 

Laborers, 9 days, at $1.50 13.50 

Clearing Brush to Build Fence: 

Laborer, 1 day, at $1.50 1.50 

Building New Fence: 

Foreman, 3.3 days, at $65 7.15 

Laborers, 37.3 days, at $1.50 15.95 

Putting Up Farm Gate: 
Laborers, 2 days, at $1.50 3.00 

Total labor $82.62 

A cost per mile of $48.60, making a total cost for materials and 
labor of $138.23. 

Cost of a 2M0-Ft. Fence. — This fence was of the same design as 
those previously given posts 16 ft. apart, with 4 wires. The fence 
was exactly half a mile long, but the costs have been reduced to the 
*!0st per mile for convenience of comparison. 

Materials : Per mile. 

21,360 ft. barb wire, 1,282 lbs., at 2.65 cts $ 33.98 

978 fence stays, 394 lbs., at 2.75 cts 10.84 

3,912 fence clamps, 98 lbs., at 5.95 cts 5.,82 

1,304 fence staples, 18 lbs., at 2.70 cts 48 

330 fence posts, at 11 cts 36.30 

Total materials per mile $ 87.42 

Labor: Distributing Fence Material: 

4 days labor, at $1.50 $ 6.00 

Erecting Fence: 

2 days foreman, at $2.50 5.00 

20 days labor, at $1.50 30.00 

Total labor per mile $ 41.00 

Total material and labor $128.42 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1783 

Labor Costs on Four Different Fences. — Having given the costs 
of materials and labor on several fences, we shall now omit the ma- 
terial item and give only the labor costs on fences, all of which had 
posts spaced 16 ft. apart, and 4 wires to the post. The first of 
these was 2,200 ft. long and the labor of erecting it cost at the 
following rate per mile: 

Hauling Out Fence Material: Per mile. 

1.2 days foreman, at $2.50 $ 3.00 

12 days laborer, at $1.50 18.00 

Total $21.00 

Building Fence: 

1.4 days foreman, at $2.50 $ 3.50 

16.8 days laborer, at $1.50 25.20 

Total $28.70 

Grand total $49.70 

This did not include $9 of lost time moving the gang from another 
job to this one. 

The next job was the building of a fence 2,600 ft. long. The 
ground was rocky, making it necessary to anchor most of the posts. 
The- labor cost at the following rate per mile : 

Clearing Brush: Per mile. 

2 days labor, at $2 $ 4.00 

Building Fence: 

2 days foreman, at $3 6.00 

34 days laborer, at $2 68.00 

Total $78.00 

In addition it cost $18 for the lost time of moving the men from 
another job to this one. Two farm gates were erected, and the 
cost of each was : 

1 farm gate $0.90 

2 posts for gate, at 10 cts 0.20 

Labor placing gate 2.00 

Total $3.10 

The next job was a fence 2,300 ft. long. The labor cost at the 
following rate per mile : 

Distributing Fence Material: ■ Per mile. 

1.1 day foreman, at $3 $ 3.30 

13.8 days laborer, at $1.50 20.70 

Total $24.00 

Clearing Brush: 
2.4 days laborer, at $1.50 $ 3.60 

Building Fence: 

1.1 day foreman, at $3 3.30 

21.8 days laborer, at $1.50 32.70 

Total $36.00 

Grand total labor $63.60 



1784 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In addition to this, the lost time moving to this job amounts 
to $10. 

The next job was a fence 5,700 ft. long, and the labor cost at the 
following rate per mile : 

Distributing Fence Material: Per mile. 
3.8 days laborer, at $1.50 $ 5.70 

Building Fence: 

1.8 days foreman, at $3 5.40 

16.6 days laborer at $1.50 24.90 

Loading Barb Wire on Car: 

0.5 day foreman, at $2.50 1.25 

2.5 days laborer, at $1.25 3.13 

Grand total labor $40.38 

Fence 5,000 Ft. Long. — The posts in this example were 20 ft. center 
to center. One gate was built. The material cost: 

254 fence posts, 4.5 cts $11.43 

1,215 lbs. No. 9 galv. iron wire, 2 cts 24.30 

285 lbs. fence stays, 3.75 10.65 

96 lbs. fence clamps, 6.25 cts 6.00 

13 lbs. fence staples, 2.20 cts 29 

1 lb. 40d nails, 1.5 cts 02 

3 pes. 2"x6"-16'48', $11.50 55 . 

$53.24 
Labor cost as follows : 

Foreman, 6 days, at $48.75 $ 9.67 

Laborers, 18 days, at $1.50 27.00 

$36.67 

Making a cost per mile for material of $55.96, for labor $38.52, 
and a total cost $94.48. This includes one gate. 

Cost of a Wire Fence.* — Mr. F. W. Doolittle gives the following 
data on 6,650 ft. of 4-wire fence, posts spaced 16 ft., as built re- 
cently about the top works of a coal mine near Denver, Colo. The 
work was done by regular employes on idle days during the sum- 
mer, which accounts for lack of uniformity in day wages, and also 
for a comparatively high labor cost. No special item of superin- 
tendence is charged as the force was so small that the overseer also 
made a hand. The cost of the 6,650 ft. was: 

Labor: 

Surveying line, 3 days, at $2.50 $ 7.50 

Digging holes, 14 days, at various 36.00 

Setting posts, 7y2 days, at $2.50 18.75 

Stretching wire, 8% days, at various 23.50 



Total labor $ 85.75 

Mat^erials: Cost. Freight. Hauling. Total. 

Posts $75.00 $25.00 $6.50 $106.50 

Wire 56.42 2.59 1.25 60.26 

Staples 3.52 (Included in wire) 3.25 



Total materials $170.01 



*Engineering-Contracting , Nov. 25, 1908. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1785 

An 8-hr. day was worked. The item, digging holes, includes 1 
day, man and team, at $3.50, and the item setting posts includes 1% 
days at $2.50, setting braces. The holes were dug with post auger 
to a depth of about 12 ins., where the ground was too hard for 
further progress. The holes were then filled with water, after 
which they could be deepened to from 20 ins. to 24 ins., or as far 
as the earth had been dampened. 

"Wires were stretched as follows: The reel was mounted on back 
of wagon box and several hundred feet of wire reeled off. The 
back end of wagon was then raised off the ground and a post placed 
between the rear axle and the ground to prevent the wagon run- 
ning back. The rear wheel was used as a tightener by taking a 
couple of turns of wire about hub and turning wheel around by 
hand, or by a bar through spokes against wagon bed. 

A comparative cost per mile of the above fence and the fence at 
San Antonio, Tex., described by Mr. Tyrrell Bartlett, in our Nov. 11 
issue is as follows: 

San Antonio. Denver. 
Materials: Per mile. Per mile. 

Posts $ 56.30 $ 85.20 

Wire and staples 48.20 50.80 

Total materials $104.50 $136.00 

Lahqr: 

Digging holes $ 40.40 ? 28.80 

Settmg posts, tamping posts, 

stringing wire 35.50 33.80 

Running line 6.00 

Total labor $ 75.90 $ 68.60 

Grand total .$180.40 $204.60 

The chief difference lies in cost of posts, those used near Denver 
costing 50% more than those used at San Antonio. At San 
Antonio 5 -in. cedar posts, set 30 ins. deep and 15 ft. on centers, 
were used, with four strands of wire. The labor on the holes was 
paid by the hole according as each was in earth, part in, or all in 
adobe. Other labor, $1.50 per day. 

Cost of Digging Post Holes for a Fence.* — In building the levees 
along the Mississippi River to retain the waters within its banks, 
fences are erected on both the land and river side. The price paid 
for this work is included in that for excavation. 

The fences are built with posts 5 ins. square, 7% ft. long, 2% ft. 
being in the ground. These posts are of oak, mulberry, black locust 
or sassafras, cut in the local timber lands. They are spaced 12 ft. 
apart. Four galvanized barbed wires are stretched and attached to 
the posts. 

Along the Mississippi at present foremen are paid $100 per 
month and board, while laborers are receiving $1.75 for a 12-hr. 
day. The materials and labor give a cost of a single line of fence 
per mile of $125, which is quite low. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 28, 1907. 



1786 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The post holes are dug with post hole augers, the holes being 
6 ins. in diameter and 2% ft. deep. In the soil that occurs along 
the river, one man with a 6-in. auger, working 12 hrs., will dig on 
an average 100 holes. This means a cost of 1% cts. for labor for 
digging a hole, and, as there are 440 holes to a mile of fence, the 
cost of digging the holes per mile will aggregate $7.70. 

From each hole is excavated % cu. ft. of earth, and, with a 6-in. 
auger digging to a depth of 2% ft, the cost of excavating a cubic 
yard of earth is 94% cts. 

Assuming that for a 10-hr. day a man would do proportionally 
the same amount of work, with wages at $1.50 per diem, we then 
have 84 holes dug in a day, making a cost of 1.8 cts. per hole, and 
cost per mile of $7.92. With the national government enforcing the 
8-hr. law on the levee construction that is to be done under United 
States engineers, the number of holes dug a day may be decreased. 

Cost of Digging Post and Pole Holes.* — A post hole digger may be 
termed a tool that does its digging by being driven into the ground, 
and, as it loosens the earth, picks it up so it can be taken out of 
the hole. 

An auger is not driven into the ground like a digger, but is forced 
down into the ground by a man pressing on it, while at the same 
time he turns it as a carpenter does an auger in boring a hole 
through wood. 

When digging a hole with a shovel and bar, it is seldom less than 
12-in. wide at the top, but it loses about one-third of its diameter 
as it is taken down, when the holes are not over 3 ft. deep. This is 
due to the fact that the shovel used for this purpose cannot be 
worked in a smaller hole. Time is lost in hard ground by having to 
change from the shovel to the bar, as it is necessary to use the 
latter to loosen the earth. 

We are enabled to give a record of digging some post holes by 
hand with the bar and ordinary long handled shovel. The fence 
posts were 7 % ft. long, 2 % ft. being put into the ground. The 
diameter of the post was 6 ins. The soil was a red clay. The holes 
being 2% ft. deep, were 12 ins. in diameter at the top, but averaged 
10 ins. This made 1% cu. ft. of excavation for each hole. The 
wages paid to the laborers were $1.50 for a 10-hr. day. A man dug 
40 of these holes per day, thus excavating about 2 cu. yds. of earth 
each day. This made a cost of 3 % cts. per post hole dug, and a cost 
of 75 cts. per cu. yd. of excavation. With 440 post holes to a mile 
of fences, posts being on 12-ft. centers, this cost per post gives 
a cost per mile of $16.50. 

A comparison of this with the cost of similar work done with an 
auger will no doubt be of interest. In Engineering-Contracting for 
Aug. 28, 1907, page 133, are given some costs of digging post holes 
with an auger. On that .lob 5-in. posts were used, and the holes 
were dug with a 6-in. auger, the holes being 2% ft. deep. Only 
% cu. ft. of earth was thus excavated from the hole, as compared 
to 1% cu. ft. One man in a 10-hr. day with wages at $1.75, dig- 



* Engineering-Contracting, Dec. 18, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1787 

ging 84 holes, made a cost of 1.8 cts. per hole, or a cost per mile, 
440 holes, of $7.92. Thus it is seen that with a higher wage the cost 
was more than 50% less, which needs no comment in estimating the 
value of the patent digger and auger. 

Another example of the cost of digging holes by hand was in 
making holes for some 12-in. steel channels that were to be used 
as the posts for a large storage bin for coal. The 12-in. channels 
were 24 ft. long, and 4 ft. of them were to be buried in the 
ground, embedded in concrete. For this reason the holes were 
made 2 ft. in diameter and 4 ft. deep. 

The tools used in digging the holes were a digging bar, a 
shovel and a spoon. The holes were kept 2 ft. diameter to 
the bottom, the spoon allowing this to be done. From each 
hole 12% cu. ft. was excavated. One man dug 3 holes of this 
kind a day. The ground was a stiff clay, and all of it had 
to be loosened with the bar. "With wages at $1.50 per 10-hr. day 
the cost per hole was 50 cts. In a day a man excavated 1.39 cu. 
yds. of earth, which made a cost per cu. yd. of $1.08. Some of the 
patented diggers are adapted to this work and would no doubt 
have reduced this cost. 

Cost of Digging 600 Trolley Pole Holes.* — Holes for trolley poles 
are generally dug by hand. Under most specifications they are not 
paid for by the hole, but are included in the price of other line 
work. For this reason few records of the cost of digging these holes 
have been kept. Poles used in large cities are generally of iron, and 
embedded in concrete, while those used in the smaller towns and on 
suburban roads are of timber. A different size hole is needed for 
each kind, so the cost of the holes varies somewhat. 

In this article we will give the cost of digging more than 600 
holes for trolley poles on a suburban line. The overhead construc- 
tion was of two kinds, span wire which needs a pole on each side 
of the track, and single poles with a bracket to hold the trolley wire. 
This divided the work into two groups, and the span wire construc- 
tion was further divided into double and single track work. The 
class of material in which the holes were dug, as well as the size 
of the butt of the pole, made additional division of the work. The 
cost of the work will be given under five groups. 

A 10-hr. day was worked and the foreman was paid $3.00 per day 
and the laborers $1.50. The work was done during the months of 
Februarj'- to July. The gang of men worked at digging the holes, 
raising the poles, and other overhead work during this period of 
time, but the cost of each item of work was kept separate. In dig- 
ging the holes, the tools that the men used were: A digging bar, 
see Fig. 1 ; a round point shovel, see Fig. 2, and a spoon, see Fig. 
3. The length of the handles on these was 8 ft. The holes were 
spaced as follows: For span construction on tangents, the poles 
were 110 ft. apart. On 12° curves or less they are from 80 to 110 ft. 
apart, while on curves of 150 ft. radius or less they were spaced 
from 40 to 50 ft. apart. 



* Engineering-Contracting, March 4, 1908. 



1788 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



Group I. — In this lot 82 holes were dug. It was for span con- 
struction of 4,775 ft. of double track. The poles were from 12 to 15 
ins. in diameter at the butt, so the holes were dug about 2 ft. in 
diameter. The depth of the hole was governed by the specifications, 
which called for all holes to be 6 ft. deep, this depth to be in the 
natural ground. Hence, where there was an embankment, the hole 
had to be as much deeper than 6 ft. as the height of the embank- 
ment was above the natural ground at the place where the pole 
was to be planted. 



Fiq.l 
EnqrConfr. 



hq-Z. 



Fi^.3. 



This is an instance of where conditions surrounding work may 
change, yet specifications are not changed to suit the new conditions. 
When these specifications were first drawn, all the poles on subur- 
ban lines of the company in question were not placed equi-distant 
from the center line of the track. In cuts they were so spaced, but, 
wherever embankments occurred, longer poles were used, as the 
poles were placed outside of the toe of the slope of the' embank- 
ment. This prevented having the poles in line, which made the line 
of poles appear unsightly, and it also added to the length of the 
span wire. For these and other reasons, the arrangement of poles 
was changed and they were set equi-distant from the center line 
on the embankment as well as in the cut. Under these circum- 
stances where the embankments had settled and were made of good 
material, there was no need of making the holes more than 6 ft., 
but, as the specifications called for a greater depth, the holes were 
so dug. They varied from 6 to 12 ft. deep. In this group 40 pole 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 



1789 



holes were dug 6 ft. deep, the rest being from 9 to 12 ft., 30 holes 
being of the last named depth. The roadbed on this section was all 
embankment, made of cinders ar.d slag from a steel plant. In dig- 
ging the 30 deepest holes the cinders and slag kept running into the 
holes, causing about three to four times as much material to be 
excavated as would otherwise have been taken from the hole. It was 
estimated that this doubled the yardage excavated from the 82 holes. 
In order to brace the poles under ground, an 8-ft. second-hand 



Spef/t y/ire 



A 



EyeBpIf 



Ma 



Tie 






I 



Fig. 4. 



sawed tie was cut into two pieces, one 3 ft. long and the other 5 ft. 
long, and placed as shown in Fig. 4. The short piece was put in 
the bottom of the hole and the large pieces at the top. This also 
increased the amount of material that was taken from the holes. 
This extra material averaged 4 cu. ft. for each hole, and the con- 
tractor was paid extra for this work. When holes were dug of a 
greater depth than the length of the shovel handle, a foot or more 
of earth was dug out of the surface of the ground at the side of the 
hole, and the workman stood in this depression, thus allowing him 
readily to reach with his shovel and spoon to the bottom of the 
hole. 

The cost of digging the 82 holes was: 

Foreman % 27.90 

Laborers 95.25 

Total $123.15 



1790 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The unit cost was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. Per hole. 

Foreman $0.13 $0.34 

Laborers 0.47 1.16 

Total $0.60 $1.50 

The high cost was due to the cinders as previously explained. 

The cost per lineal foot of double track for the hole digging was 
2.6 cts. 

Group II. — All of these holes, 88 in number, were 6 ft. deep. 
The poles were a little heavier than those in Group I, so the holes 
were 2i^ ft. in diameter. Each hole had 28 cu. ft. of earth in it, 
thus making 91 cu. yds. for all the holes. This was the first work 
done, and the men were not accustomed to handling their long 
handled shovels. 

The cost of digging the holes was : 

Foreman $ 23.10 

Laborers 83.10 

Total $106.10 

This gave a unit cost of the following : 

Per cu. yd. Per hole. 

Foreman $0.25 $0.27 

Laborers 0.91 0.94 

Total $1.16 $1.21 

As there was 4,590 lin. ft. of double track, the cost of digging 
holes per lineal foot was 2.3 cts. 

Group III. — This was span wire construction for single track 
work, there being 17,160 lin. ft. of track. In all 320 pole holes were 
dug. The holes averaged Zy^ ft. in diameter, and were from 6 ft. 
to 12 ft. deep. About 20% were deeper than 6 ft, 10% being 8 or 9 
ft. deep, and 10% from 10 to 12 ft. deep. From the holes 510 cu. 
yds. of earth were excavated, being 1.6 cu. yds. as an average from 
each hole. This large size hole was needed because the poles were 
extremely large in diameter and heavy — much larger than they 
were needed. This, too, was owing to the specifications, which stated 
the smallest size in diameter that would be accepted, but failed to 
state the largest dimensions that would be taken. Some of the poles 
furnished by the timber contractor were 3 ft. or more in diameter 
at the butt. This not only added to the cost of digging the holes, 
but also to the setting of the poles, and other details of the work. 
Special eye bolts had to be made for a large number of the poles, 
and some longer crossarms had to be obtained to carry the feed 
wires. 

Ten of the 6-ft. holes were dug in quicksand. These gave some 
trouble, and additional expense. An expedient used in digging these 
holes was to take a barrel, and, after knocking the two heads out of 
it, to put it in the hole. Then all the excavation was done from 
within the barrel, sinking it as the hole was dug. Thus the sides 
of the hole were sheathed, and by means of a hand pump the water 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1791 

was kept out while the digging was going on. If the quicksand 
occurs for a greater depth than the height of one barrel, a second 
barrel should be used on top of the first. This second one should be 
a little larger than the first, so it will go down around the lower 
one. The pole must be raised in such a hole as soon as it is dug. 

The total cost of digging the 320 holes was as follows: 

Foreman $ 77.80 

Laborers 349.35 

Total $427.15 

This gave the following unit cost : 

Per cu. yd. Per hole. 

Foreman •. . . $0.13 $0.24 

Laborers 0.68 1.09 

Total $0.81 $1.33 

The cost per lineal foot of single track for the hole digging was 
2.5 cts. 

Group IV. — This was for 2,188 lin. ft. of single track, a branch of 
the other line. The curves were sharper, hence the poles on the 
curves were closer than on the main line. The poles were all less 
than 20 ins. in diameter, so the holes were made 2 ft. in diameter. 
There were 64 poles, and only a few of the holes were deeper than 
6 ft. About 19 cu. ft. were excavated from each hole, no under- 
ground braces being used. This made 45 cu. yds. excavated from 
the 64 holes. The cost of digging the holes was : 

Foreman $ 9.00 

Laborers 40.50 

Total $49.50 

The unit cost was as follows : 

Per cu. yd. Per hole. 

Foreman $0.20 $0.14 

Laborers 0.90 0.65 

Total $1.10 $0.79 

The cost per lineal foot of single track for the digging was 
2.2 cts. 

Group V. — This was side pole construction for single track, using 
a bracket made of pipe, on the pole. There were 5,700 lin. ft. of 
this construction, the poles being spaced about 80 ft. apart. Only a 
few of the holes were deeper than 6 ft., but, as the poles were large, 
the holes were 3% ft. in diameter. The bracing blocks were used 
for these poles. An average of 36 cu. ft. was excavated from each 
hole, and, as there were 69 holes, 92 cu. yds. were excavated. 

The cost of digging the holes was; 

Foreman $12.00 

Laborers 54.00 

Total $66.00 



1792 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This gives a unit cost of: 

Per cu. yd. Per hole. 

Foreman $0.13 $0.18 

Laborers 0.59 0.78 



Total $0.72 $0.96 

The cost per lin. ft. of single track was 1.2 cts. 
A comparison of the cost of each group is shown in the follow- 
ing table, also the average cost for the entire job : 

Cost per Cost per Cost per lin. ft. 

hole. cu. yd. Double track. Single track. 

Group I $1.50 $0.60 $0,026 

Group II 1.21 1.16 0.023 

Group III 1.33 0.81 $0,025 

Group IV 0.79 1.10 0.022 

Group V 0.96 0.72 0.012 

Average 1.24 0.82 0.0245 0.0235* 



♦Bracket construction (Group V) left out of this average. 

It will be noticed that the cost per hole varied directly with the 
size of the hole. Adding to the diameter and the depth increased 
the cost. The cost per cubic yard was high when tlie hole was small 
and low when the hole was large. The cost per lineal foot for span 
wire construction varied but little. Naturally the single track was 
about the same as double track. 

Weight of Ashes, Garbage, Etc.* — In the Transactions of the 
American Society of Civil Engineers for April there is a valuable 
paper by Mr. H. de B. Parsons, entitled "Disposal of Municipal 
Refuse and Rubbish Incineration." From that paper we have ab- 
stracted data that may be of use to our readers. 

Mr. Parsons gives the following as average weights per cubic 
yard: 

Lbs. per cu. yd. 

Rubbish (paper, rags, old furniture, etc.) 200 

Street sweepings 850 

Garbage 1,150 

Ashes 1,350 

The weight of ashes varies from 1,200 lbs. to 1,500 lbs. per cu. yd. 
Ordinary household ashes contain about 15% of unburned coal ; but 
steam-ash averages about 24% to 30% coal, the lower figure being 
for bituminous, and the higher figure for anthracite coal. 

Mr. Parsons states that the mixed ash collections from New 
York City contains 30% to 35% combustible matter. 

Rubbish, as ordinarily piled in carts, or without extra packing, 
weighs 130 lbs. to 225 lbs. per cu. yd. In Boston it averages 202 
lbs. per cu. yd. ; in New York it averages about 140 lbs. 

The weight of street sweepings ranges from 800 lbs. to 1,400 lbs. 
per cu. yd., depending upon the dryness of the weather and the time 
of collection. 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 18, 1906. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1793 

A large table is given by Mr. Parsons showing the average per 
capita weights of city refuse collected in different cities. From that 
table the following was deduced, showing the average collection of 
refuse per capita per day: 

Lbs. per day. 

Garbage 0.53 

Street sweepings 0.50 

Ashes 2.23 

Rubbish 0.21 

Total per capita 3.47 

Cost of Garbage Reduction and Collection at Cleveland, C* — The 

city of Cleveland, O., owns and operates its own garbage collection 
and reduction plant. This plant had cost the city on Dec. 31, 1906, 
a total sum of $181,307, divided as follows: 

Reduction plant (incl. $15,000 bldgs.) $146,297 

Collection plant 35,010 

Total $181,307 

In acquiring the plant the city has assumed a debt of $155,000 in 
bonds, the interest on which is paid by the city out of general funds. 
The reduction plant includes 50 acres ($25,000). 

During the year 1900 there were collected and treated by the city 
plant 69,872,000 lbs., or 34,891 tons of garbage. The cost of this 
collection and treatment is given in detail in a report presented to 
the Cleveland City Council by the Board of Public Service, Mr. W. 
J. Springborn, President. Mr. Springborn has furnished us a copy 
of this report for examination, and from it we have taken the 
statistics given above. 

The figures of most value and interest, however, are those show- 
ing by items the income and the operating expenses of the plant 
for the last calendar year. These figures are of value particularly 
because they give us specific costs of collecting and of treating 
garbage by the reduction process with a well managed and reason- 
ably well designed and, equipped plant. Prices of supplies and 
wages of labor are not given and various other important data are 
omitted. 

"We give in Table I the itemized operating expenses for collecting 
and reducing 34,891 tons of garbage at Cleveland, O., in 1906. The 
totals are as they are given in the report, but the several items have 
been extended by us to give the unit costs as well as the totals. It 
may be noted also that the totals are given separately in the report 
lor the two half-year periods, Jan. 1 to June 30 and July 1 to 
Dec. 31 ; we have not made this separation. The figures given are 
the actual costs of collecting and reducing the garbage ; these costs 
may be summarized as follows: 

Per ton. 

Collection $2,127 

Reduction, per ton 2.385 

Extraordinary expenses 0.253 

Total $4,765 

* Engineering-Contracting, May 2, 1907. 



1794 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

This total, it is to be noted, does not include interest on the bonds, 
which at 4% would be $6,200, or nearly 18 cts. per ton of garbage 
handled ; nor does it include any charge for general administration 
expenses, a wholly indeterminate sum. Adding the interest charges 
brings the total cost per ton to $4,945. 

The net cost to the city of collection and reduction is of course 
a less amount since the reduction process preserves the grease and 
other salable products, which ai-e disposed of and constitute a source 

Table I. — Itemized Cost of Operating Garbage Collection and 

Heduction Plant at Cleveland, O. 

Total. Per ton. 

Labor at plant $43,732 $1,254 

Coal at plant 19,980 0.572 

Superintendence and clerk 3,363 0.096 

Repairs and renewals 4,763 0.136 

Press cloths 2,565 0.073 

Insurance 288 0.008 

Office supplies 146 0.004 

Oil, waste, light, water, etc 5,113 0.146 

Press racks 806 0.023 

Taxes 346 0.009 

Commission, analysis, etc 826 0.023 

Freight, purchase dead animals.. 1,455 0.041 

Total reduction expenses $ 83,383 $2,385 

Labor, teamster, etc 43,829 1.256 

Feed 10,991 0.315 

Freight on garbage 5,285 0.151 

Superintendence and clerk 2,870 0.082 

Shoeing, etc 2,431 0.069 

Harness repairs and renewals 1,204 0.034 

Painting garbage cars 919 0.026 

Repair cars and wagons 4,280 0.123 

Rent and taxes 473 0.014 

Insurance 450 0.012 

Oil, light, telephone, etc 1,601 0.045 

Total collection expenses $ 74,334 $2,127 

Auditing 150 0.004 

Loss of horses 1,473 0.042 

Depreciation reduction plant, at 10% 3,382 0.097 

Depreciation collection plant, at 10%... 3,351 0.095 

Depreciation new reduction equipment.. 536 0.015 

Total extraordinary expenses $ 8,892 $0,253 

Grand total operating expenses $166,609 $4,765 

of income which is credited against operating expenses. There are 
also at Cleveland minor sources of income. The report mentioned 
above summarizes the income account as follows: 

Product sold $ 96,351 

Inventory of product 8,694 

Sale of raw material ., 354 

Rents 127 

Miscellaneous revenue 1,465 

Total income $106,991 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1795 

We have then the following net cost to the city of treating one ton 
of garbage : 

Total cost of disposal, per ton $4,945 

Total income from operation, per ton 3.07 

Net cost of disposal, per ton $1,875 

It will be seen by referring to Table I that the total cost of re- 
duction proper was $2,385 per ton, not including depreciation and 
interest on cost. Adding these two items we get a cost of about 
$2.62 per ton, so that the income for operation gives a profit on re- 
duction alone of 45 cts. per ton. These figures are significant, not as 
specific guides as to the cost and profit of reduction, but as indi- 
cating that the reduction process of garbage disposal may be made 
self-supporting. 

The income from operation comes chiefly from the sale of product. 
The nature and amount of this product are indicated by Table II, 
rearranged from figures given in the report. In addition to the 
character and quantities of materials produced for sale the table 
shows the prices fetched by these materials in the market. It is 
interesting to note that the amount of grease per ton of garbage 
treated was 61.05 lbs., or 3.06%. 

In coiisidering the figures given it is important to remember that 
they are a record of an individual case. They are interesting as 
being almost the first and certainly the most complete published 
figures of the cost of garbage disposal by reduction, and for this 
reason they have been given. 

Table II. — Showing Character and Value op Salable 
Product from Cleveland, O., Garbage 
Reduction Plant. 
Article. 

Grease, 2,140,300 lbs $41,940 

Dry tankage, 6,282,500 lbs 13,724 

Pressed tankage, 2,315,400 lbs 2,564 

Hair 87 

Tails 45 

Hides 1,493 

Total $59,853 

Cost of Garbage Disposal, Milwaukee. — Mr. Rudoph Hering is 
authority for the following data. The weight of garbage is : 

Per cu. yd., 
lbs. 

Ashes and rubbish mixed 1,040 

Dry manure 970 

Clear ashes 1,210 

Rubbish alone 650 

A horse produces 22 lbs. of manure daily. 

In 1906 the city had a population of 350,000. The garbage col- 
lected was 48,400 loads, or 38,500 tons, of which 35,300 tons were 
burned in a furnace. It required 160 lbs. of coal to burn a ton 
of garbage, coal costing $3.80 per ton, which is equivalent to 19 cts. 



1796 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

per ton of garbage. There are 8 tons of residual ash from each 
150 tons of garbage. 

The cost per ton in 1906 was: 

Per ton. 

Collection $1.66 

Operating hoist 0.10 

Operating furnace 1.24 

Burial 0.01 

Total $3.01 

The cost of the crematory plant was approximately as follows: 

Buildings $16,795 

Steel trestles 3,510 

Hoists 2,900 

Engines and dynamos 4,113 

Pump 494 

Chimney (150 ft. high) 6,399 

Three furnaces 27,750 

Patent rights 12,500 

Total $74,461 

Garbage Incineration, San Francisco. — The garbage is cremated 
by a private company for 20 cts. per cu. yd., garbage being deliv- 
ered by the city at the plant. The plant was built in 1897 at a cost 
of $75,000, and handles 650 cu. yds., or about 260 tons per day, 
which is less than half its capacity as no force works nights. 

The following gang works 11 hrs. (in 1900) : 

1 foreman $ 2.50 

1 office man 2.50 

1 night man 2.50 

5 firemen, at $1.75 8.75 

5 firemen-helpers, at $1.50 7.50 

10 men on garbage floor, at $1.625 16.25 

Total $40.00 

This labor is equivalent to 6 cts. per cu. yd., or 15 cts. per ton, 
but does not include the disposal of the ash and clinker. There were 
169,200 cu. yds. of garbage burned in 1899. 

Cost of Removing Ashes. — The average cost of removing ashes, 
exclusive of dump maintenance, at Rochester, N. Y., in 1906, was 
$0,353 per cu. yd. The average weight of a cubic yard of ashes was 
921 lbs. Tlie average cost of maintenance of dumps, ashes, scrapings 
and sweepings was $0.1073 per team load. A team load weighed 
3,683 lbs., the average weight of the wagon being 2,100 lbs. 

Cost of Tile Drains. — Clay tiles for drainage purposes are usually 
round in section, and are usually made in 1-ft. lengths. In soil that 
can be spaded, a special ditching spade should be used. The blade 
of this type of spade is narrow and very long (18 ins.), and 
strongly curved forward to give greater stiffness. With such a 
spade, a trench 5 ft. deep, and not more than 15 ins. wide at the 
top, can be dug. Trenches 3 ft. deep are 10 to 12 ins. wide on top, 
and are taken out in two spadings, or benches. The bottoms of the 
trenches are shaped so as to fit the tile, by using a tile hoe or scoop 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1797 

of proper shape, different widths being used for different sizes of 
tile. The tiles are laid by a man standing on the surface of the 
ground, using a tile hook for the purpose of placing the tiles in the 
trench. The trench is backfilled by a team dragging a plow pro- 
vided with a long evener, so that there is one horse on each side of 
the trench. 

Mr. C. G. Elliott gives the following as the actual cost of drain- 
ing an 80-acre farm in Illinois: 

Tile. • Cost per lin. ft. 

Size, Lin. Depth, Tile, Laying, Total, 

ins. ft. ft. cts. cts. cts. Total. 

3 7,030 3 1.32 2.00 3.32 $233.40 

4 8,280 3% 2.00 2.00 4.00 331.20 

5., 850 4 3.00 2.42 5.42 46.07 

6 2,700 5 4.00 3.66 7.66 206.82 

7 1,000 5 6.00 3.72 9.72 97.20 

Total, 80 acres, at $11.43 per acre $914.69 

The cost of "laying," as above given, includes the cost of digging 
the trench, laying the pipe and backfilling. The men were paid $2 a 
day, being skilled diggers and tile layers. The soil was a black 
loam 2% ft. thick, under which was a yellow clay subsoil. 

For tile up to 6 ins. diameter, Elliott estimates 1^4 cts. per lin. 
ft. for labor of trenching 3 ft. deep and laying the tile ; and he 
allows 0.3 ct. per lin. ft. for backfilling. 

The manufacturers of tile do not have uniform list prices from 
which discounts are given. The following net prices are quoted 
(1905) for New York delivery in carload lots: 

Weight, Net price per 

Size of drain tile, ins. lbs. per ft. ft., cts. 

2 3 1.45 

2% 4 1.72 

3 5 2.18 

4 7 3.04 

5 9 3.93 

6 12 5.38 

8 19 8.20 

10 28 14.50 

12 40 18.80 

Tile drains are frequently used for road drainage. In such cases 
the trench is usually filled part way up with broken stone or gravel, 
the cost of which must be included in the bidding price per lin. ft. 
of drain. Tile collars to be used at joints are occasionally specified, 
but they are of questionable value, and are rarely used in land 
drainage. On roadwork done by the author, the cost of laying 4-in. 
tile in a trench was % ct. per lin. ft., exclusive of digging the trench 
and filling with gravel. The man laying tile received 16 cts. per hr., 
and he averaged 640 ft. laid per 10-hr. day. 

In New Jersey roadwork, where tile drains are used, the 4-in. tiles 
are frequently specified to be laid on a 1-in. yellow pine plank, 6 ins. 
wide, in a trench 2 ft. deep. If plank costs $20 per M delivered this 
item adds 1 ct. per lin. ft. The average bidding price in New 



1798 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Jersey has been about 12 cts. per lin. ft. for a 4-in. tile drain 
complete. 

Weight of Drain Tile. — Porous- or farm tile laid 3 or 4 ft. deep on 
one or both sides of the roadway is the best method of securing 
xinderdrainage for highways. Tile may be had from 3 to 30 ins. in 
diameter. The smaller sizes are usually 1 ft. long and the larger 
sizes are 2 or 2i^ ft. long. The accompanying table shows the 
weight per foot and the average carload for various sizes of tile : 

Weight Av. carload, 

per ft., lbs. No. pieces. 

4-in. tile 6 6,500 

5-in. tile 8 5,000 

6-in. tile 11 4,000 

7-in. tile 14 3,000 

8-in. tile 18 1,200 

10-in. tile 25 800 

12-in. tile 33 500 

14-in. tile 43 400 

15-in. tile 50 300 

16-in. tile 53 250 

18-in. tile 70 200 

20-in. tile 83 166 

22-in. tile 100 160 

24-in. tile 112 150 

30-in. tile 192 65 

Prices of Tile Drains in Place.* — Table III was compiled by Mr. 
George M. Thomson, County Surveyor of Green County, Iowa, to 
facilitate the making of estimates on county ditches. Mr. Thomson 
writes us that the table agrees very closely with bids received dur- 
ing the last two years for doing such work in Greene County. The 
prices given in the table are for excavating the trench, laying the tile 
and refilling the trench. The prices given are per foot deep and rod 
long. For instance, suppose the drain is to be 7.15 ft. deep and is 
to be laid with 12-in. tile. In the column under 7 ft. and opposite 
12 ins. will be found 40 cts., the price per foot deep ; then 7.15 X 40 
= $2.86, the price per rod for 12-in. tile laid 7.15 ft. deep. 

Cost of Digging a Trench and Laying Tile Drain.f — In laying some 
tiles for the drainage of a wagon road a trench 2 ft. wide on the 
top and 1 ft. on the bottom, with an average depth of 3 ft., was 
excavated. The tiles used were 4-in. and 8-in. They were laid in 
the trench and broken stone placed around them, and over them, 
before backfilling the trench. This allows the water to enter the 
tiles much easier than when dirt is put around them. In all, 7,500 
lin. ft. of trench was dug. 

There were excavated 1,250 cu. yds. from the trench, 75 cu. yds. 
being rock. The rock was all in the bottom of the trench, some- 
times running across the bottom, while in some places it was only 
found on one side of the trench. Some of it was loosened with bars 
and picks, but the most of the rock had to be blasted. The rock ex- 
cavated was broken up by hand into about 2-in. ring stone, and 



*Engineering-Contracting, Jan. 22, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 16, 1908. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 



1799 



jjoifloiooiot-oiaoinoooffooiooiooin 



lmmt050t-t-OOOOOOa>0500THrHNW)(rOTt<Tf"U5 



o 
o 

Eh 



jou50inou5t-oioou:>oooMooinomo"5 



jjinoinoinoiMiooiaoineoooeoomomO 



r: t^ -^ ""^ ITS K5 » <D :D t^ t" OO 00 Oi C5 O O tH Cq (M CO CO 
tH i-irHrHr-!i-iT-5l-i 



W -fl 



P< 






^lisoioousommOLOOmcooocooioomO 



o 

< 

O 

M 

O 

H 



-jJcoco-^-'^ioirsirsocot-.c-ooooasCiOrH^-ic^cs! 



CTieo- 



^mou:)Oii50(Mmou50«oeoooeooijOOioo 

■HC^COCOTf<Tt<miOin50tr>t-t-00000500rHTHOiJ 



n 

EH 



.usooomoint-omousiHt-cooomomoo 
+JTHTHMcoeoeoco-^Tj<ir5iocenDt-t-oooioaOr-t 
,- r-irH 

^ s :::::::::::::::::: : 

r^co .!!.*I!!-> 

■g-s 

® S.S.S.S.S5.S.S.S.S.2.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.S.2 

•i-<10t-OOOCqTj(10«0000(MTl<toOOONTt>CDOOO 
HI iH r-l j-l T-i rH 1-1 IM IM N IM (M CO CO CO eo to Tj< 



1800 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

was used around the tiles, very little stone being purchased for this 
purpose. 

The wages paid on the job for a 9-hr. day were $3.50 for foremen, 
$1.35 and $1.40 for laborers, and 75 cts. for water boys. One fore- 
man and one gang of 16 men worked for 9 days, and the job was 
completed by 2 foremen and 26 men, working 10 additional days. 

The total labor cost for excavating the trench, breaking up the 
stone, laying the tile, and placing broken stone around it, and back- 
filling the trench was $674.15, or 52 cts. per cu. yd. of trench. 

The tile laying was done by one man and an assistant, who 
wheeled the tiles and laid them alongside of the trench, the tile 
layer then placing them. These two men, in a half day, could lay 
tiles in the trench that the entire gang had dug during a day. After 
they had laid the tiles, with the assistance of a few additional men, 
they did the backfilling of the trench. The labor cost of placing 
the tiles was $26.14, making a cost of 0.35 ct. per lin. ft. The cost 
per lin. ft. for excavating, breaking rock and backfilling was 8.6 
cts., making a total cost per lin, ft. of the completed drain of 
about 9 cts. 

Cost of Farm Drainage. — Several excellent articles on the methods 
and cost of farm drainage appeared in Engineering-Contracting, 
Dec. 4, 1907, Oct. 21, Nov. 4 and Nov. 18, 1908, Oct. 13 and Oct. 20, 
1909. These articles occupied about 25 pages, of which the follow- 
ing is a very brief summary. 

Mr. L. G. Hicks states that, in draining a farm near Omaha, the 
cost of tile drainage was $23 per acre. Wages were $1.50 per 
10-hr. day and board, the board amounting to $0.50, making a total 
of $2 per day. Material was black loam, which cost 21 cts. per cu. 
yd. to excavate from ditches 3% ft. deep and 12 to 15 ins. wide. 
The ditch was shaped up with a tile spoon, at a cost of 2% cts. per 
lin. ft., which is equivalent to adding another 20 cts. per cu. yd. 
The backfilling was done by two men and two horses with a plow 
at a cost of 1 ct. per cu. yd. Hence the total cost was 42 cts. per 
cu. yd. The cost of laying the tile was as follows : 

Per 100 ft., 
cts. 

3 or 4-in. tile 5 

6-in. tile 6.7 

8-in. tile 10 

With a tile hook a man lays 100 ft. of 3-in. tile in 15 mins., or at 
the rate of 4,000 ft. per day. 

The cost of this work on a 75-acre farm where 25,150 lin. ft. of 
tile were laid was : 

Per acre. Per lin. ft., cts. 

Surveys $ 1.45 0.43 

Labor 12.82 3.82 

Material 8.55 2.55 

Total $22.82 6.80 

A 476-acre "experimental farm" in Minnesota was drained, using 
4, 6 and 8-in. tile. Farm laborers received $2 a day, and team with 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1801 

driver was rated at $4.50 per day. The cost of loading, unloading 
and hauling was 80 cts. per ton for the first mile, plus 30 cts. per ton 
for each additional mile, load averaging 2^4 tons over ordinary 
fields. The contract price for trenching (by hand), tile laying and 
backfilling was $2.42 per 100 lin. ft. of trench 3 ft. deep, plus 6 cts. 
for each additional foot of depth. The average trench work done 
by one man, at $2 per day, was: 

Lin. ft. 

3-ft. trench 100 

3.5-ft. trench 95 

5-ft. trench 80 

After a man had acquired some experience, 4 to 6-in. tile were laid 
with a tile hook at the rate of 2,000 ft. in 10 hrs., where the trench 
was in good condition and the tile convenient. 

After the tile were laid they were covered with earth 4 to 6 ins. 
de"ep, called "blinding." A man astride of the trench cuts off earth 
from each side with a tile spade. This blinding is done at the rate 
of 4,000 ft. in 10 hrs. The blinding holds the tile in place. 

The backfilling was done in three ways : ( 1 ) By hand ; ( 2 ) by 
drag scraper ; ( 3 ) by plow and road machine. The costs were as 
follows : 

A trench 3 ft. deep was backfilled by hand at a cost of $0.56 per 
100 lin. ft, wages being $2.00 per 10-hr. day. 

A trench 3% ft. deep was backfilled by a drag scraper, two horses 
and two men, for $0.60 per 100 lin. ft. of trench. 

A similar trench was backfilled for $0.32 per 100 lin. ft., using a 
plow first and a road machine afterward. Two teams and drivers 
were used on the plow, one team on each side of the trench. A long 
evener was used, and the plow shifted as desired. After two round 
trips, the same gang completed thei filling by means of a road 
machine. 

In Illinois the average depth to lay tile is about 3 ft., and the dis- 
tance apart of lateral drains is about as follows : 

Ft. apart. 

Light, sandy soil 150 to 300 

Heavy loam 75 to 150 

Gumbo 30 to 100 

The cost in dollars per acre for tile drains may be roughly esti- 
mated by dividing 1,500 by the distance apart (in feet) of the lateral 
drains. Thus, if the drains are 150 ft. apart, the cost per acre is 
1,500 -7- 150 = $10. 

In Utah, 40 acres of irrigated farm land were drained, using 4, 
5 and 6-in. tile, laid 4 to 5 ft. deep. The cost was $13.50 per acre. 
There were 5,300 lin. ft. of tile used, at the following average cost: 

Per 100 lin. ft. 

Tile $ 6.40 

Laobr 3.80 

Total $10.20 

Mr. Jas. T. Taylor gives the following relative to pipes laid in 
1891 for irrigating 4,200 acres in the Alessandro District, California. 



1802 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The pipes were vitrified sewer pipes and cement pipes, 6 to 12 ins. 
diam., and these pipe lines, including trenching, etc., cost $76,300 
for 40 miles of pipe, or $18.15 per acre for the lateral system. This 
is equivalent to 50 ft. of lateral pipe per acre, at an average cost of 
36 cts. per ft. laid. 

Cost of Tile Trenching With a iVIachine.* — A machine made by 
the Buckeye Traction Ditcher Co., of Pindlay, Ohio, was used on the 
Northwest Experiment Farm, University of Minnesota, in 1903. 
The machine dug a trench 14% ins. wide and 41/2 ft. deep. It had 
an 8-hp. boiler and consumed 450 lbs. of coal and 4 bbls. of water 
per day. It dug 34,000 lin. ft. of trench in 45 days actual working 
time, or 744 lin. ft. per day. The men who handled the machine 
were inexperienced. . 

The following was the cost : 

Per 100 ft. 

Labor running machine $0.45 

Coal at $7.50 per ton 0.19 

Water 0.13 

Oil 0.01 

Repairs 0.13 

Total ditching ., $0.91 

Laying tile 0.18 

Blinding 0.05 

Incidentals 0.09 

Total $1.23 

The price of the machine was $1,400. 

Although the machine was not well handled and had not at that 
time (1903) been perfected, it made a very creditable record of cost, 
as contrasted with hand work, for the latter cost $3.88 per 100 lin. 
ft. on the same farm. 

Two men operated the machine. 

I recently saw a machine of the same make and size on a farm 
in New Jersey where it was averaging 2,000 lin. ft. of trench 
(15 ins. X 3 ft.) in 10 hrs. 

Cost of Laying Small Gas IVIains on Six Jobs.f — Mr. W. H. Mat- 
lack is author of the following: 

In this article the cost is given of laying 4-in., 6-in. and 10-in. gas 
mains on 6 different jobs, there being a total of 10,924 lin. ft. of 
pipe laid. The 10-in. main was first laid, the 6-in. and 4-in. follow- 
ing. The work was done in the months of May and June, 1908. 
The weather during that spring was unusually wet and all costs are 
a little higher than they should be, yet the tables will give a fair 
idea of what work will cost under such conditions. 

The ditch averaged 3 ft. 6 ins. in depth and was 28 ins. wide. 
The soil was half and half sandy clay and gumbo, with the excep- 
tion of about 150 ft. of quicksand encountered in laying the 10-in. 
line. The 10-in. line was almost all laid on rainy days in a wet 



* Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 4, 1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting, March 31, 1909. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1803 

ditch. From 1,500 to 2,000 ft. of the ditch were one-third full of 
water at one time, which caused it to cave, and about 900 ft. had 
to be redug, aside from bailing the water with buckets from some 
2,000 ft. of it. 

A -ereek was crossed with the 10-in. line. Here lead joints were 
used, but all other joints on the six jobs were made with cement. 
The following fittings were put in on the 10-in. line: Three 10-in. 
drips, thirteen 5-in. tees, one 10-in. cross, and one 10 x 16-in. 
reducer. 

The 6-in. line No. 1 was laid next and under similar conditions, 
and the following fittings used: Three 6-in. crosses and three 
6 x 4-in. tees. 

The 4-in. lines were put in when the weather was good and the 
soil dry. Records kept in laying the 4-in. pipe showed that 3 ft. of 
yarn would make four joints and that one sack of cement would 
caulk and cap 32 joints. Lehigh Portland cement was used, and 
tests previously made showed tensile strengths of from 500 to 600 
lbs., per sq. in. 

The gang averaged 25 men. The best day's work consisted of 52 
lengths of 6-in. pipe and 29 lengths of 4-in. pipe, the ditch being 
opened, pipe laid and caulked in 10 hours. In backfilling the trench 
the earth was hand tamped in from 6 to 8-in. layers. The team was 
used in handling pipe and other supplies from the plant to the job, 
an average distance of two miles. 

The following wages were paid: Foreman, 27% cts. per hour; 
caulkers, 22 to 25 cts. per hour ; laborers, 17 cts. ; team and driver, 
45 cts. ; watchman, 17% cts., and water boy, 15 cts. per hour. A 
night watchman was employed throughout the job and a man for 
Sundays. 

The cost of the work, divided into various items- of labor for each 
lineal foot, is as follows: 

Job No "A" "1" "2" 

Size 4-in. 6-in. 10-in. 

Total ft. laid 1,412 1,302 5,781 

Team and driver $0,007 $0,014 $0,023 

Foreman 0.007 0.005 0.007 

Superintendence 0.005 0.007 

Excavation 0.040 0.033 0.058 

Caulking 0.004 0.007 0.012 

Backfilling 0.040 0.032 0.058 

Sundry expenses : 0.002 0.006 

Total cost per ft $0,998 $0,096 $0,171 

Job No. . ; "B" "C" "D" 

Size 4-in. 6-in. 6-in. 

Total ft. laid 595 841 993 

Team and driver $0,009 $0,011 $0,120 

Foreman 0.009 0.003 0.150 

Superintendence 0.005 

Excavation 0.052 0.409 0.500 

Caulking 0.007 0.009 0.110 

Backfilling 0.050 0.125 0.137 

Total cost per ft $0,127 $0,125 $0,137 

The sundry expense item is for the watchman and water boy. 



1804 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



All the pipe was tested before going into the ditch and all leaky 
joints were cut out and redriven. There were 18 such joints on the 
10-in. line due to rain over night on green joints. After the pipes 
were all laid they were all tested. The 10-in. line was tested from 
four parts. The others were tested once. This testing, which was 
all in the air, was done with an old style hand pump that required 
10 men to operate. In testing, 12 men were used, 10 to pump up the 
line, 1 to snap joints and 1 to look after the gage. The time con- 
sumed by a test varied from 45 mins. to IVi hrs. This time is dis- 
tributed as well as possible between the laborers and caulkers, as all 
took a hand. 

After completing the work a final test was made, as shown by 
Fig. 5. The piping was placed and a meter set ; the pressure was 
then equalized by running gas from an old 10-in. line through the 
1-in. line and into the new line, this line being opened at B for 
15 mins. At the end of this time B was closed and A opened, 
allowing the gas to pass through the meter and to register. After 



/O' 






CD 



/%?/,?/: 



t 



Sn^'r- Co/7fr. 



Fig. 5. 



the register was made, which took almost 10 mins., the meter wa§ 
read and noted, then left standing for 2 1/2 hrs. At the end of that 
time it was reread and finding the reading to be the same as at the 
time of the first registering, it was known that no gas had passed 
through the meter, hence there were no leaks in the new line. The 
following day men were sent along the line and all drip leads were 
opened, allowing all air to pass out. 

Cost of Laying Wrought Iron, Screw-Joint Pipe for Compressed 
Air IVIain. — Mr. E. E. Harper gives the following: 

The work consisted of laying 7,000 ft. of 8-in. and 4,000 ft. of 6-in. 
wrought-iron, screw-joint pipe for a compressed air line carrying 
SO to 90 lbs. pressure. The work was all performed by common 
labor, none of the men being experienced in pipe laying. 

The greatest cause of delaj'^ in lajdng screwed pipe is the difR- 
'culty in getting each successive length of pipe into line and keeping 
it there until the first threads take hold and the pipe begins to screw 
together. To overcome this difficulty a cradle for supporting the 
■pipe at the joint, a jack for adjusting and supporting the outer end 
"Df the pipe and a straight-edge for lining the pipe were devised. 
The cradle holds the threaded end of the pipe in position to enter the 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 



1805 



sleeve coupling on the last joint laid ; the jack allows both vertical 
and horizontal adjustment of the joint of pipe ; and the straight- 
edge shows when the pipe is in line ready to screw together. The 
cradle was simply a wood block, 8x8 ins. x 24 ins. in length, with a 
groove having a 4-in. radius cut in its top. The jack is shown by 
Fig. 6 and the straight-edge by Fig. 7. The movable block on the 
straight-edge is necessary because it is almost impossible to make 
a 12-ft. straight-edge that will remain true for more than a day. 



fV« 




ffofd. lined 
\mth5traplron 

Hcmef/e 



3'^" 




EnqrCenfr 



Fig. 6. — Jack. 



These devices saved fully 50% over the crude and unsatisfactory 
method of using blocks to hold the pipe in line. There was no 
straining and lifting to hold the pipe in place, and as the pipes 
were started together straight there were no stripped threads and 
bad joints, and the pipe made up so easily that one man with a pair 
of 3-ft. tongs often screwed an 8-in. pipe half way up ; it was then 
completed by four men using two pairs of tongs with 8-ft. handles. 



Z'Wiae, Tafxr m '^j.>.i» 




Ertq.-Contr. 







II' 

Cross Section^, 
(cnlarqecl> 



Pig. 7. — Straight Edge. 



The threads, both male and female, were cleaned with wire 
brushes. Dixon's pipe joint compound was used on all screwed 
joints. Ring gaskets of 1/16-ih. Rainbow packing were ased on 
flange joints, the gasket being pasted to one flange with coal-tar 
roofing paint, which held it in position while the joint was being; 
made. 

Six-Inch Pipe Line. — The total length of 6-in. pipe was 4,118 ft. 
The pipe was 6-in. lap welded casing weighing 15 lbs. per lin. ft. 



1806 HAN'DBOOK OF COST DATA. 

It was laid with sleeve couplings, 11% threads per inch, with a 
flange union every 150 ft. and U-bends for expansion every 500 ft. 
The average length of joints was 20.1 ft. ; an average of 588.2 ft. 
of pipe or of 29.3 joints, was laid per 10-hr. day. The best day's 
work was 1,065 ft, or 53 joints, with 6 men working 9 hrs., making 
177.5 ft. per man; the poorest day's work was 120 ft., or 6 joints, 
by 6 men working 9% hrs. The work was done from Aug. 15 to 24, 
1907, in fair weather except, for one day, when the men worked 
4 hrs. in rain and laid 22 joints. The men walked 2i^ to 3 miles to 
and from work. The average gang was: 4.85 men at 20 cts. per 
hour, 1 foreman at 30 cts. per hour, and 1 waterboy at 10 cts. per 
hour. The cost of pipelaying was as follows per 100 ft. : 

Per 100 ft. 

Clearing right of way $0,327 

Hauling and distributing 1.578 

Blocking to grade 0.116 

Constructing bents 0.450 

Anchors for U-bends 2.290 

Painting 0.900 

Tools 0.100 

Testing 0.300 

Laying 3.137 

Surveying and superintendence 0.700 

Total $9,898 

The total cost per foot exclusive of cost of pipe was 9.898 cts., 
or, say, 10 cts. The following notes explain the work included in the 
various items : 

Clearing. — Removing small brush for a width of 10 ft. 

Hauling. — The average hauls were 3,000 ft. over bad roads, steep 
and rough. This item includes loading pipe on cars and unloading, 
hauling and distributing, including seven U-bends. Teams and driv- 
ers got $3 per day. 

Blocking. — Includes temporary blocking and bending pipe in five 
places by building fires on it. 

Anchors for U-Bends. — Includes 8 piers at $12 each, including 
bolts and clamps. 

Bent Construction. — Includes carpenter work only on about 20 
bents, averaging 3 ft. in height and made 4 x 6-in. stuff. 

Painting. — Includes cost of painting and cleaning pipe with wire 
brushes with paint costing $1 per gallon and labor at 20 cts. per 
hour. The pipe was painted one coat. 

Tools. — Includes shopwork and depreciation. 

Eight-Inch Pipe Line. — The total length of 8-in. pipe was 7,101 ft. 
The pipe was 8-in. O. D., lap-welded casing weighing 20 lbs. per 
foot, laid with sleeve couplings, 11% threads per inch. The average 
length of joints was 19.15 ft. There was a flange union every 150 
ft., and U-bends for expansion every 600 ft. An average of 503.6 ft. 
was laid per day, of 10 hrs., or 26.3 joints. The best day's work 
was 613 ft., or 32 joints, by 6 men, including foreman ; the poorest 
day's work was 380 ft., or 20 joints, by 7 men, including foreman. 
The work was done from July 2 to Aug. 5, 1907, the weather being 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1807 

hot and sultry, the thermometer ranging from 85° to 100°, aild 

averaging 90° in shade. The average gang was: 5.92 men at 20 cts. 

per hour, 1 foreman at 30 cts. per hour, and 1 waterboy at 10 cts. 

per hour. The cost was as follows per 100 f t. : 

Per 100 ft. 

Surveying and superintendence $ 1.000 

Laying 3.580 

Clearing 0.187 

Hauling and distributing 1.032 

Blocking to grade 1.110 

Constructing bents 1.069 

Anchors for U-bends 2.535 

Painting 1.200 

Tools 0.102 

Testing , 0.388 

Total cost of laying $12,203 

Cost of pipe 76.400 

Grand total cost $88,603 

The total cost per foot, exclusive cost of pipe, was thus 12.2 cts., 
and including cost of pipe 88.6 cts. The following notes explain the 
work included in the various items : 

Clearing. — Removing small brush for a width of 10 ft. 

Hauling. — Includes 12 U-bends, which cost $1 each to haul ; teams 
and drivers, 30 cts. per hour; laborers, 20 cts. per hour, and fore- 
man, 30 cts. per hour. 

Bent Construction. — Includes carpenter work only on about 80 
bents of 4 X 6-in. stuff, spaced 30 ft. apart and ranging in height 
from 1 ft. to 16 ft, averaging 6 ft. high. 

Anchors for U-Bends. — Includes 12 piers at $15 each, including 
bolts and clamps. 

Painting. — Same as for 6-in. pipe. 

Testing. — Includes laying and connecting 200 ft. of 4 -in. pipe to 
pump line. Tested to 110 lbs. hydraulic pressure. Leaks developed 
in two tees in line and these were repaired, line tested again and 
found tight. The pipe cost $76 per ton (100 ft.) f. o. b. McKees- 
port, and the freight to Flat River was 40 cts. per ton. 

Cost of Maintaining Teams. — I have maintained teams at the fol- 
lowing cost per month per team of two horses : 

% ton of hay, at $10 $ 5.00 

30 bu. oats, at 35 cts 10.50 

Straw for bedding 1.00 

Shoeing and medicine 2.00 

Total $18.50 

A generation ago there were 2,000 horses used on the Brooklyn 
street railways. The cost of feeding each horse was $10 a month, 
and the depreciation in value of each horse was 25% per annum. 

Contract work is not so severe as street car work ; still the 
annual depreciation is probably not less than 15%. A team, 
wagon and harness costing $300 should be charged with about $60 
per annum for interest and depreciation. When the team is work-, 
ing it must be fed oats, when not working it can be fed on hay at 
half the usual cost. 



1808 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The following gives the average feed of horses and mules used 
by the H. C. Frick Coke Co., extending over a period of 6 years: 
500 lbs. of hay, 7 bus. of oats, 4 2/5 bus. of corn on the ear per head 
per month. The daily feed of each animal was two feeds of corn, 
13 ears to the feed (70 lbs. per bu.), one 6-qt. feed of oats, and 
about 16% lbs. of hay. Each animal averaged about 13 miles trav- 
eled per day underground, 15 miles being the maximum 10-hr. day's 
work. 

It is not ordinarily possible to get more than 180 days of work per 
annum out of a contractor's team in the North, and very frequently 
much less. We may, therefore, say that $1.50 for each day actually 
worked by the team will cover its feed, interest and depreciation, for 
the year. If the driver is paid only while at work, then his $1.50 
added to that of the team makes $3 a day for each day worked. 

The cost of feeding 25 horses at work building roads near San 
Francisco, for a period of 12 mos., was as follows, per horse 
per day : 

28 lbs. wheat hay, at $15.50 per ton $0,215 

12 lbs. rolled barley, at $24.10 per ton 0.150 

11/2 lbs. oats, at $27.40 per ton 0.020 

% lb. bran, at $21.20 per ton 0.003 

1% lbs. straw bedding, at $13.80 per ton 0.009 

Wages, 1 stableman ($775 for year), and hauling 

forage ($281 for year) 0.113 

Total per horse per day $0,510 

The above shows a consumption of nearly 42 lbs. of feed per 
horse per day, which seems large, but is not excessive for heavy 
draft horses working daily. A conservative estimate of the food 
waste is 5%. 

A four-horse team averaged 16% miles traveled per day over 
fair macadam roads with some 5% grades. The load was 3 short 
tons, plus the 0.65-ton wagon ; and the haul, one way, was % to 
1 mile. 

Cost of Horse Maintenance.* — In a report to the Street Cleaning 
Department of Boston, Mass., Mr. Richard T. Fox, Sanitary Ex- 
pert, Chicago, 111., gives some figures as to the stable and yard ex- 
penses of that department for 1906. The following matter has been 
taken from that report. The street cleaning department owns 128 
horses, which are used for driving purposes for machine sweeping 
and the removal of street dirt. Of these horses 95 are maintained 
directly by the department and 33 are boarded by the Sanitary De- 
partment. The net cost in 1906 for rent, repairs, shoeing, veterin- 
ary services, medicines and feed for the 128 horses amounted to 
$66,283. The cost per horse per year is therefore $517.83 or $43.15 
per month. As a comparison Mr. Fox found that the S. S. Pierce & 
Co., wholesale grocers of Boston, paid $27.65 per horse per month 
for maintenance, the cost including shoeing, veterinary service and 
boarding in a public stable. Mr. Fox considers that $19 per month 
is a fair average yearly price per horse, if maintained at private 



^Engineering-Contracting, Nov. 13, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1809 

expense. The horse shoeing bill for the Street Cleaning Department 
amounted to $33.43 per year per horse or $2.78 per month. The 
veterinary services and medicine amounted to $17.97 per horse per 
year. In comparison with this Mr. Fox found that S. S. Pierce 
& Co. pay a little less than $12 per year for veterinary service and 
medicine; the Boston Fire Department pays $12 per year per horse, 
and the Knickerbocker Ice Co., Chicago, 111., pays $5 per year 
per horse. 

Cost of Maintaining Horses, New York City.* — A report made by 
the Parsons-Herring-Whinery Commission on the cost of municipal 
street cleaning contains data on horse maintenance, of which the 
following is a brief summary. The cost of maintaining each of 1,174 
horses for one year (1906) in Manhattan and The Bronx was: 

Stable rental $ 41.44 

Labor at stables (hostlers at $720 yr.) 237.00 

Feed and bedding 171.00 

Shoeing 18.36 

Veterinary 5.63 



Total, at $1.30 per day (365 days) $473.43 

The commission states that private corporations in New York 
City pay about $330 per year per horSe for the same maintenance 
that costs the city $473. 

Feed for Street Car Horses. — The daily mileage of street car 
horses, working in teams, is 15 miles traveled in 3 hrs. In cool 
Weather this mileage may be covered in one trip, but in summer 
the time should be divided. For this sort of work a horse weighing 
about 1,100 lbs. is best. 

A weekly report of feed should show. 

Used during 

week. On hand. 

Hay 

Straw 

Corn 

Oats 

Bran 

Salt 

Proportion of feeding 

Average number of horses 

Pounds of hay and meal per horse 

Remarks 

Required during week 

In Brooklyn the old horse car companies prescribed the following 
feed per horse : 

In summer, 15 lbs. of mixed grain ground (5 lbs. corn, 10 lbs. 
oats). In winter, 10 lbs. corn and 5 lbs. oats. About 15 lbs. of cut 
hay moistened and mixed with the meal. About 4 lbs. of cattle 
salt to each 100 horses. Hours for feeding, 5 :30 and 10 a. m. and 
4 p. m. Quantities at each feed, 10.8 and 12 lbs. respectively. Road 
mileage, 16 miles per day; rest Sunday. Average working life 
(based on 20 years experience) 7 years. 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 20, 1908. 



1810 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

In Providence, R. I., about 35 lbs. of straw for bedding required 
per horse per month. Horses In groups of 16 under the care of 
bne stable man, who also harnesses them. 

Cost of Maintaining Farm Horses and of Raising Hay and Oats in 
Minnesota.* — The following data should be of value both to the 
highway engineer, for estimating the cost of hauling, and to the 
contractor who may wish to raise feed for his horses. The data 
have been .abstracted from bulletins Nos. 48 and 73 of the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture, entitled "The Cost of Producing Minne- 
sota Farm Products." The bulletins contain very complete sum- 
maries of the results of careful investigations during the years 
1902 and 1907 inclusive, covering about 70 farms in five counties 
of Minnesota. These bulletins mark the beginning of the scientific 
application of cost analysis to farming, and, so far as we know, 
are the only records of their kind in print. 

The first step in ascertaining the cost of producing crops is 
to determine the cost of a horse hour and of a man hour. To 
do this the "route statisticians" (assisted by the farmers) kept 
accurate records of the number of hours that each horse was 
actually worked each day, as well as the number of hours worked 
by each man. 

For the purpose of condensing the results, while at the same 
time giving the data in considerable detail, we have selected the 
records of Rice county, where 24 farms of about 170 acres each 
were recorded. There were 5.4 work horses (not including colts or 
driving horses) per farm. The time of the farm owner was 
counted as being of no more value than of his hired men. The 
following is the average number of hours worked per day during 
the years 1902 to 1907, including the time of the farm owner: 

Week Days. Sunday. 
Man. Horse. Man. 

January 6.80 1.16 4.85 

February 6.62 1.14 4.80 

March 7.57 1.34 4.63 

April 9.88 4.54 4.02 

May 9.03 4.00 3.46 

June 9.64 3.11 3.11 

July 9.32 3.44 2.82 

August 10.25 4.78 2.66 

September 11.03 4.07 2.93 

October 9.56 3.86 2.84 

November 9.08 3.05 3.55 

December 7.29 1.55 4.57 

Average 8.94 3.03 3.£4 

On 20 farms in Lyon county (averaging 250 acres each) there 
were 6.8 work horses per farm ; and on 18 farms in Norman 
county (averaging 210 acres each) there were 7 work horses per 
farm ; and the average number of hours worked was as follows: 

Lyon. Norman. 

Per week day per man 8.66 8.10 

Per week day per horse 3.29 3.14 

Per Sunday per man 3.05 2.76 

* Engineering-Contracting, June 2, 1909. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1811 

It would appear that the Sunday work consisted mainly in 
caring for the stock and milking the cows. There were about 12 
milch cows per farm. 

If the 3.64 hours of Sunday work represents the average daily 
time spent caring for the stock, etc., it would seem that this 
accounts in large measure for the small number of hours worked 
daily by each horse. Nevertheless, there is a surprising loss of 
horse time. According to the bulletins, this is in part due to the 
practice on many farms of having from "one to three unnecessary 
horses," kept "mainly that they may be available during a few days 
when the crops were being harvested." 

In round numbers, we may say that each horse averaged only 
1,000 hrs. worked per year, which is equivalent to 100 days of 10 
hrs. each. The cost of feeding horses averaged $65 per year 
(1905-1907) in Rice county, $55 in Lyon county, and $43 in 
Norman county. The detailed cost of the feed in Rice county was 
as follows per horse during 1905 to 1907: 

Grain for 4 winter mos., 1,477 lbs. at 0.7 ct $10.38 

Hay for 4 winter mos., 1,924 lbs. at 0.27 ct 5.34 

Grain for 8 active mos., 3,736 lbs. at 0.88 ct 33.05 

Hay for 8 active mos., 5,149 lbs. at 0.31 ct 16.21 

Total, 12,290 lbs $64.98 

The prices for grain and hay were the local market prices less 
the cost of hauling from the farm to the market. The grain 
was oats, barley and corn, weighing 32, 48 and 56 lbs. per bushel, 
respectively. Oats at 0.88 ct. per lb. is therefore equivalent to 
27 Vz cts. per bushel. During the years 1905 to 1907, the average 
farm prices of farm products throughout Minnesota were as follows : 
Oats, 31 cts. ; barley, 45 cts. ; corn, 39 cts. ; hay, $6.27. 
The feed per horse per day was as follows in Rice county : 

Winter Active 

season. season. 

Lbs. Lbs. 

Grain 12.1 15.4 

Hay 15.8 21.2 

Total 27.9 36.6 

No account was kept of pasturage nor of any straw fed to horses. 
It is not clear whether the lower price (0.7 ct. per lb.) for grain 
in the winter season was due to feeding corn instead of oats, or 
not. It should be noted that the feed during the winter season 
cost $3.93 per horse per month as compared with $6.18 per month 
during the active season. In Norman county the cost of feed was 
much lower, due to the practice of feeding very largely with straw 
in the winter months. The extent to which this was done is well 
shown by the following records per horse per day in Norman 
county : Winter Active 

season. season. 
Lbs. Lbs. 

Grain 6.0 11.4 

Hay 6.4 23.4 

Total 12.4 34.8 



1812 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The average annual cost of maintaining a horse in Rice county 
was estimated as follows: 

Average for For 
1904 to 1907. 1907. 
Interest on horse at 5% on de- 
preciated value $ 5.54 $ 6.74 

Depreciation (too low) 5.56 4.35 

Harness depreciation 2.10 1.39 

Shoeing 1.42 1.46 

Feed 63.49 75.03 

Labor 11.88 15.01 

Miscellaneous 0.40 0.29 

Total $90.40 $104.27 

Thei item of interest is estimated on the average depreciated 
value of the horse; thus a horse worth $220 in its prime (4 yrs. 
old), has a working life of 10 to 15 years, and at the end of that 
time is worth nothing, hence the interest is estimated on its average 
depreciated value of $110. 

The bulletin states that the annual depreciation of $5.56 is too 
low for an average, and is due to the fact that the increase in 
the market prices of horses has offset largely the actual depreciation. 
This method of accounting is fallacious, for fluctuating market 
values should not be allowed to affect the depreciation charged 
off annually, for this depreciation charge is really a sinking fund 
charge intended to return the original investment at the end of 
the life of the animal. If a $150 horse has an average working life 
of 10 years, $15 should be charged off each year for depreciation, 
which is $9.44 more than the average depreciation charge above 
given. An item that has been entirely omitted is the cost of shelter- 
ing. The bulletin estimates this item at about $6 a year for each 
cow, which covers its pro rata share of interest, insurance, de- 
preciation and repairs on a barn costing $80 per head housed. If 
we add the $9.44 and the $6 to the $90.40 above given, we have 
a total of $105 as the average cost of maintaining a horse during 
1904 to 1907. The corresponding cost for 1907 would be nearly 
$120. Hence, on the basis of 1,000 hours worked annually, the 
cost of maintenance was 12 cts. per horse per hour in Rice county 
in 1907. Including cost of housing and a fair allowance for de- 
preciation, there was no county where the average annual cost of 
maintenance fell below $100 per horse in 1907. Regarding the 
assumed depreciation of 10 per cent per year, the bulletin says: 

"The experience of many farmers would incidate that the average 
working life of a farm horse is ten years." 

It will be remembered that the feed was charged at its market 
value less the cost of hauling to market. Strictly speaking this 
is not correct, but the feed should be charged at its actual cost of 
production. This cost will next be considered, but, before doing 
so, it is desirable to record the cost of hired farm labor in 
Minnesota. 

The average monthly cost wage during the "crop season" (8 mos. 
April 1 to Nov. 31) was $26.16 in Rice county during 1905 to 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1813 

1907, to which must be added the cost of board, which was $14.36, 
making a total of $40.50. During the four winter months (Dec. 1 
to Mar. 31), the cash wage was $15.80. This makes an average 
wage, including board, of $37 per month throughout the year, or 
$444 for the year. As above given, the total number of hours 
worked per man, including Sundays, was nearly 3,000 hrs. per year. 
Hence the cost of regular hired farm labor was nearly 15 cts. per 
hr. in Rice county. The average for the three counties was 12 cts. 
per hr. In 1907, the cost of board was $2 more per month than 
the average of the years 1905 to 1907 in Rice county. 

In addition to the regular hired men on each farm; a number 
of men are employed by the day during the active season, and 
in 1907, these men received 20 to 25 cts. per hr. including board. 
Unfortunately no record is given of the percentage of men thus 
employed by the day, so that it is impossible to state accurately 
what was the average wage paid to all men. Including both 
classes. 

"With wages of regular hired men at 15 cts. per hr. worked, 
and cost of horses at 12 cts. per hr. worked, the cost of team 
and driver was 39 cts. per hr. in Rice county in 1907, and in no 
county was it less than 30 cts. It may fairly be assumed to have 
averaged (in all counties) at least 35 cts. per hr. worked in 1907. 
If men hired by the day were employed as drivers, the cost was 
40 to 45 cts. per hr. for team and driver. These data dispose 
of Prof. Ira O. Baker's contention that team time on a farm is 
worth only a fraction of the ordinary rates at which teams are 
usually hired. 

As above stated, the cost of board in Rice county averaged $14.36 
per month per man in 1907, or $172 per year, or 47 cts. per day. 
It is not given in detail for any particular county, but the following 
are typical examples of the daily cost of board on. two farms 
in 1905: 

No. 1. No. 2. 

Food $0,181 $0,190 

Fuel and light 0.041 0.027 

Labor (woman at $20 per mo.) 0.171 0.120 

Labor (man at about $35 per mo.) 0.019 0.012 

Total $0,412 $0,349 

The higher cost on farm No. 1 is due to the fact that the average 
number of men boarded was only 3% as compared with 5 on farm 
No. 2, thus Increasing the daily cost of the labor of household 
work charged to each man's board. 

The cost of producing various crops is given in the bulletin, 
but unfortunately only the average cost for the period of 1902 to 
1907 is given, and not the cost for 1907 also, for wages and 
prices were considerably higher in 1907, and seem likely to remain 
so. The costs are given in terms of the acre as the unit, but, 
as the average amount of product per acre is also given, we can 
arrive at the cost per bushel or ton. Interest on the land, at 5 



1814 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

per cent, is properly included as a part of the cost. The following 
is the average cost per acre of hay in Hice county : 

Per acre. 

Seed $0,293 

Mowing (first crop) 0.368 

Raking (first crop) 0.178 

Cocking and spreading (first crop) 0.199 

Hauling to barn (first crop) 1.099 

Mowing (second crop) 0.264 

Raking (second crop) 0.115 

Cocking and spreading (second crop) 0.150 

Hauling to barn (second crop) 0.460 

Machinery, interest, deprec. and repairs 0.548 

Land rental ($70 at 5%) 3.500 

Total $7,178 

The cost of the seed per acre was determined thus : 

8 lbs. timothy at 3 cts $0.24 

4 lbs. clover at 16 cts 0.64 

Seed for 3 yrs. at $0,293 per year $0.88 

To the above total of $7.18 per acre should be added about $1 
for general expense, according to the bulletin, which would give 
a grand total of $8.18 per acre of hay. The average yearly produc- 
tion of hay (two crops) was 2.25 tons per acre in Rice county, 
hence the cost was $3.64 per ton. The average for three counties 
was 1.85 tons per acre, hence it is safe to say that the cost 
averaged not far from $4 per ton. 

It will be noted that there is no item for plowing, the reason 
being that the hay seed is sown with the grain crop against which 
the full cost of plowing, etc., is charged. It may well be questioned 
whether this is correct accounting. The cost of plowing is $1.25 
per acre. 

The average farm price for hay in Minnesota was $6.05 per ton 
during the period of 1902 to 1907. 

The cost of producing oats in Rice county during 1902 to 1907 
averaged as follows : 

Per acre. 

Seed $0,997 

Cleaning seed 0.023 

Plowing (in the fall) 1.256 

Dragging 0.285 

Seeding 0.261 

Cutting 0.401 

Twine : 0.335 

Shocking 0.165 

Stacking 0.772 

Stack thrashing (labor) S? 

Thrashing (cash cost) ^■^Js 

Machinery, interest, deprec. and repairs 0.517 

Land rental ($70 at 5% ) • 3.500 

Total $9,854 

To this should be added about $1 for general expense, making 
a grand total of $10.85 per acre. The average production in Rice 
county was 41 bu. per acre; hence the cost was nearly 26% cts. 
per bushel. The average price of oats in Minnesota was 29.2 cts. 
per bushel during 1902 to 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1815 

The bulletin does not give the average wage paid during 1902 
to 1907, but it gives enough data to enable us to say that it was 
about 12 Yz cts. per hr. worked, including board. The cost of a 
horse averaged about 8 cts. per hr. worked, during the same period, 
on the basis of depreciation assumed (which was confessedly too 
low) and without any allowance for cost of shelter. But, making 
proper allowance for depreciation and shelter, the cost of a horse 
was about 9 cts. per hr. worked. It is clear, therefore, that a 
team and driver cost more than 30 cts. per hr. worked, during the 
period of 1902 to 1907. 

It should be noted that the farm owner's time was counted the 
same as an ordinary farm workman, which, as above stated, was 
12% cts. per hr. Obviously this is a questionable procedure. The 
farm owner is really a superintendent, even though he works with 
his men, and he is of a grade of intelligence that would command 
much higher pay^ than an ordinary workman. The farm owner 
really gets his pay in the form of "profits." If proper allowance is 
made for "supervision," it is evident that the costs above given 
will be considerably increased — probably by at least 10 per cent. 

The permanent value of the data in these bulletins would be 
much greater were the averages made into a sort of composite 
picture, giving a typical average farm organization thus: 

1 farm-owner. 

3 regular hired men. 

2 extra men (4 extra for 6 mos.). 
5 work horses. 

1 woman, household work. 

Then the average farm "plant" should be listed, giving prices of 
each item, including buildings and land, cows, sheep, hogs, etc- 
Then the total annual product should be itemized, giving actual unit 
costs per bushel, pound, ton, etc. 

Then should follow the unit costs per acre, and these should be= 
tabulated so as to show the amount of work on each item, thus : 

Per acre. 

Plowing: 1 team and driver, 4 hrs. at 30 cts $1.20 

Dragging: 1 team and driver, 1^4 hrs. at 30 cts.. . 0.45 

This should be followed by the number of units produced per acre.. 

The information in these bulletins is excellent, but is not. 
arranged as above indicated, and, therefore, any item of cost, 
on any given farm cannot be compared with another except in 
terms of dollars and cents, which is often vei^y misleading due 
to differences in rates of wages. In brief, farm costs should be^ 
recorded exactly like engineering construction costs, giving the 
organization of the working forces, rates of wages, prices of plant, 
number of hours (or days) of work at stated prices are required, 
to perform each item of work. When recorded in this manner, 
accurate comparisons are readily made, and correct conclusions- 
drawn. 

By way of comparison we add some data taken from the^ 
"Encyclopedia Brittanica," under the head of Agriculture. There 
it is stated that during the 30 weeks of active season on the farm,. 



1816 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

each horse is fed 16 lbs. of oats and 24 lbs. of hay per day. The 
annual cost of maintaining a farm horse is estimated thus: 

30 weeks' feed (active season) at $2.75 $ 82.50 

22 weeks' feed (inactive season), clover, at $1.25 27.50 

Total feed $110.00 

Interest, $200 at 5% 10.00 

Depreciation, etc., $200 at 12% % 25.00 

Total annual cost $145.00 

The $200 includes not only the cost of the horse, but its pro rata 
of farm implements. There was about 1 horse for every 30 acres 
of farm. 

It is stated that unmanured land yields (in 1873) 16 bushels of 
wheat per acre, but that the application of 400 lbs. of guano per 
acre doubles the yield. In 1873 the average yield in England was 
27 bushels of wheat (63 lbs. per bu.) per acre, an increase of 14 
per cent over what it had been 80 years before. The present yield 
(1909) is about 32 bu. of wheat per acre in England. 

In 1873 the following were regarded as being "good crops" per 
acre : 

1 ton (2,240 lbs.) of grain plus 2 tons straw. 

1 ton of beans plus 1% tons straw. 

8 tons potatoes. 

17 tons beets or turnips. 

35 tons cabbage. 

Cost of Maintaining IVIules. — Mr. Chas. E. Bowen gives the fol- 
lowing data as to costs in 1906 in Alabama. 

A first class mule costs $200. Its useful life is 6 years, at the 
end of which it will bring $50. The average cost of maintenance 
in 7 mines was as follows per mule per calendar day: 

Food $0.30 

Stableman 0.05 

Interest and depreciation 0.10 

Total $0.45 

The daily ration was as follows : 

Lbs. 

Hay 10 

Grain 16 

Total 26 

The U. S. army ration is 14 lbs. of hay and 9 lbs. of- grain for 
a mule, and 14 lbs. of hay and 12 lbs. of grain for a horse. 

Due to holidays, Sundays, etc., about 276 days in the year are 
worked in the mines, hence if all the mules worked the cost 
would be 60 cts. per mule per day worked. However, about 10% 
are idle, due to sickness, etc., so that the actual cost per working 
animal per day is 66 cts., to which must be added 4 cts. for 
shoeing and harness, making a total of 70 cts., not including any 
allowance for stable rental. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1817 

Mr. E. Hogg says that a mule weighing 1,000 to 1,100 lbs. eats 
12 lbs. of grain and 15 lbs. of the best hay per day. He feeds 
% cracked corn and % oats, and gives bran twice a week. 

Shipping Contractors' Horses in Cars.* — We understand that in 
the northwest the railroads receive from 14 to 16 horses to be 
shipped in a stock car, charging the minimum shipping weight, 
28,000 lbs., or an average per horse of 2,000 lbs. A 30,000-lbs. 
capacity car, 30 ft. long, would accommodate this number of horses 
giving them each about 2 ft. of space. 

In the south the writer has been accustomed to ship 20 mules 
in a car paying for the actual weight of the mules. The length 
of the car would vary from 30 to 33 ft., thus giving a little over 
1% ft. of space to a mule. In a 36-ft. car 21 or 22 mules could be 
shipped. 

In a palace stock car ranging in length from 54 to 57 ft., the 
writer has shipped 30 mules, thus giving a space of about 1.8 
ft. per mule. A few horses were generally shipped with the mules, 
but horses cannot be crowded as much as mules can, and at times 
a separate stall must be built for a valuable horse to keep the 
mules from crowding or injuring it. 

In loading mules into a car a well broken horse is frequently 
a great help, as mules will follow horses as a rule, and by leading 
in the horse, several mules can be taken into the car right behind 
him. 

Unless shipped in palace stock cars, animals must be unloaded on 
a long journey once every 24 hours, so as to be fed and watered. 
The help of a horse in taking the mules in and out of a car is of 
great assistance, and saves much time. Railroad companies allow 
at least one care-taker to accompany a shipment of horses or 
mules, and he is a busy man when the time arrives for feeding 
the stock. 

Hauling Heavy Machinery on Wagons. — In hauling cement and 
coal to the Spiers Falls Dam from Glens Falls, N. T., I found the 
average load was 2 net tons per team of horses. The loads ranged 
from 3,500 to 4,500 lbs. The haul was 9 miles, one way, and a 
round trip constituted a day's work. Teamsters were paid by the 
ton. The road was sandy, but level, except for about half a mile 
at the end. Two teams were hitched onto a wagon to pull up 
this hill at the end. 

Some very heavy pieces of machinery were hauled on wagons. 
One piece of machinery weighing 14 tons was slung between two 
heavy timber beams whose ends rested on bolsters on the wagons. 
Thus the piece of machinery was really slung between two wagons, 
one wagon in front and one behind. In order to steer the rear 
wagon a simple steering gear was made, very much like the steering 
device for controlling the rudder of a ship. It consisted of a pilot 
wheel mounted at the forward end of the rear wagon, and a 
drum from which two ropes passed around pulleys to t'le stub 
tongue of the wagon. One man could thus steer the front wheels 



^Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 25, 1907. 



1818 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

of the rear wagon. With 12 horses this 14-ton load was hauled 
over the sandy road. 

A heavier load, 28 tons, was not loaded on wagons, but was 
hauled on rollers, a temporary timber way being laid in front of 
the rollers, as in house moving. It took 12 teams 9 days to haul 
this load the 9 miles. 

Handling Teams With a Jerl< Line.* — Mr. W. A. Gillette is author 
of the following: 

I have been especially impressed with the difference between 
the extreme West and East in handling teams. When I did con- 
struction work in the East, I did as Easteners do, namely, sub- 
mitted to the dictation of teamsters in the determination of each 
driver to drive his own team. Consequently, when we wanted to 
use three or four teams on a road grader or plow, three or four 
teamsters walked along, not driving but "herding" the teams. 
Once in a while we could find a man who could drive four horses, 
but not often ; and, when he knew how, he wouldn't do it. 

Consider what it means to a contractor to have three extra 
drivers on a plow, drawn by four teams and two extra drivers 
on a road grader drawn by three teams. It is just as ridiculous 
as having two men loading wheel scrapers. Five extra men on an 
outfit as mentioned above means $7.50 a day, drivers' wages being 
$1.50 a day. 

In the West we use one driver for one, two, three, four, five or 
more teams, and these drivers will handle three, four or more 
teams with one rein or jerk line with as much ease as the ordinary 
driver handles one team. It is a comparatively simple matter to 
train these teams to respond to a jerk line, and to the shout ol 
"gee" or "haw." 

For the benefit of those who do not know how to hitch a jerk 
line, I will explain. It is customary to use a strong braided clothes 
line. This line reaches from the "nigh" wheel animal to the "nigh" 
lead animal, and is fastened to the left hand side of the bit ; from 
this main line a short piece of the line passes under the jaw to 
the right side of the bit, making a "Y." Fastened to the hames on 
the right side of the "nigh" lead is a "jockey stick" (a short piece 
of wood or iron) which reaches to a curb strap fastened to the bit 
of the "off" lead animal. A straight pull on the jerk line pulls the 
"jerk" line or "nigh" animal to the left, or "haw," and the "jockey 
stick" guides the "off" animal. A succession of jerks on the line 
causes the "nigh" or left lead animal instinctively to throw its head 
to the right, to escape from the jerking, and the "jockey stick" 
guides the "off" animal to the right also, or "gee." 

A little patience will teach the lead team to "gee" or "haw" if 
the guiding words "gee" or "haw" are shouted every time the 
line is used. By fastening the following teams to the double 
trees of the team ahead, they will soon learn to follow the team 
ahead without being tied, and, as a matter of fact, it is not as 
handy in turning around if each team is fastened, as it does not 



* Engineering-Contracting, Apr. 14, 1909. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1819 

permit them to cross over and out of the way of the chain wliile 
turning. 

When a team has been properly trained in turning to the right 
or "gee," for example, the teams following the lead teams will 
step over on the left of the draft chain and follow it around until 
the chain is straight for the return trip ; then each animal will cross 
over to his place on the right side of the chain. 

In all of our team work we use but one driver, no matter how 
many teams are hitched to the load. In the hauling of gravel, 
sand or broken stone we use two or three wagons in a train. The 
trail wagons have a short trail tongue just long enough to permit 
the wheels to clear about three or four feet. The economy of this 
method of teaming is apparent when one driver is used to handle 
three wagons with three teams, for the wages of two teamsters are 
saved. 

Cost of Plowing Farm Land With a Steam Traction Engine.* — It 
is only within the last ten years or so that the feasibility of 
plowing with traction engines has become generally recognized. 
The results obtained have been very satisfactory, and when it is 
remembered that one man with a plowing outfit can do much more 
work than six or eight with horses, the advantages of this method 
on the large farms of the West are obvious. Some data on the cost 
of steam plowing taken from letters written to the manufacturers 
by users of the traction engine are given below. 

The first piece of work for which data are given was done in 
Missouri last year, a 20 hp. Rumley Standard traction engine 
and an 8-gang 14-in. Moline steam plow being used. An average 
of 18 acres per day was plowed, the cost of operating per day 
being as follows : 

Total. Per acre. 

Engineering ? 3.00 $0,166 

Water and fuel, hauled with team 2.50 0.139 

Plowman 1.00 0.055 

Coal 3.00 0.166 

Plow sharpening, oil, etc 0.50 0.027 

Total $10.00 $0,553 

The next piece of work was done in North Dakota, a 30 hp. 
Rumley engine and Emerson 16-in. plow being used. The cost was 
as follows: 

Per acre. 

Coal, at $6 per ton, 90 lbs. per acre $0.27 

Cylinder oil, at 40 cts. per gallon 0.01% 

Machine oil, at 20 cts. per gallon 0.01 

Fireman, $2.50 per day 0.06% 

Water, team and man for hauling, $4 per day. . 0.10 

Sharpening lays 0.01 

Gear grease, 4 cts. per lb 0.00% 

Total $0.47 

It will be noted that there is no allowance made for engineer in 
the above, the owner of the outfit probably acting as such. 

* Engineering-Contracting, June 16, 1909. 



1820 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Charging this item up at $4.00 per day would bring the cost per 
acre to 57 cts. The fireman also probably acted as plowman. The 
outfit traveled 2^4 miles per hour, cutting 16% ft. wide, thus 
averaging four acres per hour, allowing for stops. 

The last piece of work was also done in North Dakota, a 30 hp. 
Rumley plowing engine being used. The ground was stony and 
hilly and a disc plow with 14 discs and cutting 11 ft. wide was 
used for breaking the ground. An average of 16 acres of ground 
was broken per 12-hour day, the cost being as follows : 

Total. Per acre. 

Coal, 2,300 lbs., at $7.50 per ton $ 8.05 $0.50 

I "Water, team and man for hauling 4.50 0.28 

' Engineer 3.00 0.11 

Plowman (wlio also fired) 2.00 0.12 

Oil and incidentals 1.00 0.06 

Total $18.55 $1.07 

Later on this ground was put in shape for the drill at a eost of 
about 50 to 60 cts. per acre. To do this the traction engine was 
used to three sections of 21 discs cutting 18 ft. wide with a large 
drag and float behind. 

None of the above costs include interest, repairs and depreciation. 

Cost of Traction Engine Haulage of Ore.* — The hauling of crude 
ore from its mines in Lemhi County, Idaho, to Dubois, on the Oregon 
Short Line Ry., a distance of 85 miles, is being done with traction 
engine trains by the Gilmore Lead Mining Co., Ltd., and the follow- 
ing statement of the method and cost of operating these trains has 
been furnished by Mr. Robert N. Bell, State Inspector of Mines, 
Boise, Idaho. Formerly, it may be noted, the hauling was done 
by teams at a cost of from $10 to $12 per ton. 

The train consists of four wagons or cars of steel and of 15 tons 
capacity each and a 110 hp. traction engine. The route is over a 
flat plain of fine gravelly soil and small sage brush, crossed by a 
number of creeks and irrigating ditches which are bridged. The 
road never gets very muddy and dries out rapidly as soon as the 
snow goes. There is one hill of about 10 per cent grade and three- 
quarters of a mile long approaching the mine ; the engine handles 
one loaded or four empty cars on this hill. It also sets the cars 
one at a time at the loading bin on a 15 per cent grade. The 
coal used in making the trip amounts to about 4 tons per 24 hours, 
and is distributed in bins at intervals along the route. "Water is 
available about every 15 miles, for which distance the tank 
capacity of the front car is sufficient. 

The following costs of haulage are based on the records of the 
first trips made with the road practically in its virgin condition. 
A round trip took four days, working two 12-hour shifts per day 
and traveling 24 hours per day, with a total load of 40 tons. 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 29, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1821 

Per shift. Per trip. Per ton. 

1 engineer at $6 ? 6.00 $ 48.00 $1.20 

1 fireman at $4 4.00 32.00 .80 

1 swamper at $3.50 .... 3.50 28.00 .70 

Total labor $13.50 $108.00 $2.70 

Coal 3.00 12.00 0.30 

Grand total $16.50 $120.00 $3.00 

Cost of Handling and Screening Cinders — Cinders are often used 
in concrete and for other purposes. The following data are given 
by Mr. Ernest McCullough : 

The cost of unloading and screening soft-coal locomotive cinders 
for a filter bed was as follows: The filter bed consisted of a lower 
layer of cinders 27 ins. thick and an upper layer 9 ins. thick. 
The lower layer comprised all cinders that would pass a screen 
of 1-in. mesh, but that would not pass a %-in. mesh. The upper 
9-in. layer would pass a %-in. mesh, but not a %-in. mesh. 
Unscreened cinders were shipped in gondola cars holding about 
32 cu. yds. each, and were unloaded near the filter bed, screened 
and conveyed in wheelbarrows to place. The freight on car load 
was about $36. In one shipment of 16 cars there were 2 cars of 
ashes so fine as to be rejected without screening. The others 
gave the following proportions: 

Per cent. 

Clinkers not passing 1-in. mesh 10 

Cinders passing 1-in., but not passing %-in. mesh.. 75 
Cinders passing %-in., but not passing %-in. mesh. . 5 
Fine dust, under %-in 10 

Total 100 

It was found that cinders in a pile exposed for two weeks to the 
rain and weather were so disintegrated that 33% would pass a %-in. 
mesh. 

One man, using a coal scoop, would unload 32 cu. yds. from a 
car in 10 hrs., and as this yielded about 24 cu. yds. of coarse 
screened cinders, the cost of unloading was 6 cts. per cu. yd., wages 
being $1.50 a day. Another man, using a scoop, would shovel the 
cinders upon the first (1-in.) screen at the same rate. But it took 
two men, using ordinary square pointed shovels, to screen through 
the %-in. screens, and these men screened the material twice, 
because it would not pass through these screens rapidly, nor at 
the first screening. A fair estimate of the cost of unloading and 
screening the coarse (1-in. to %-in.) cinders is as follows, the 
cinders being measured in place in the filter bed : 

Per cu. yd. 

Unloading cars $0.06 

Coarse (1-in.) screening 0.06 

Fine ( %-in.) screening twice 0.24 

Wheeling and spreading in bed 0.08 

Total $0.44 

The freight was about $1.50 per cu. yd. of screened cinders, 
and the cost of loading the cars about 16 cts. more, making a grand 



1822 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

total of $2.10 per cu. yd. of coarse screened cinders in place in 
filter beds. 

Since all the cost of loading, unloading and freight has been 
charged to the coarse cinders, the cost of the fine cinders (% to 
%-in.) was merely the cost of screening them twice through a 
%-in. screen, or 24 cts. per cu. yd. plus 8 cts. for wheeling and 
spreading. When these fine cinders were perfectly dry, once over 
the % -in. screen was enough ; but, if very wet and largely dust, 
screening three times over the %-in. screen was necessary. 

Since the proportion of fine screenings (% to %-in. ) was so small,, 
it was necessary to buy a number of car loads of screenings and 
waste all the material over %-in. size. The freight, when charged 
against the fine screenings, was about $12 per cu. yd. due to the 
fact that not more than 3 cu. yds. of fine screenings could be 
obtained from a car load. An attempt was made to grind up some 
of the coarse screenings using a farmer's feed mill operated by 
horsepower. The mill would grind at the rate of 1^ cu. yds. of 
cinders in 10 hrs., but so many iron bolts and nuts were in the 
cinders that the mill was continually forced to stop, and finally had 
to be abandoned. 

The specific gravity of soft coal cinders is 1.5, and the voids are 
frequently as high as 60%, in which case 1 cu. ft. of cinders weighs 
STVa lbs. 

Size, Weight and Price of Expanded Metal. — The following are 
standard sizes of expanded metal : 





Gage of 


Width of 


Sectional area 


Lbs. per 


Mesh. 


Metal. 


Metal. 


per ft. of width. 


sq. ft. 


3-in. 


No. 10 


5/32 in. 


0.185 sq. in. 


0.65 


3-in. 


No. 10 


15/64 in. 


0.278 sq. in. 


0.94 


3-in. 


No. 10 


5/16 in. 


0.370 sq. in. 


1.25 


6-in. 


No. 4 


1/4 in. 


0.259 sq. in. 


0.86 


6-in. 


No. 4 


3/8 in. 


0.389 sq. in. 


1.29 


The 3-in. 


mesh is sold 


in 6 X 8-ft. 


sheets ; the 6- 


-in. mesl 



5 X 8-ft. sheets ; and in both cases, 5 sheets per bundle. These are 
the common sizes, but expanded metal of the following meshes is 
also made; %-in., %-in., IVa-in., and 2-in. The mesh is measured 
the short way across the diamond. 

Expanded metal is sold by the square foot, but at prices equivalent 
to about 5 to 6 cts. per lb., depending upon the locality and the 
size of mesh. For expanded metal lath see index under "Lath, 
Metal." 

Price of Mineral Wool. — Mineral wool is ordinarily made by pour- 
ing molten slag into water. It is largely used as a filling in hollow 
walls, because of its heat insulating property. I have also used 
it as a packing around water pipes that were exposed to the air. 
In carrying a pipe line across a bridge, for example, the pipe may 
be laid in a box and surrounded with mineral wool. A steam pipe 
may be jacketed in the same way. 

Ordinary mineral wool weighs about 12 lbs. per cu. ft. and may 
be bought for about 1 ct. per lb. 

Cost of Sodding.— Mr. Arthur Hay gives the cost of sodding a 
park in Illinois. The best sod shovel is a "moulder's shovel," with 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1823 

a flat blade 10 ins. wide and 12 ins. long. The edge should be 
drawn down thin on an anvil and sharpened on a grindstone. The 
sod is cut through in parallel lines 14 ins. apart, with the shovel 
held at an angle so as to give bevel edges to the roll of sod. The 
sod strip is cut off square at the ends so as to make a strip about 8 
ft. long (a square yard), and rolled up. One hundred of these 
rolls make a good wagon load, 80 being about the usual load. 
Sod should be cut as thin as possible, say 1^^ to 2 ins. thick. 
Sod cut thicker, with the idea of saving all the roots, never unites 
with the bank when laid on an earth slope. When the rolls are 
laid, fine earth should be sifted into any cracks between the rolls. 
The sod should be thoroughly soaked with water after it is laid, 
and tamped to expel air underneath. A good tamper, or spatter, 
consists of a piece of 2-in. oak plank 10 ins. wide by 18 ins. long, 
strengthened by cleats across the ends and with a tough wood 
handle 2 ins. in diameter and 4 ft. long. One end of this handle 
is beveled off and bolted to the plank so that when the plank lies 
flat on the ground the end of the handle is waist high. 

The following was the average cost of laying 20,000 sq. yds. of 
sod by day labor for the city of Springfield, 111. : 

Cts. per sq. yd. 

Cutting sod 1.6 

Hauling sod 0.9 

Laying sod 2.6 

"Watering sod 0.6 

Spatting sod 0.1 

Total 5.8 

Men were paid $1.50 per 8-hr. day, and the sod cutters had a 
theory, very difficult to contend with, that 71 sq. yds. should 
constitute a day's work. Average contract prices in the vicinity 
were 10 cts. per sq. yd. of sod in place. 

Seeding can be done for about $20 an acre, the cost of 80 lbs. 
of seed being $10, and the cost of labor being about $10 more. 
On slopes gentle enough to hold the seed without washing, seed 
is preferable to sod on account of its cheapness. An acre of sod, 
at 6 cts. per sq. yd., would cost about $300. 

A Device for Cutting Soil for Sodding.* — Mr. A. N. Tolman gives 
the following : 

Fig. 8 shows a sod cutter used at Sioux Falls, S. Dak. The 
"construction is clearly shown by the illustration, but it may be 
well to add that the knife is curved (in plan) and pitches downward 
about % in. in its width of 2% ins. It can be adjusted so that the 
sod can be cut in different thickness as required. I have not seen 
the cutter in use but two men and a boy with a team cut enough 
sod to load a slat wagon (1% cu. yds.) and rolled the sod and 
loaded the wagon in a trifle over an hour. This was so much faster 
than I had anticipated that I arrived on the scene only in time to 
find that the loaded wagon was more than the team could haul on 



*Engineering-Contracting, Aug. 11, 1909. 



1824 



HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 



the muddy road. As the cutter is easily and cheaply made, and 
evidently a great improvement on the spade, it may be of interest 
to your readers. 

Painting Data. — ^A gallon of iron oxide paint w^ill cover 400 sq. ft. 
of wood surface, or 500 sq. ft. of iron surface, first coat. It requires 
about two-thirds as much paint for the second coat as for the first ; 
and half as much paint for the third coat as for the first. Further 
data will be found on page 558. 

A man, working 9 hrs. can paint (one coat) 2,000 sq. ft. of 
tin roof, or 1,000 sq. ft. of frame house, or 300 sq. ft. of bridge 
trusses. The shifting of scaffolds on house work accounts for the 




Fig. S. — Sod Cutter. 



decreased time ; and the smaller area of the surfaces of bridge 
trusses makes the work slower in bridge painting. 
Consult the index under "Painting." 

Cost of Painting a Tin Roof. — Mr. J. M. Braxton gives the fol- 
lowing : 

An old tin roof was showing rust spots, most of the paint being 
worn off. The tin was first rubbed with palmetto brushes and 
then swept clean. The area painted was 151,000 sq. ft., requiring 
563 gals, of paint for two coats, or 267 sq. ft. per gallon for the 
two coats. The paint was : 

396 gallons raw linseed oil. 

35 lbs. dryer. 

2,120 lbs. dry oxide of iron. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1825 

This mixture yielded 563 gals, of paint. Each man averaged 
1,920 sq. ft., or 220 sq. yds. per day of 9 hrs. painted with one 
coat. It toolc 158 man-days to paint the roof, not including fore- 
man's time. 

Unloading Coal From Cars With a Clamshell.* — Broken stone, 
sand and gravel can be unloaded from cars very cheaply with a 
clamshell bucket, wherever the amount to be handled warrants the 
use of such a plant. The following data on unloading coal may also 
be applied to handling other materials. 

At the Navy Yard at Washington, D. C, a locomotive crane, 
fitted with a 50 -ft. boom and a 1%-cu. yd. Hay ward clamshell 
bucket has been in use for unloading coal from cars. A description 
of the crane is as follows : Track gage, 4 ft. 8 % in. ; wheel 
base, 8 ft. ; greatest width, 9 ft. 10 in. ; maximum working radius, 
30 f t. ; hoisting speed per minute, 250 ft. ; rotating speed, three 
revolutions per minute; traveling speed, 350 ft. per minute; 
capacity, one trip per minute. The machine will lift 20,000 lbs. 
at a 12-ft. radius, and 7,500 lbs. at a 30-ft. radius. The engine 
is a 9 X 12-in., double cylinder, double drum engine, fitted with 
the necessary clutches and brakes for controlling the swinging and 
propelling movements of the machine. The crane was manufactured 
by the McMyler Mfg. Co., of Cleveland, O. 

According to data furnished by Mr. F. B. Beatty, commandant of 
the Washington Navy Yard, the machine will unload approximately 
400 tons of coal in eight hours. The crane used in loading coal 
cars from the coal bin will dip and load 48 tons in 20 minutes. 
In unloading a car, the bucket easily takes out three-fourths of the 
contents of the car. The remainder of the coal is taken into the 
boiler house by opening bottom run to bunkers with a chute, and 
thus requires no rehandling. In unloading the coal, one car is 
ahead of the crane, and the other behind, on the same track. The 
bucket takes a load, and, without stopping the swing of the boom, 
the coal is dropped ; then the second car is reached, and the bucket 
filled. Commander Beatty considers that this makes not only less 
work for the man handling the levers, but also increases the output 
by 10 to 15 per cent. 

A clamshell bucket is also used at the Polk street plant, Chicago, 
of the Western Electric Co., in handling coal from cars to storage 
bin. In this case, however, the bucket is operated by an electric 
overhead traveling crane. This machine was built by the Whiting 
Foundry & Equipment Co., of Harvey, 111., for the Western Electric 
Co. It is of the three-motor type, and has a working load capacity 
of 10,000 lbs. The span, center and center of runway rails is 
73 ft. 10 in. The lift (maximum vertical travel of hook) of the 
main hoist is 37 ft. The average travel is 50 ft. A 2-cu. yd. 
Hayward clamshell bucket is used. 

Mr. G. A. Pennod, factory enginer for the General Electric Co., 
states that a 40-ton car can be unloaded in 1% to 2 hrs., depending 
on the travel of the crane. From 5 to 6 cars a day, allowing for 



* Engineering-Contracting, May 23, 1906. 



1826 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

switching, etc., can be unloaded in a day. It takes two men to 
unload a car ; one man to operate the crane, and one man to shovel 
what coal remains in the corners of the car which the bucket, on 
account of its bulky nature, cannot pick up. 

This last operation takes about as much time as unloading with 
the bucket alone, that is, the bulk of the coal in a 40-ton car can 
be unloaded in about 45 minutes, and it takes the same length 
of time for one man to shovel out what remains. The time of this 
last operation can, of course, be reduced by putting on more men. 

If we assume that a man shovels coal at the rate of 4 tons per 
hour, it is evident that the clamshell bucket removes all the coal 
in a car except about 3 tons which must be shoveled out by hand. 

It is apparent from the two foregoing examples that a contractor 
need not be afraid that a clamshell bucket will not clean up a 
carload of broken stone sufficiently well for practical purposes. 

For data on handling stone with clamshells, consult the index 
under "Clamshell." 

Cost of a 28- Mile Telegraph Line.* — The data to be given relate 
to a telegraph line 28 miles long, built in British Columbia. There 
were 32 poles to the mile, strung with a single No. 8 B. B. galvanized 
iron wire. The cost of the poles was very much less than it would 
be in most localities, but, since quotations on poles are readily 
secured, proper substitutions can be made in the following tabu- 
lated values for any particular case. 

Regarding telegraph wire, a word of explanation may be helpful. 
Until recently the size of wire commonly used for lines of medium 
length, up to 400 miles, was No. 9, weighing 305 lbs. per mile, 
but No. 8 is now used more frequently. There are two grades com- 
monly used : The E. B. B., or "extra best best," and the B. B., or 
"best best." A third grade, S, or "steel," is also used for short 
circuits. The following are the weights of galvanized wire : 

Lbs. Lbs. Ft. 

Per mile. Per ft. Per lb. 

No. 6 570 0.108 9.2 

No. 7 450 0.085 11.7 

No. 8 380 0.072 14.0 

No. 9 305 0.058 17.4 

No. 10 250 0.047 21.2 

The itemized cost of this 28-mile line was as follows: 

Labor: Per mile. 

1.0 day, foreman at $3.50 ' $ 3.50 

1.0 day, sub-foreman at $3.00 3.00 

2.7 days, climber at $2.50 6.75 

2.5 days, framer at $2.25 5.62 

0.7 day, blacksmith at $2.25 1.58 

4.6 days, groundman at $2.00 9.20 

12.5 days total at $2.40 $29.65 



*Engineering-Contracting, July 10, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1827 

32 poles (25-ft.) at $1.25 $40.00 

32 wooden brackets at 1% cts 0.40 

32 glass insulators at 0.4 cts 1.28 

5 lbs. nails at 2 % cts. 0.12 

% lb. staples at 0.3 cts 0.02 

380 lbs. No. 8 BB galv. wire at 5 cts 19.00 

2 lbs. tie wire at 3 cts 0.06 

Total materials $60.88 

Total labor and materials 90.53 

The labor includes the cost of digging holes, erecting poles, string- 
ing the wire, etc. The poles were distributed by train, and the 
price of $1.25 per pole does not include the train service. 

A pole 12 ins. diameter at the butt and 7 ins. at the top, contains 
% cu. ft. of wood per lin. ft. Hence there are about 12% cu. ft. 
of timber in a 25-ft. pole. Knowing the kind of timber, it is easy 
to estimate the weight of poles, and consequently the freight for any 
given haul. If the timber weighs 40 lbs. per cu. ft. the weight of a 
pole is about 500 lbs. With 32 poles per mile, the weight is 8 tons 
for the poles. See page 952 for weights of poles. 

Cost of a Telephone Line. — In Engineering-Contracting, May 27, 
1908, an article by Mr. L. B. Hurtz gives in detail the methods of 
building an all-cable telephone plant in a suburb of a city, the popu- 
lation of the suburb being 3,000. The following is the summary of 
unit costs : 

Cost each. 

Poles, unloaded, 363 $0.07 

Poles shaved (average, 30 ft. long) 0.22 

Poles roofed (and a very few gains cut) 0.07% 

Poles hauled (average, 30 ft. long) 0.25 

Poles set (average, 30 ft. long) 0.33 

Poles set (average, 40 ft. long) 0.69 

Poles bored for steps 0.18 

Poles stepped 0.20 

Pole holes dug, average, 30 ft., pole holes 5% ft. 

deep 0.47% 

Anchors, holes dug, 99 0.45 

Anchors set, 99 0.58 

X-arms fitted 0.07 

X-arms distributed 0.09 

X-arms put on 0.15% 

Guys put on 1.00 

Stringing and pulling messenger, per ft 0.00% 

Cable pulled, average 25 pr., per ft 0.00% 

Cable clipped (hangers put on), per hanger 0.00% 

Staking out line, per pole 0.10 

Poles pulled and holes filled, per pole 0.65 

Cable unloaded, average, 25 pr. per ft 0.00 1/5 

Drops strung, per drop 1.04 

Bare wire strung, per single wire per mile 2.75 

Average total cost of labor and material for splicing lead cov- 
ered, paper insulated telephone cable : 

25 pr. cable '.$ 2.86 

50 pr. cable 2.95 

75 pr. cable 4.40 

100 pr. cable 5.75 

150 pr. cable 6.22 

200 pr. cable 8.37 

250 pr. cable 10.00 

300 pr. cable 10.00 



1828 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

Cost of Two Telephone Lines.* — Two short lines were built, on© 
10 miles long and the other 14 miles long. The cost of the 10-mile 
line was as follows per mile: 

Labor: Per mile. 

1.7 days foreman at $4.00 $ 6.80 

1.7 days sub-foreman at $3.00 5.10 

4.0 days climbers at $2.50 10.00 

10.5 days groundmen at $2.25 23.63 

I 17.9 days total at $3.10 $ 55.53 

Materials: 

28 poles at $1.50 $ 42.00 

28 cross arms at $0.15 4.20 

28 steel pins at $0.04 1.12 

28 glass insulators at $0.04 1.12 

56 lag screws and washers at $0.015 0.84 

305 lbs. No. 9 galv. wire at $0.042 12.81 

Total materials $ 62.09 

Total labor and materials 117.62 

More than 90% of the poles were 25 ft. long. The rest were 
30 to 40 ft. in length. 

The cost of the 14-mile line was as follows per mile: 

Labor: Per mile. 

2.2 days foreman at $3.50 $ 7.70 

2.2 days sub-foreman at $3.00 6.60 

5.3 days climber at $2.75 14.58 

11.4 days groundman at $2.25 25.64 

21.5 days total at $2.54 $ 54.52 

Materials: 

32 poles at $1.50 $ 48.00 

32 brackets at $0.015 0.48 

380 lbs. No. 8 galv. wire, $0.042 15.96 

10 lbs. No. 9 galv. wire, $0.042 0.42 

IVa lbs. fence staples, $0.025 0.04 

32 insulators, $0.04 1.28 

Total materials ^iSn'JS 

Total labor and materials ^„9-iX 

2 telephones at $12.50 25.00 

200 ft. office wire . 1-40 

Considering the low cost of telephone lines of this character, it Is 
surprising that they are not more frequently built for use on con- 
struction work. For temporary purposes, a much cheaper kind of 
poles could be used. For example, a very substantial pole could be 
made by nailing together two 1 x 4-in. boards, so as to form a post 
having a T-shape cross-section. Such a pole would contain only two- 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 24, 1907. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 



1829 



thirds of a foot, board measure ( % ft. B. M. ) per lineal foot of pole. 
At $24 per M for the boards, a pole 20 ft. long would cost 32 cts. 

Hence the poles would cost less than $10 per mile of line. The 
No. 9 wire would ordinarily cost less than $13 per mile; and $3 more 
would cover the cost of the remaining line materials, making a total 
cost of $26 per mile for materials. We have no data as to the 
labor of erecting such a line, but it would certainly be less than $15 
per mile ; and in soil where post hole diggers could be used the 
cost would be considerably less. In fact, a telephone line built for 
$35 a mile might easily be obtained under fairly favorable condi- 
tions. Moreover it could be taken down and used many times on 
subsequent construction. Such a light pole line, however, would not 
stand up in severe winter weather. 

Life of Telephone Line Equipment.* — Some time ago the city of 
Chicago appointed a special commission, consisting of Prof. Dugald 
C. Jackson, Dr. George W. Wilder and William H. Crumb, to in- 
vestigate matters pertaining to the telephone situation in that city. 
In connection with its report the commission gave the following 
data as to the life and depreciation of telephone equipment : 



Property ; 



Underground conduit, main, clay in concrete.. 50 

Underground conduit, main, fibre, etc 20 

Underground conduit, subsidiary '. 20 

Underground cable, main \\ 20 

Underground cable, subsidiary. .'. 15 

Aerial cable 15 

Poles, including crossarms, etc . . . 10 

Aerial strand 12 

Aerial cable, terminals 12 

Aerial wire, copper 15 

Drop wires, copper 8 

Subscribers' station instruments 10 

Private branch exchange switchboards 8 

Central office switchboards 8 

Buildings, fireproof 40 

Teams, tools, furniture, etc 4 



oj 


9 

60 


hi : 


^^ 


> 


^^aj 


rt 


d 


s y 


■►^ ^ 


to 


+j c 


-^n 


-(-> 


-mTJcS 


C.2 


fl 


aou 


(U-M 


0) 


0) 3 5 


133 





f <a 


fe" 


u 


§3«-S 


^ 


^ 


a. 


.89 





1% 


3.72 





iy<t 


3.72 


u 


2 


3.72 




2 


5.38 


40 


2 


5.38 




3 


8.73 





4^ 


7.05 





SYst 


7.05 





3 


5.38 


70 


3 


11.25 


15 


4 


8.73 


5 


2 


11.25 


20 


2 


11.25 


20 


2 


1.33 





1 


23.92 


10 






Vitrified Conduit Data — Vitrified conduits for carrying electric 
wires underground are made in single or multiple ducts. A single 
duct is a pipe 18 ins. long with a round or square bore ranging 
from 3% to 4 ins. diameter. Multiple ducts are made with two or 
more ducts in one piece. The common multiples are 2, 3, 4, 6 or 9 
ducts in one piece. The lengths of the pieces are 24 or 36 ins. Ducts 
are sold by the duct-foot, and the present price in New York City 



* Engineering-Contracting, Feb. 12, 1908. 



1830 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

is about 3% cts. per duct-foot. A 6-duct multiple has 6 duct-feet 
per lin. ft., and its price is therefore 6 X 3y2, or 21 cts. per lin. ft. of 
the 6-duct piece. The weight varies somewhat with different manu- 
facturers, but 8 lbs. per duct foot may be used for estimating freight 
and haulage. 

I am informed by one of the large manufacturers that the 9-duct 
multiple is not so popular as it once was, due to loss by breakage. 

The outside dimensions of vitrified conduits are about as follows : 
Number of ducts in the piece. ..123 4 6 9 

Dimensions of the piece, ins 5x5 5x9 5x13 9x9 9x13 13x13 

These ducts are all square bore, 3% ins., square with rounded 
corners. 

Cost of Laying Electric Conduits. — My own cost records for this 
class of work cover only two sizes of vitrified pipe conduits encased 
in concrete. One of these conduits was made of 4-duct pipe, each 
duct being 3 V-i ins. inside diameter, the 4 ducts being baked together 
in one piece 18 ins. long. First a trench was dug 2 ft. 8 ins. deep 
and 18 ins. wide, then a bed of concrete 4 ins. thick was laid in the 
trench. Upon this concrete the conduit was laid, every joint being 
wrapped with a strip of cheap cotton cloth. Then concrete was 
packed on both sides of the conduit and 4 ins. thick over its top. 
The labor cost of laying this conduit, not including the cost of 
trenching and the cost of making and placing the concrete, was as 
follows: Two men laying the duct pipe and one helper delivering 
pipe from piles along the sidewalk, averaged 60 lin. ft. of 4-duct 
conduit laid per hour, which is equivalent to 120 ft. of single 
duct per hour. With wages of duct layers at 20 cts. each 
per hour, and helper at 15 cts. per hour the cost of laying was a 
trifle less than 1 ct. per lin. ft. of 4-duct conduit, or y^ ct. per ft. of 
single duct. 

In laying a 9-duct conduit (each piece of pipe having 9 ducts 
instead of 4 as above), two men laying were supplied with pipe by 
two helpers. This gang averaged 30 lin. ft. of 9-duct conduit per 
hour, at a cost of 2.3 cts. per lin. ft. of conduit, or % ct. per ft. of 
single duct. From this it appears that the labor cost of laying 
the pipe is practically the same per duct-foot, whether 4-duct or 
9-duct conduit is laid. 

At another time, one man laying a single duct line (exclusive of 
trenching and concreting) averaged 66 lin. ft. per hour, at a cost 
of a trifle less than % ct. per ft. The work in all these cases was 
done by day labor for the company. 

Cost of Vitrified Conduits, IVIemphis, Tenn. — Mr. F. G. Proutt 
gives the following data on electric vitrified conduit construction, at 
Memphis, Tenn., in 1903 : The work was done by day labor, the 
wages of common laborers (negroes) being $1.50 per day. There 
were about 3,700 ft. of trenches containing 27 ducts, and 7,200 ft. 
of trench containing 18 ducts, besides which there were 575 ft. of 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1831 

trench containing from 6 to 60 ducts, making in all 11,475 ft. of 
trench and 252,000 duct feet. An 18-duct conduit was made up of 
three 6-duct sections (no single duct sections were used), each 
section measuring 9x13 ins., sections being laid one on top of the 
other. The ducts were surrounded on all sides with concrete 3 ins. 
thick, making 6 ins. of concrete, 27 ins. of ducts and 30 ins. of 
backfill, or a trench 514 ft. deep for an 18-duct conduit. The 
width of the duct, 13 ins., plus 6 ins. for concrete, gives a trench 
19 ins. wide, or about S% cu. ft. (less than % cu. yd.) of excavation 
per foot of trench. The 27-duct conduit was made up of 4 multiple 
ducts of 6 ducts each, and one multiple of 3 ducts, laid in tiers, 
making the trench 6^4 ft. deep and 19 ins. wide, or about 9.4 cu. ft. 
per foot of trench. Roughly speaking, all the trench work averaged 
% cu. yd. excavation per foot of trench. All 6-duct sections were 
3 ft. long, and all 3-duct sections were 2 ft. long. 

The executive force consisted of 1 general foreman at $3 ; 1 fore- 
man of pipe layers ; 1 foreman of concrete mixing gang ; 1 foreman 
in charge of digging for manholes ; 1 foreman in charge of back- 
filling and hauling away, and 1 timekeeper. There were 8 men on 
manholes and service boxes, 80 men trenching, concreting and pipe 
laying. The best day's work was 703 ft. of trench and 15,156 
duct-feet. 

In laying the ducts, the 3-in. concrete bottom was first placed, 
then 2 men in the' trench laid the lower tier or run, 2 men on the 
bank handling the sections down by means of a rope run through 
one of the holes. This run was followed by a similar gang of 4 men 
working a few lengths back. Three dowel pins were used in each 
section. The joint was made with a strip of cheap canvas 5 ins. 
wide by 5 ft. long laid on the bottom before placing the ducts. 
A boy followed along, wrapping the canvas over the top joint and 
painting the lap with asphaltum. To cut the canvas into strips 
a table was made with a saw kerf in it 5 ins. from one edge and at 
this edge was a strip against which to push the bolt of cloth. A 
large butcher knife was then run through the saw kerf and cloth, 
cutting off a strip 5 ins. wide and the length of the bolt. This strip 
was wound on a reel whose circumference was 5 ft., and a cut 
through the cloth at the circumference made strips 5 ft. long. 

The concrete was mixed with "Dromedary" mixers costing about 
$200 each. A "Dromedary" mixer holds about % cu. yd. of con- 
crete, and is hauled by two horses in tandem. Half the charge of 
sand is shoveled in, then the cement, then the rest of the sand, and 
finally the stone. The door is closed and the mixer hauled about 
150 ft. to the water tank and from 6 to 8 pails of water are thrown 
in. If the concrete must be rehandled the mixer is hauled to a 
dumping board 6 ft. wide by 24 ft. long, made in two 6 x 12-ft. 
sections. 



1832 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The cost of 252,000 duct-feet, laid in 11,475 ft. of trench, was as 
follows : 

254,500 duct feet (1% broken), at 5y2 cts $13,997 

45 cars of ducts unloaded, at $7.50 338 

Labor trenching, backfilling, concreting and duct 

laying 7745 

Materials for 882 cu. yds. of 1:4:8 concrete,* 

at $5.22 4 go4 

32 brick manholes,t at $115 , ,\ s'eso 

31 manhole drains,} at $86 \\ 2,666 

48 service boxes,§ at $30 \ 1520 

4,300 lin. yds. canvas (5 ft. wide), at 5 cts.. . . . . '215 

5 bbls. asphalt paint, at $30 150 

40,000 dowel pins for ducts, at i/^ ct * 2OO 

Tools 800 

City water 50 

Plumbers repairing water pipes .' .' . loO 

New sidewalks 600 

Repaving city streets . . . 1,000 

City inspection I95 

Engineering \\ i,000 

Incidentals 1,140 

252,000 duct feet, at nearly 16 cts $40,000 

♦Each cubic yard of 1:4:8 concrete required 0.96 bbl. (a bbl 
being counted as 4 cu. ft.) cement at $2.10 per bbl. ; 0.56 cu. yd of 
sand at $1.25 per cu. yd. ; and 1.36 short tons of broken limestone at 
$2 a ton. 

tEach manhole was 8-sided, 5 ft. wide by 7 ft. long and 6i/^ ft. 
deep, inside measure, with 13-in. brick walls, a 6-in. concrete floor, 
and a 12-in. concrete top reinforced by old rails. There were 3,200 
bricks in each manhole at $7.50 per M; there were nearly 4 cu. yds. 
of concrete in the bottom and top at $5.75 per cu. yd. for materials. 
Masons were paid $6 a day and helpers $2. The cost of excavating 
for and building a manhole averaged about $40. The iron rails cost 
$5. The cast-iron cover for each manhole weighed 1,150 lbs. costing 
1.9 cts. per lb. 

JManhole drains averaged 170 ft. long of 6-in. sewer pipe, cost- 
ing $10 for materials and $76 for labor. 

§Service boxes contained 325 bricks each, and were 3 ft. square 
inside, with 9-in. walls, and provided with cast-iron covers like the 
manhole cover. 

The designs of manholes, methods of construction and other de- 
tails as to this work are given in Mayer's "Telephone Construction — 
Methods and Cost," p. 243 et seq. 

Cost of Brick Manholes for Electric Conduits. — Square manholes 
were built with brick walls 12 ins. thick. The bottom of the man- 
hole was concrete, and the top was reinforced concrete. The fol- 
lowing data relate only to the brick work : Each manhole contained 
4.6 cu. yds. of brick masonry, and the following gang averaged 1% 
days to each manhole, the day being 8 hrs. long: 

2 masons, at $3.00 $ 6.00 

3 helpers, at $1.50 4.50 

Total per day $10.50 " 

Therefore, it cost $18.35 per manhole foi* the labor on the brick 
work, which is equivalent to $4 per cu. yd. of brick masonry. Since 
each manhole contained 2,140 bricks, each mason averaged about 600 
bricks laid per 8-hr. day. This was very slow work. It was done by 
day labor for a company. See Mayer's "Telephone Construction — 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1833 

Methods and Cost" for the design, methods of construction and 
itemized costs of several hundred brick and concrete vaults. 

Methods and Cost of Laying Vitrified Conduits for Electric 
Wires.* — Considering the large amount of vitrified conduit work 
that is being done, there is surprisingly little in print on the cost 
of laying conduits for electric wires. In our issue of July 11 we 
gave the costs of excavation and of concrete work on the Atlantic 
Ave. subway work of the Long Island R. R. The concrete retaining 
walls of that subway contained many thousand feet of vitrified 
ducts, and we give herewith some data bearing upon the cost of 
hauling and laying the ducts for the electric wires. The ducts were 
of standard 3-ft. length, having an inside diameter of 3i/4 ins. 
Multiple duct conduits were laid, being for the most part, 4-hole 
pieces. 

The conduits were imloaded from boats, hauled about 1% miles, 
and piled up ready for use. The cost of unloading, hauling and 
piling was 0.8 ct. per duct-foot; and, as a duct-foot weighs about 
8 lbs., this is equivalent to $1.30 per ton. Laborers received 15 cts. 
an hour, team and driver 45 cts. 

The cost of laying conduits during the year of 1903 was as 
follows : 

Duct-ft. Labor, Pay Cost per 

laid. days. roll. duct ft. 

January 1,942 10 $ 15 0.8 ct. 

February 1,636 9 13 0.8 ct. 

April 4,512 32 55 1.2 ct. 

May 30,653 154 254 0.8 ct. 

June 37,715 205 357 0.9 ct. 

July 27,893 179 288 I.Oct. 

August 15,293 92 142 0.9 ct. 

September 14,170 63 108 0.8 ct. 

October 10,037 43 74 0.7 ct. 

Total 143,851 787 $1,316 0.9 ct. 

From this it appears that the cost of laying was a trifle less than 
1 ct. per duct-foot, and that the average wages were $1.66 per day 
of 10 hrs. This is the average of the common laborers delivering 
ducts and the skilled men laying ducts. 

It required 150 bbls. of Portland cement to lay the 143,851 duct- 
feet, or 1 bbl. per 960 duct-feet. - 

During the year of 1904, there were 227,600 duct-feet laid, re- 
quiring 240 bbls. of cement and 975 days labor. The average wages 
paid were $1.71 per day, and the average cost was 0.8 ct. per duct- 
foot for laying. During the best month, 30,700 duct-feet were laid at 
a cost of 0.6 ct. per duct-foot for laying, which indicates that the 
workmen were not very efficient during the previous months. 

In our February issue we gave the itemized cost of building a sec- 
tion of the New York Subway, and from that article we have ab- 



* Engineering-Contracting, July 25, 1906. 



1834 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

stracted such data as pertain to conduit construction, for the 
purposes of comparison, as follows : p (juot-f t 

Labor 1 ct. 

Materials 5 cts. 

Total 6ctl 

The cost of materials for 123,483 duct-feet in the New York Sub- 
way were as follows : 

123,483 duct-ft, at 41/2 cts $5,556 

6,000 sq. yds. burlap, at 4 14 cts 270 

275 bbls. Portland cement, at $1.58 435 

68 cu. yds. sand, at $0.50 34 

13 sets mandrels, at $2 26 

Total, 123,483 duct-ft, at 5 cts $6i^321 

One barrel cement was used for every 440 duct-feet. 

As an average of a large amount of work on the New York Sub- 
way, the following data were deduced: 100 duct-feet require 0.22 
bbl. cement, 0.055 cu. yd. sand and 4.86 sq. yds. burlap. The con- 
duits used were 4-hole pieces in 2-ft. lengths, 9 ins. square, built up 
in advance of the concrete side walls which surrounded them. 

On another section of the New York Subway where more than 
500,000 duct-feet were laid, the cost of the labor of laying was 1% 
cts. per duct-foot. And on still another section, where 60,000 
duct-feet were laid, the cost was as high as 2^4 cts. per duct-foot 
for labor of laying. This last appears to indicate an immense 
amount of loafing ; although the New York Subway work at best 
was poorly managed by the contractors. 

However, the wages paid on the New York Subway work were 
high, being $5.20 per 8-hr. day for the bricklayers who laid the ducts. 
We are informed that the men who handed the ducts to the layers 
were classed as "mason's helpers," in which case they would have 
received about $3 a d.ay, being union men. But in the itemized list 
of workers and wages of men on the New York Subway, given in our 
February issue, we find no "mason's helpers." This makes it 
doubtful whether the helpers were credited as receiving more than 
the wages of common laborers, or $1.50 a day. 

In laying the ducts, there were sometimes 2 helpers to 1 brick- 
layer, sometimes 2 helpers to 2 bricklayers. It was'the duty of one 
of the helpers to prepare the muslin sheets that were wrapped 
around the joints of the ducts. The sheets were cut into strips 8 ins. 
wide and 3 % ft. long ; then they were laid on boards and soaked 
with neat cement grout, using a whitewash brush for the purpose. 
This helper sometimes passed the cemented cloths to the layer ; but 

sometimes a helper passed the cemented cloths and the ducts to the 
layer. 

The conduits were laid 16 ducts high, usually back of the steel 
side columns and against the waterproofed 4 -in. backing wall of 
brick on each side of the subway. The ducts were laid % break 
joint, with a cemented cloth around each joint, then a little mortar 
was slushed in to smooth up the line of ducts. Mandrels were used 
in laying, the mandrel being 4 ft. long, and extending through two 
ducts. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1835 

The specifications for this Long Island R. R. work are given in 
Mayer's "Telephone Construction — Methods and Cost," p. 278 et seq. 

Cost of Pole Lines, Vitrified Conduits, iVlanholes, Etc. — References. 
— :A complete treatise on the methods and cost of telephone line con- 
struction, with data equally applicable to electric power transmis- 
sion lines, is Mayer's "Telephone Construction — Methods and Cost." 
The cost data were secured from work aggregating 50 miles of 
underground conduit, and the pole line costs cover an even more 
extensive mileage. The same book contains other similar data 
gathered by Mr. J. C. Slippy. 

Labor Cost of an Electric Transmission Line. — In Engineering- 
Contracting, Feb. 5, 1908, two pages are devoted to the methods 
and cost of constructing a 20-mile electric power transmission line. 
A full abstract of the same is given in Mayer's "Telephone Construc- 
tion — Methods and Cost," p. 227 et seq. The following is merely 
a brief summary of the labor cost per mile of line : 

Per mile. 

Hauling poles $ 18.75 

Digging (46 poles) holes 45.47 

Raising poles 35.47 

Dapping crossarms 14.14 

Hauling and placing crossarms and insulators. . 21.01 

Labor on guy poles 18.28 

Trimming trees and bushes 20.94 

Stringing and fastening wires 74.06 

Changing old poles 35.31 

Total $283.43 

Laborers received $1.50 ; linemen, $2.50 ; teams, $4.50. The poles 
were 32 ft. long, set 5 ft. deep. There were two crossarms to a pole, 
each holding 8 pins ; but a third dap was made in each pole to pro- 
vide for a future crossarm. Twelve wires were strung. 

Cost of Transmission Line for Interurban Electric Railways.* — 
The following is a rather brief abstract of an article by Mr. B. P. 
Roberts and Mr. J. C. Gillette: 

The following data on overhead line construction for interurban 
electric railways are based on actual practice and on the average 
costs of a large number of lines in different sections of the United 
States. The elements of interurban electric railway overhead line 
construction are: (1) A conductor from which the cars take elec- 
trical energy, and (2) the supporting of this conductor, which may 
be directly by brackets or by cross spans, which in turn are sup- 
ported by poles. These two methods of construction are termed re- 
spectively bracket suspension and cross-suspension. The trolley wire 
may be supported either directly from insulators carried by the 
brackets or spans, or by steel cable, which in turn is supported by 
the brackets or spans. The former is the old and standard method 
of trolley construction so long used on direct current lines, while 
the latter is the new "catenary" type of construction. The work 
for a 600-volt direct current line will be considered first and then 
the work for a line for higher voltage alternating or direct current 
motors . 
must be added i^^accorvx^ 



1836 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

The costs submitted are probable costs between limits, but even 
though a maximum limit is given, the actual cost may sometimes 
exceed these figures, depending on local conditions. 

Starting from the standpoint of the cheapest practicable con- 
struction, we have 30-ft. poles, 90 to 100 ft. spacing, and bracket 
supports, and with double overhead No. 000 trolley. The cost of 
such construction will aproximate the figures given by Table IV. 

Table IV. — Cost Per Mile of Bracket Construction Single Track 

600 V. Two No. 000 Trollet Wires, Poles Spaced 100 Ft, 
Fifty-three 30-ft. poles in place and framed, 

poles delivered on cars $4.00 to $6.00 $ 325.00 $ 475.00 

Fifty-three brackets in place with fittings 180.00 210.00 

Ears, hangers, etc., in place 50.00 75.00 

Two miles No. 000 trolley with splicers, at 

20C-26C 1,100.00 1,400.00 

Erecting same 100.00 150.00 

Siding construction pro rated 75.00 100.00 

Curve construction 1,500 ft. additional cost... 50.00 75.00 

Five anchors 8.50 15.00 

Two hundred ft. strand for guys 2.25 2.50 

Two half anchorages 5.00 10.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 5.00 8.00 

Per cent on material for handling 75.00 100.00 

$1,975.75 $2,620.50 

Add for lightning arrester 10.00 20.00 

Add for telephone system pro rated 75.00 100.00 

$2,060.75 $2,740.50 

If all poles are anchored add 160.00 265.00 

If 35-ft. poles are used add (poles $6.00 to 

$8.50) 130.00 160.00 

Total $2,350.75 $3,165.50 

If for any reason, it is decided to use cross suspension instead of 
bracket construction with the same pole spacing and size of trolley, 
then the approximate cost will be as given by Table V. 
Table V. — Cost Per Mile of Span Construction Single Track 

600 Volt Two No. 000 Trolley Wires, Poles Spaced 100 Ft. 
One hundred and six 30-ft. poles in place and 

framed, poles delivered on cars $4.00-$6.00. . $ 650.00 $ 950.00 

Ears, hangers, etc., in place 50.00 75.00 

Span wire erected 60.00 85.00 

Two miles No. 000 trolley at 20c-26c 1,100.00 1,400.00 

Erecting same 100.00 150.00 

Siding construction, pro rated 75.00 100.00 

Curve construction, additional cost 35.00 60.00 

Five anchors 8.50 15.00 

Two hundred ft. strand for anchor guys 2.25 2.50 

Two half anchorages 5.00 10.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 5.00 8.00 

Per cent on material for handling 100.00 150.00 

$2,190.75 $3,005.50 

Lightning arresters 10.00 20.00 

Telephone system, pro rated 75.00 100.00 

If all 35-ft. poles are used (poles at $6.00 to 

$8.50) 260.00 320.00 

If poles are anchored add 320.00 -^"n (\<\ 

Total v'^'Oox). I o $3,97?750 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1837 

In case transmission wires are required for transmission of elec- 
tric energy from tlie power house to substations, such transmis- 
sion wires may be placed entirely on crossarms, or in the case of 
three-phase transmission, two of such wires may be on one two-pin 
arm and the third wire on a pin on the top of the pole or on a 
bracket on the side of the pole. Of course the pole top cannot be 
used if a ground wire is located at such point. The cost of con- 
struction on a three-phase transmission line will approximate the 
figures given by Table VI. 

Table VI. — Cost Per Mile of Bracket Construction Single Track 

600 Volt Two No. 000 Trolley Wirls, Poles Spaced 100 Ft. 

WITH Three Phase 33,000 Volt Transmission Line on 

Trolley Line Poles^ 2-Pin Crossarm and 

Pole Top Pin Construction, 

Fifty-three 35-ft. poles in place and framed, 

poles delivered on cars at $6.00 to $8.50 $ 455.00 $ 635.00 

Ears, hangers, etc., in place 50.00 75.00 

Fifty-three brackets in place with fittings 180.00 210.00 

Two miles No. 000 trolley with splicer at 

20c-26c 1,100.00 1,400.00 

Erecting same 100.00 150.00 

Siding construction, pro rated 75.00 100.00 

Curve construction 1,500 ft. additional cost.. 65.00 100.00 

Five anchors 8.50 15.00 

Two hundred ft. strand for guys 2.25 2.50 

Two half anchorages 5.00 10.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 5.00 8.00 

Fifty-three 4 x 5 in. x 4 ft. 6 in. crossarms 16.00 22.00 

One hundred and fifty-nine 2 x 13-in. oak pins 

paraffined 9.00 11.00 

One hundred and fifty-nine 33,000 volt porce- 
lain insulators 90.00 120.00 

One hundred and six 20 x 1% x % in. crossarm 

braces galv 5.00 6.50 

One hundred and six % x 5 cge. bolts 1.00 1.25 

Fifty-three 1/2 x 4 lag bolts .60 .75 

Fifty-three % x 13 mch. bolts 3.00 3.75 

Erecting arms, pins and insulators 25.00 35.00 

Three miles No. 2 copper wire with splicers at 

20c-26c 638.40 829.92 

Erecting same 125.00 170.00 

Per cent on material for handling 140.00 190.00 

Total $3,098.75 $4,095.67 

Add for trolley lightning protection 10.00 20.00 

Add for transmission lightning protection.... 50.00 250.00 

Add for telephone system pro rated 75.00 100.00 

Total $3,233.75 $4,465.67 

If all poles are anchored add 160.00 265.00 

Total $3,393.75 $4,730.67 

From the above the principal unit costs of the cheapest practicable 
character of line work can be ascertained, and such additions must 
be made as are necessary for special overhead work around car 
shops, and in connection with bridges, city work or other special 
conditions ; also the cost of copper for feeders or for transmission 
must be added in accordance with the plan decided upon. 



1838 HANDBOOK' OF COST DATA. 

Tables VII to IX show the average cost between limits of differ- 
ent types of catenary construction. 

Table VII. — Cost Per Mile SikiGLE Track 9 -Point Catenart 
150-Ft. Pole Spacing, 6,600 Volt. 

36 35-ft. poles in place and framed, poles taken 

at $6.00 to $8.00 delivered $ 310.00 $ 430.00 

36 brackets with fittings, in place 120.00 150.00 

5,280 ft. No. 0000 trolley, 3,382 lbs., at 20c to 

26c per lb 676.00 879.00 

5,300 ft. %-in. high strength steel messenger 

cable 110.00 130.00 

36 messenger insulators 15.00 30.00 

36 spans catenary hangers 40.00 72.00 

5 anchors 8.50 15.00 

200 ft. %-in. high strength strand for guys.. 2.25 2.50 

10 steady braces for curves 30.00 40.00 

10 strain insulators 11.00 15.00 

Per cent on material for handling, etc 100.00 130.00 

Labor erecting curve trolley 1,500 ft. additional 50.00 75.00 

Labor erecting catenary trolley 160.00 200.00 

2 half anchorages 20.00 30.00 

Siding construction, pro rated 100.00 150.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 10.00 15.00 

$1,762.75 $2,363.50 

Add for lightning arresters 10.00 60.00 

Add for galv. wire lightning protection 150.00 200.00 

Add for telephone system, pro rated 100.00 150.00 

$2,022.75 $2,773.50 

If all poles are anchored add 108.00 180.00 

If brackets are insulated 40.00 60.00 

Total .$2,170.75 $3,013.50 . 

Table VIII. — Cost Per Mile of Double Track 9-Point Catenary, 
Center Pole, 150-Ft. Pole Spacing, 6,600 Volt. 

36 35-ft. poles in place and framed, poles de- 
livered on cars $6.00 to $8.00 each $ 310.00 $ 430.00 

72 brackets with fittings in place 240.00 300.00 

10,500 ft. trolley, 6,764 lbs., at 20c to 26c 

per lb 1,352.00 1,758.00 

10,600 ft. %-in. high strength steel messenger 

cable 220.00 260.00 

72 messenger insulators 30.00 60.00 

72 spans catenary hangers 80.00 144.00 

10 anchors 17.00 30.00 

300 ft. %-in. strand for guy ... 3.50 4.00 

20 steady braces for curves 60.00 80.00 

20 strain insulators 22.00 30.00 

10 30-ft. pull-off poles in place and framed 100.00 , 130.00 

Per cent for handling material, etc 110.00 140.00 

Labor erecting catenary trolley 320.00 400.00- 

Labor erecting curve trolley, 3,000 ft. add 100.00 150.00 

2 half anchorages 40.00 60.00 

Siding construction, pro rated 200.00 300.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 10.00 15.00 

$3,214.50 $4,291.00 

Add for lightning arresters 10.00 120.00 

Add for galv. wire lightning protection...... 150.00 400.00 

Add for telephone line 100.00 150.00 

Total $3,374.50 $4,961.00 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1839 

TABt.E IX. — Cost Per Mile of Double Track 9-Point Catenary, 
Double Pole Line^ 150-Ft. Spacing, 6,600 Volt. 

72 35-ft. poles in place and framed, poles at 

$6.00 to $8.50 each delivered on cars $ 620.00 $ 860.00 

72 brackets with fittings in place, i . . , 240.00 300.00 

10,560 ft. No. 0000 trolley, 6,764 lbs., at 20c 

to 26c per lb 1,352.00 1,758.00 

10,600 ft. %-in. high strength steel messenger 

cable , 220.00 260.00 

72 messenger insulators ., .^ . . , . 30.00 60.00 

72 spans cat. hangers 80.00 144.00 

10 anchors 17.00 30.00 

300 ft. %-in. strand for guy. . ,.....; 3.50 4.00 

20 steady braces for curves 60.00 80.00 

20 strain insulators 22.00 30.00 

Per cent for handling material 130.00 160.00 

Labor erecting 2 miles catenary construction . . 320.00 400.00 

Labor erecting 3,000 ft. curve construction add 100.00 150.00 

2 double track half anchorages 40.00 60.00 

Siding construction pro rated 200.00 300.00 

Lags, clamps, etc 10.00 20.00 

$3,444.50 $4,616.00 

Add for lightning protection 20.00 240.00 

Add for galv. wire lightning protection 150.00 400.00 

Add for telephone line 100.00 15O.O0 

$3,714.50 $5,406.00 

If all poles are anchored i 216.00 360.00 

If all brackets are insulated .: . i, 80.00 120.00 

Total $4,010.50 $5,886.00 

In deciding whether the pole line for double track shall be a 
double pole line or a center pole line, the character of the grading 
on the right-of-way will have to be taken into consideration. If, 
as in the Middle "West, the country is practically level and no ex- 
pensive cuts or fills are required, possibly the single pole construc- 
tion will show ai saving over the double pole ; however, where 
there are expensive fills and cuts, the double pole construction will 
show a saving over the single pole, not in itself, but in the fact 
that the roadbed will not have to be as wide as for the single pole 
construction. 

Estimating the Horse Po^N&r of Contractors' Engines and Boilers.* 
— -The size of an engine is usually expressed in terms of the diam- 
eter of the cylinder bore by the length of the piston stroke. In a 
6x8 engine, the cylinder has a bore of 6 ins. and the piston has a 
stroke of 8 ins. This stroke is, of course, just twice the length of 
. the "throw" of the crank arm. Bear in mind, therefore, that the 
"size of cylinder" as given in catalogues is the bore of the cylinder 
by the stroke, of the piston, and not by the full length of the 
cylinder. 

If a contractor's engine is designed to have a piston speed of 300 
ft. per minute, and is using steam with a boiler pressure of 100 lbs., 
it is an easy matter to deduce a very simple rule for estimating the 
horsepower of the engine. The following rule is precisely correct 



*Engineering-Contracting, Sept. 2, 1908. 



1340 HANDBOOK OF COST DATA. 

when the product of the piston speed, by the mean effective pressure 
by the mechanical efficiency is equal to 1,050 ; and this is ordinarily 
the case with contractors' engines having cylinders of 8 ins. or more 
in diameter. 

Rule: To ascertain the horsepower square the bore of the cylin- 
der and divide by four. 

Thus, if the engine is 8x8, we have a cylinder bore of 8. Hence, 
squaring 8 we have 64, and dividing by 4 we get 16, which is the 
horsepower. This is the actual delivered, or brake, horsepower. 

For smaller engines, whose piston speeds are usually less, it is 
safe to divide the square of the bore by five instead of by four. A 
6x6 engine would, therefore, have 7 horsepower. 

If the engine has two cylinders (duplex), of course the horsepower 
is twice that of a single cylinder. 

A boiler is usually estimated to give one horsepower for every 
10 sq. ft. of heating surface. Hence the horsepower of a vertical 
tubular boiler is found thus: 

Rule: Divide the total heating surface of the tubes and fire box 
(expressed in square feet) by ten, and the quotient is the horse- 
power. 

The square foot heating surface of a tube is quickly calculated by 
multiplying the length of the tube in feet by 0.26 and then multi- 
plying by the outside diameter of the tube in inches. Since tubes 
are ordinarily 2 ins., the total heating surface of the tubes is found 
by multiplying the number of tubes by their length in feet by 0.52 ; 
or, for all practical purposes, take half the product of the number of 
tubes by the length of tube in feet. To this heating surface of the 
tubes must be added the heating surface of the firebox, which is 
ascertained thus: Multiply the circumference of the firebox in feet 
by its height above the grate in feet and add the square foot area of 
the lower flue sheet. 

The diameter of the firebox or furnace is usually 4 to 5 ins. less 
than the outside diameter of the boiler. The height of the firebox 
Is usually 2 to 2y2 ft. 

The amount of coal required for a contractor's boiler is about 
€ lbs. per horsepower per hour, or 60 lbs. per horsepower per day of 
10 hours. Nearly one gallon of water will be required for each 
pound of coal. About 2% lbs. of dry wood are equal to 1 lb. coal, 
or 2 cords of wood equal 1 ton of coal. 

Cost of Cutting Cord Wood.* — Frequently a contractor must fig- 
ure on using wood for fuel, in which case it is desirable that he know 
the cost of cutting and piling cord wood. The following average 
record relates to work done in the state of Washington under the 
direction of one of the editors of this journal. The work involved 
the felling of the trees, which were fir, sawing them into cordwood 
lengths (4 ft), splitting and piling. Axmen averaged 2 cords per 
10-hour day, but an extra good woodman will readily average 3 
cords per day. With wages at $2.50, a cord of wood cost $1.25 
ready for hauling. 



* Engineering-Contracting, Oct. 7, 1C08. 



MISCELLANEOUS COST DATA 1841 

A cord measures 128 cu. ft., of which about 65% is solid wood, 
the remaining 35% being the voids or spaces between the sticks^ 
Washington fir when green weighs about 3.5 lbs. per ft. B. M., and 
about 3.2 lbs. when dry. Hence a cord of green fir weighs about 
3,200 lbs., or 1.6 tons, which is a good wagon load on most roads. 
About 10 cords is the ordinary carload. 

The daily papers of Sept. 27 contained an Associated Press dis- 
patch from which we have abstracted the following record of wood 
chopping on a wager. A Vermont woodsman undertook to cut 
down, chop up, split and pile 5 cords of basswood between sunrise 
and sunset. He did it, with nearly an hour and a half to spare, for 
he had completed his work in 10 hours, and had half a cord of un- 
piled wood left over. The trees ranged in length from 60 to 70 ft. 
and were 9 to 13 ins. diameter at the butt. At the end of 4 hrs. and 
40 mlns. he had felled 18 trees and had chopped and split 3% 
cords. It took him about 2 hrs. and 40 mins. to pile the 5 cords. 

This record is said to be the best ever made. It is interesting to 
note that this man's output was about double what is regarded as a 
good day's work, and, in this respect, the record bears out the gen- 
eralization that a man can perform on a wager about double the 
physical work that he is accustomed to do day in and day out. 



INDEX. 



Page 

Absorption process 958 

Abutment (see also pile) . . 972 
Acid, finishing walk with.. 448 
removing efflorescence 

with 637 

washing stone with... 527 

Adze, price 1398 

Air compressor 191 

Allardyce process 1262 

Alum, price 631, 632, 765 

Alumina sulphate, price 765 

Angle bars 1253 

Annuity tables 12 

Anvil, price 1398 

Appraisal, see Valuation. 

Aqueduct, timber 986 

Ash pit 1285, 1325 

Ashes, weight 1792, 1795 

Ashlar, see Stone Masonry. 

Asphalt, price 334, 394, 399 

407, 412, 414, 417, 420, 
430, 633, 768, 770, 1398. 
Asphalt block pavement. 344, 380 

Asphalt macadam 314 

Asphalt pavement, price 

339, 348, 352, 388 

plant. 397, 403, 412, 416, 421 
repairs.. 400, 424, 425, 428 

specific gravity 429 

Asphalt reservoir lining 766 

Asphalt roller, price 397, 416 

Asphalt walk 429 

Asphaltic oil, see Road oil. 

tie treatment with 962 

Auger, earth 141, 163 

price 1398 

stump 1048 

Ax, price 1398 

Backfill, see "Earth excava- 
tion, backfill." 
Backing, see Tunnel Lining. 

Ballast 1242, 1313, 1325, 1354 

gravel 1266, 1375 

life of 221 

rock 218, 221, 1268 

Band stand 630 

Barn 1127 

Barrel, cement 540 

size 258 

Base, see Concrete base. 

Baseboard 1089 

Battery, blasting 1398 

Belgian block, see Stone 
block. 



1843. 



Page 

Belt, price 221, 226 

Bids, making 41 

unbalanced 50 

Bitulithic 340, 419 

specific gravity 429 

Black powder, see Powder. 

Blast, chamber 257 

stumps 1047 

Blinds, window 1090 

Blocks, concrete 1171 

concrete sewer 920 

pulley 1398 

Board measure 945, 950 

Boiler 215, 222, 

741, 1398, 1445, 1568 

horsepower of 1839 

life of 797 

Bolts, track 1253 

Bonds, surety 51 

Bonus system Ill 

Bookkeeping 88 

Boring 964 

earth 141 

wash 144 

Bort 228 

Bran, price 408 

Brick, gravity conveyor for. 353 

laying 769, 1094 

in asphalt 633, 1391 

price 334, 769, 838, 847 

removing tar from.... 367 

sizes 1094 

unloading 352, 769, 1153 

weight 358, 1094 

Brick Masonry, buildings... 

1094, 1153 

casing of standpipe.. 

727, 728 

cement required. .844, 851 

chimney 1099, 1405 

conduit 724 

flush tank 926 

manhole 835, 836, 922, 

925, 930, 1832. 

mortar required 1096 

piers 745 

reservoir lining 766 

sewer 839, 847, 851, 854, 

857, 862, 863, 866, 881, 
896, 899, 906. 

slope paving 739 

subway 1391 

tunnel 528, 1187, 1233, 

1237, 1239. 
vault 689, 1408 



1844 



INDEX. 



Page 

Brick pavement 352 

excavating 367 

joints of 357 

laying 356 

prices 334, 335, 337, 

344, 367, 420, 834. 

Brick sidewalk 352 

Bridge, Section XII 1471 

abutment.. 591, 1312, 1323, 

1702. 
anchorage of suspen- ■ 

sion 1569 

area of steel surface. .1637 
arch, steel.. 1486, 1541, 1583 

Brooklyn 1543 

caisson (see also Cais- 
son) 986 

cantilever.. 1482, 1488, 1541 

City Island 1577 

combination 1539 

concrete 1647 to 1696 

draw 1475, 1480, 1481, 

1482, 1483, 1488, 1504, 
1528, lo3o, 1537, 1540, 
1577. 
falsework.. 972, 1493, 1495, 
1501, 1506, 1519, 1531, 
1532, 1533, 1536. 1560. 
foundations.. 155, 488, 509, 
583, 591, 1506 to 1620, 
1645, 1702. 

Frazer River 1539 

highway... 1471. 1478, 1539 
Howe truss.. 970, 971, 1368, 

1375, 1506, 1533, 1529. 
Hudson Memorial .... 1653 

life of steel 1487, 1488 

life of timber 954 

lift 1483 

moving 1495, 1716 

painting, see Painting, 
pier, see Bridge foun- 
dation, also Con- 
crete, also Stone 
Masonry. 

plate girder 1471, 1506, 

1511, 1519, 1527. 

rail 279 

removing 1715 

St. Lawrence 1542 

shop work J 493 

span, economic 1487 

steel 1368 

stone arch 493 

suspension 1542 

timber, life 954 

trestle 966 

Walnut Lane 1653 

Washington 1583 

Williamsburg 1544 

weight of steel 1471 

Broken Stone, see Macadam, 

see Stone. 
Bucket, price 1392, 1398, 1352 



Page 

Buildings, Section X 1069 

camp 593 

concrete. .1072, 1076, 1084, 
1104, 1108. 1155, 1159, 
1162, 1163, 1165. 

cubic feet of 1070 

life 797 

mill 1076 

moving 1176 

Park Row 1172 

per cent of cost itfems.1069 

power 1417 

railway 1303, 1313. 

1325, 1354, 1362. 

square feet of 1070 

steel 1171, 1074,1723 

Building paper 1092 

Burlap, price 1395 

Burnettizing 957, 1259 

Burnt clay road 328 

Brush mattress 1028 

Cable, wire, life 1406, 1408 

price 716 

Cablev/ay 210, 503. 

510, 578, 813. 

moving 57g, 314 

Cable railway 1405 

Caisson 986, 1545, 1606, 1612. 

1616, 1618, 1620. 

Calcium chloride 294 

Calyx drill ' ' 243 

Camps 593, 1139, 1228," 1518, 

Canal, Chicago 207 

lock, see Lock. 

Candles, price I6I4 

Canthook, price 1398 

Caps, price 226 

Car (see also Equipment). .1376, 
1455. 

fcox 992 

cable 1405 

dump 136, 993 

freight 992, 1464 

motor 1417, 1439, 

1446, 1452. 

passenger .' 1464 

repairs 21, 1466 

Car mile 1457 

Car shop 1147 

Carbons 228 

Card process 960, 1262 

Carting (see also Hauling). 124 

Cast iron pipe, prices 278 

Cast iron stairway 1722 

Catch basin, cleaning 935 

price 278 

Cattle guard 1313,1354 

Ceiling 1088 



INDEX. 



1845 



Page 

Cement, amount in concrete 539 

amount in mortar. . . . 538 

barrel of 540 

finishing surface of. . . 558 

handling 585 

manufacturing 534 

storing 574 

testing 793 

unloading 1160 

weight 540 

Cement blocks 920 

Cement curb 449, 451 

Cement gutter 451 

Cement lined pipe 679 

Cement pipe 628, 927, 928, 931 

Cement walk 442 to 449 

acid finish for 448 

Centers 494, 776, 845 

Cesspool 140 

Chain, price 1398 

Chamber blast 257 

Chart, cost 107 

Chimney, brick (see Stack) 

741, 1099, 1405 

Chisel, price 1398 

Cinders, scrotning 1821 

weight 1822 

Cinder-Clay road 327 

Cinder pit 1151 

Clamshell 198, 838, 1151, 1825 

Clay, burning 328 

Cleaning, sewers (see Sewers). 

streets 459 

Clearing and grubbing 790, 

1045, 1303, 1323, 1354, 
1375. 

Closets 1091 

Cobble gutters 279,352 

Cobblestone pavement 379 

Cofferdam 514, 575, 737, 986, 

1512, 1547, 1578, 1584, 
1587, 1601, 1602, 1609, 
1726. 

Coal, price 394, 407, 417 

unloading 1825 

Coaling station 1151 

Compound interest 9 

Compressor 1568 

Concrete, Section VI 530 

abutment (see Concrete 

bridge foundation), 
anchorage for bridge. 1572 

bandstand 630 

base for pavement. .. .360, 
384, 386, 390, 392, 400, 430 
to 441. 

beams 540 

blocks 920, 1171 

breakwater 569 

bridges 1647 to 1696 

bridge foundations 583, 

1511, 1520, 1581, 1597, 
1599. 1602, 1645. 1702. 
buildings.. 1072, 1076, 1155, 
1159, 1162, 1163, 1165. 



Concrete, Cont'd. Page 

bush hammering 637 

caisson.... 1550, 1610, 1614, 
1617, 1619. 

car 1523 

cart 551 

cement required 539 

cleaning with acid 637 

conduit 719, 724 

core wall 792 

culvert.. 1696 to 1705. 1710 

dam 588, 589, 590, 592 

excavating 437, 441,638 

facing 558, 578, 637, 786 

fence post 596 

filter roof 745, 748, 763 

finishing. .558, 578, 637, 786 

floor , 1104 

forms 563, 572, 576, 577, 

580, 583, 749, 773, 776, 
777, 781, 792, 1156, 1160, 
1162, 1170, 1634, 1677, 
1680, 1704. 

fortification 567 

foundation (see also 
Concrete bridge 

foundation) 508 

groined arches 748 

items of cost 78 

hand mixing 552 

lock 570 

manhole 925 

materials required 535 

mixer, gravity. . .563, 1403 

mixer, price 580, 582 

mixer used for... 433, 439, 
444, 562, 1704. 

pedestals, viaduct 1636 

pile 610 

pile, Raymond 624 

rolled 626 

Simplex 627 

pipe ...: 628, 918, 1710 

pipe culvert 1710 

pole 596 

ramming 557, 574, 579, 

774, 905. 
reinforcement, see Steel- 
work reinforcement. 

reservoir lining 766, 771 

roof 775 

retaining wall 577, 1702 

rolling 558 

sand required 539 

sewer 844, 899 

slabs 542 

standpipe 730 

steel reinforcement, 
see Steelwork rein- 
forcement. 

stone required 539 

street railway founda- 
tion 1426 

subaqueous 583, 793, 

1522, 1581. 

subway.. 1390, 1403, 1708 



1846 



INDEX. 



Concrete, Cont'd. Page 

Sylvester 786 

tamping, see Concrete 
ramming. 

tank 627 

tar 1109 

trestle 1655, 1686 

tunnel lining. .. .1187, 1202, 
1225, 1232, 1237. 

vault 693 

viaduct 1686 

water required 546, 567 

waterproofing (see 
Waterproofing). 
Conduit, see also Sewer. 

Conduit, brick 724 

concrete 719 

electric 1391 

vitrified ...1393, 1398, 1829 

Contingencies 46, 1344 

Contractors' plant, see Plant 

Converter 1445 

Copper wire, price 1420 

Cord 183 

Cordwood, see Wood. 

Corduroy 330 

Corrugated steel 1174 

Cost Charts 107 

Cost keeping 87 

Cost, schedule of items 43 

Crane, mail 1286 

Creosoting 958, 961, 1259 

Creosoted ties, see Ties. 
Creosoted wood block, see 
Wood block pave- 
ment. 
Crib, see "Timberwork 

crib." 
Cross ties, see Ties. 
Crushed rock, see Stone. 

Crusher, gyratory 226 

jaw 226 

price 215, 221, 580, 582 

repairs.. 213, 214, 215, 225, 
226. 

Culvert 1312. 1323 

cast iron pipe 278, 299, 

280, 1712. 

cement pipe 1710 

concrete.. 1696 to 1705, 1710 

corrugated iron 1715 

log 976, 1375 

stone 495, 1709 

timber 977 

vitrified pipe (see also 

Sewer pipe) 278, 279, 

280, 1368. 
Curb, see also Cement curb. 

resetting . . . . ; 456 

stone 352, 456 

Cyclopean masonry, see 
Stone Masonry, see 
Rubble Concrete. 



Page 

Dam, Boonton 586, 590 

concrete.. 588, 589, 590, 592 

crib *. 504, 978 

earth 788, 791 

Hemet 589 

rock-fill 515 

rock excav. for 206 

Spier Falls 588 

stone masonry 488, 497, 

499, 510, 796. 

Day labor system 55, 57 

Depot 1111, 1362 

Depreciation 796, 1317 

formulas 34, 35, 36 

Derrick, price 222, 1392, 1398 

work with 200, 510, 589, 

817, 1499, 1563, 1577, 1603, 
1616, 1623, 1625. 

Diamond, price 229 

Diamond drill, price 229 

Diamond drilling 228 

Diary, foreman's 100 

Dike 1042 

Dinkey 135, 594 

Ditch, see also Trench. 

Ditch work 141 

Ditcher 651 

Dock 1314 

pile 1561 

Docking, pile 1008 

Dolly, timber 965, 1399 

Dome, steel 1172 

Doors 1090 

Drafting, steel work.. 1174, 1722 

Drag scraper 126 

Drain, tile 1796 

Drainage, ditch work 141 

Drawings, shop 1174, 1722 

Dredging 745 

Driver, see Pile Driver. 

Drill, Calyx 243 

pneumatic plug (see 
also Pneumatic 

hammer) 1394, 1398 

price 215, 222, 1398 

repairs 195, 222, 226 

. well 246 

Drilling (see also Boring). .1385 

air 188 

diamond 228 

hand 184, 1199 

lost time 191 

plug holes 492 

spacing holes 203 

speed 194 

steam 190 

Ducts, see Conduit. 

Dump car 136, 993 

Dust, preventing 294 

Dynamite, price 211, 213, 222, 

225, 256, 874. 1182, 1211, 
1229, 1398, 1445. 

Earth, kinds 120 

measurement 119 

weight . .■ 791 



INDEX. 



1847 



Page 

Earth excavation, Section II 119 
backfill (see also 

Trench) 140, 508, 575, 

656, 783, 850, 1595, 1597. 

bracing 795 

caisson, see Caisson. 

culvert 1704 

dam 514 

dike 596 

filter 740 

foundation 507, 1526, 

1569, 1584, 1592, 1594, 
1603, 1634, 1667. 

harrowing 791 

hydraulic... 804, 830, 1029, 
1589. 

lock 575 

manhole 835 

orange peel bucket... 816, 
852. 

pole holes 1064, 1786 

price 278, 337, 352 

pumping 804, 830, 1029, 

1589. 

railway 1178, 1304, 1305, 

1311, 1323, 1354. 1357, 
1365, 1374, 1375, 1414, 
1415. 

reservoir 779, 791, 795 

river bank 1038 

road 331 

rolling 791 

scraper (power). .848, 852, 
856. 

spreading 791 

sprinkling 791 

street 390, 392, 1415 

subway 1386, 1390, 1399 

trench, see Trench. 

Economizer, fuel 741,1444 

Efflorescence, removal 637 

Eiffel Tower 1719 

Ejector, sand 551 

Electric conduits, see Con- 
duits. 

Electric machinery, life 797 

Electric power plant, see 

Power plant. 
Electric railway, see Kail- 
way. 
Electric transmission line.. 1835 

Elevating grader 132 

Elevator, grain 1173 

Engine (see also Locomo- 
tive) ..1445 

horsepower 1839 

life 797 

price 215, 1279, 1280 

Engine roundhouse 1147 

Engineering, Section XIV.. 1745 

bridge ....1495, 1511, 1542, 

1583. ^„,^ 

charges for 1745 

city 1746 

conduit 1832 

dam 514 



Engineering, Cont'd. Page 

definition 2 

drafting 1174 

filter.... 737, 738, 739, 740, 

742. 
railway... 1289, 1291, 1303, 
1306, -1308, 1321, 1331, 
1380, 1408. 

reservoir 1746 

road 280 

shop drawings 1722 

tunnel 1228, 1235 

viaduct 1628 

Equipment (see also Car).. 992, 
1288, 1295, 1310, 1314, 
1321, 1326, 1332, 1364, 
1376, 1455, 1464. 
depreciation of... 21, 1295, 
1463. 

Estimates 41, 47 

Excavation, see Earth Ex- 
cavation, see Rock 
Excavation, see 
Trench, see Tun- 
nel. 

Exciter 1445 

Expanded metal... 279, 722, 1822 
Explosives (see also Dyna- 
mite, see Powder) . . 205 
Factory building, see Mill 

building. 
Falsework (see also Bridge 

falsework) 972, 1493 

Farm drain, see Drain. 

Farming 1810 

Feed, see Horse. 

Felt 633, 1092, 1399 

Fence 1417, 1779 

post 596, 955 

Ferroinclave 1094 

Filler, see Pitch, see Tar. 

Filter 736 

mechanical 753, 764 

sewage 938 

Fireproofing, tile 1102 

Flagging 279, 352 

Floor 1085, 1087 

concrete 1104 

tar concrete 1109 

tile 1104 

Flume 988 

Flush tank 926 

Flushing, street 469,473 

wagon 469 

Food, men (see also Ra- 
tions) 1746 

Foremen, instructions 61 

Forge, price 1398 

Forms, see Concrete forms. 

Fortification work 567 

Foundation, see Bridge 
foundation, see Con- 
crete base, see Earth 
excavation founda- 
tion. 
Freight, rate 1456 



1848 



INDEX. 



Page 

Fresno scraper 129 

Frog 1253, 1274 

Fuel, see Boiler, see Coal, 
see Wood. 

Furnace, price 1399 

Fuses, price 225 

Gallon 261 

Gang plow 316 

Garbage, disposal 1793 

weight 1792, 1795 

Gas pipe 1802 

Gasoline, price 1614 

Gate, price 676 

Generator 1445 

General expense 45 

Going value 796 

Grader, elevating 132, 270 

Grading, see Earth Excava- 
tion, see Rock Ex- 
cavation. 

Grain elevator 1173 

Granite, see Stone Block, 
see Stone Masonry, 
see Rock Excava- 
tion. 

Gravel, voids 172 

washing 1271 

Gravel road 331 

Gravel roof 1092 

Gravity mixer 563 

Grindstone, price 1399 

Grout 357, 363 

Grubbing (see also Clear- 
ing) 790, 1045, 1375 

Guard rail, price 278, 279 

Gutter, cement 451 

cobble 279, 352 

Hair, price 1102 

Hammer, price 1399 

Handcar house 1131 

Harbor pier 583 

Haul, defined 121 

Hauling (see also Horse) . . 124, 
268, 276. 

locomotive 135 

machinery 1817 

time card 100 

tracting engine 1820 

units of 80 

Hay, price 408, 1808 

raising 1810 

Highway bridge, see Bridge. 

Hod, price 1399 

Horses (see also Team), 
driving with jerk 

line 1818 

maintenance 1807 

shipping 1817 

Hose, air 1398, 1399 

Howe truss, see Bridge, 
Howe truss. 

Hydrant, life 797 

maintenance 703 

placing 669, 691 

price 676 



Page 

Hydraulic jack, price.. 1393, 1394 

Ice, boring 1778 

Ice house 1139, 1146 

Iron, see Steel. 
Iron pipe, see Pipe. 

Iron work (see Steel) 1379 

Kerosene, price 1614 

Key letters 85 

Jack, hydraulic 1399 

Jute (see also Oakum, see 

Yarn), price.670, 676, 834 

Lantern, price 1399 

Lath 1100 

"Lead," defined 121 

Lead, price 649, 659, 670, 676, 

1399. 

Leveler, or spreader 270 

Life, see Depreciation, see 
structure in ques- 
tion. 
Load, see Hauling. 

Lock, canal 496, 513, 570, 989 

Locomotive (see also Equip- 
ment).. 1376, 1455, 1463, 
1467. 

dinky 135 

handling 1469 

repairs 1466 

Log crib 974 

Log culvert 976 

Logs, driving 1061 

Logging railway 1290 

Lowry process 959 

Lumber (see also Timber). 

making 951 

quantity in a build- 
ing 1085 

Macadam (see also Crush- 
ing, see Quarrying, 
see Rock excava- 
tion), cost summary 266 

maintenance 293 

materials required.... 266 
prices... 277, 279, 342, 350, 
352. 

resurfacing , 288 

scarifying 286 

Machine (see also Plant), 

life of 21 

when repairs justify 

removal 27 

when to retire an old. 20 

which to select 17 

Mail crane 1286 

Management, laws of 66 

Mandrel, price 1399 

Manhole (see also Vault) . . 833, 
836, 866, 922, 923, 925, 
930, 1832. 

Manure, weight 1795 

Masonry, see Concrete, see 
Stone Masonry. 

Materials, report on 105 

Mattress, brush 1028 

Measure, units of 79, 84 



INDEX. 



1849 



Page 

Meter, see Water Meter. 

Mill building 1076, 1151, 1162, 

1173. 

Mile 262 

railway 1287 

Mineral wool 1822 

Miscellaneous Cost Data, 

Section XV 1779 

Mortar (see also Concrete, 

see Stone Masonry). 480, 
1096. 

cement required 538 

sand required 633 

water required 546 

Mixer, see Concrete mixer. 
Mold, see Concrete forms. 

Nails, price 715, 1634 

Oakum, price (see also 

Jute) 1548, 1608 

Oats, price 408,1808 

raising 1810 

Office building 1171 

Oil, price 226, 1614 

road, price 306, 307 

Oiled road 302 

Oiled suits 1379 

Orange peel 816, 852 

Packing, see Tunnel lining. 

Pail, price 1399 

Plaint 1548, 1637 

brush 1638 

cenaent 1743 

life 729 

Painting 528, 1115, 1141, 1368, 

1824. 

bridge 1504, 1506, 1528, 

1538, 1568, 1624, 1637 
to 1645. 

pteel 729, 1719, 1743 

viaduct 1624, 1626 

Paper, building 1092 

Passenger car, see Car. 

Passenger station 1111, 1176 

Pavement, Section IV 258 

asphalt, see Asphalt, 
base, see Concrete 

base, 
brick, see Brick pave- 
ment, 
macadam, see Ma- 
cadam, 
removing, see Con- 
crete excavation. 

repairs 27 

stone block, see Stone 

block, 
wood block, see Wood 
block. 
Paving, see Slope wall. 
Paving pitch, see Pitch. 

Perch, defined 182 

Petrolithic 315, 321 

Piece rate system 110 

Pier, see Bridge founda- 
tion, 
harbor 583, 619 



Page 

Pick, price 1399 

Picking earth 122 

Piles, blasting 1017 

cubic contents 951 

docking 1008 

jetting down.. 611, 620, 828, 
830. 

making 998 

pulling 1010, 1014, .1017, 

1526, 1739. 
sawing off.. 708, 1012, 1013 
sheet.. 983, 1007, 1025, 1513, 
1570, 1596, 1676. 

steel 1724, 1732, 1738 

test 1017 

trestle 970, 971 

weight 951 

Pile driver.. 994, 1000, 1005, 1026, 
1530, 1577, 1730, 1735. 

Piling 972, 975, 994, 998, 1375, 

1526, 1531, 1532, 1536, 

1538, 1561, 1571, 1604, 

1615, 1628, 1663, 1667. 

concrete.. 610, 624, 626, 627 

Pipe, cast iron, life 796 

loading 650 

price 646, 670, 1712 

weight 648 

cement 628 

cement lined 679 

cleaning 698 

concrete 918 

dipping in tar 696 

gas 1802 

laying 649, 656 

laying under water. . . 703 

life 796, 797, 800, 801 

maintenance 702 

scraping 698 

screw joint 1804 

service 672, 687 

sewer, see Sewer Pipe. 

taking up 679 

terra cotta, see Sewer 
pipe. 

thawing water 703 

wood 716, 797 

wrought iron 678, 1802, 

1804. 
Pitch (see also Tar), price. 358, 
363, 366- 374, 375, 698, 
1092, 1105, 1548. 

Plank road 993 

Plant expense 43 

Plant, repairs 222 

Plaster • 1101 

cement... 767, 773, 777, 782 

of Paris 1102 

Plow, gang 316 

Plowing 122, 320, 1815 

traction engine 1819 

Plug hole drilling 492 

Pneumatic hammer. . .492, 1394, 
1568, 1717. 



1850 



INDEX. 



Page 

Pole (see also Telegraph, 
see Telephone). 

concrete 596, 1437 

cubic contents 951 

holes 1786 

price 1420 

trolley 1437 

weight 951 

Post, concrete 596 

. hole 1785 

life of fence 955 

Potash, price 632 

Portland cement, see Ce- 
ment. 
Powder (see also Dyna- 
mite) 256, 1211 

Prices, indexing 48 

Profits, per cent 47 

Progress chart 107 

Power, electric cars 1451 

house 1405 

plant 1417, 1439, 1440, 

1444, 1447. 

Puddle 788, 794, 1588, 1589 

Pump, life 797 

price 741, 1393, 1399 

Pumping 804, 848, 854, 857 

Punch card 99 

Quarrying (see also Rock 

Excavation) 210, 492, 

499, 503, 506, 521, 529, 
581 594 
Quicksand .'.654,' 828, 848, 852, 890 

Rack Railway 1413 

Ramming, see Concrete 
ramming. 

Rail bender 1274 

brace 1274 

chair 1274 

Ralls, life 1459, 1462 

loading 1242 

price 279, 1239 

relaying 1249 

unloading 1249 

welding 1429, 1432 

Railing, hand 1719 

Railway, Section XI 1178 

appraisal 1291 

bridges, see Bridges. 

cable 1405 

C. M. & St. P 1352 

cost in America 1288 

curvature 1462 

electric 1414, 1416, 1438, 

1440, 1786, 1835. 

elevated 1376, 1451 

employes 1456 

engineerfng, see Engi- 
neering 
equipment, see Equip- 
ment. 
Fairhaven Southern. .1306 
Great Northern. .1302, 1363 

income 1458 

logging 1290 

Michigan 1335, 1348 



Railway, Cont'd. Page 

mile 1287 

mining 1289 

Minnesota 1339 

Northern Pacific.1319, 1355 

operating cable 1407 

operating electric. .. .1438, 

1447. 
operating elevated. .. .1379 

operating steam 1453 

O. R. & N 1231 

rack 1413 

service 1456 

S. P. & N 1307 

street, see "Railway, 
electric," see Sub- 
way. 

surveys 1748 

Texas 1354 

trestle, see Trestle, 
underground, see Sub- 
way. 

Washington 1291, 1374 

"Wash. & G. N 1308 

Wisconsin .1332,1335 

Rations 1746, 1758 

Red lead, price 1615 

Reinforced concrete, see 

Concrete. 
Reinforcement, see Steel 
work reinforcement. 
Repairs, growth of annual.. 21 
Reservoir, asphalt lining.... 766 

brick lining 766 

capacity and price.... 776 

concrete lining 766 

covered, see Reservoir 
roof. 

earth 786 

roof (see also Filter 

roof) 775, 790, 977 

Retaining wall 506, 577, 1702 

Riprap 279, 524, 788, 972, 981, 

984, 985, 1374, 1536, 1588, 
1628. 

River bank protection 1028 

Riveting, see "Steelwork, 
riveting." 

Rock, hauling 202 

loading 197 

specific gravity 173 

weight 197 

Rock crushing (see also 

Crusher) 580 

Rock excavation, Section 

III 171 

caisson 1557 

foundation 1696 

measurement 182 

price 278, 352 

railway 1305, 1354, 1374 

steam shovel 201, 204 

subaqueous 257 

subway 1384, 1390 

trench... 207, 843, 859, 865, 
858, 916. 



INDEX. 



1851 



Page 

Holler, see Steam roller.... 271 

asphalt 397 

Rolling concrete 558 

earth 123, 791 

stone 271 

Rolling stock, see Equip- 
ment. 

Rolling tamper 316 

Road, Section rv 258 

dragging 330 

dust laying 294 

grading (see also 

Earth excava.) 331 

macadam (see Macad- 
am). 

oiling 305, 320 

Petrolithic 315, 321 

plank 993 

plant for building 215 

prices 277 

Telford, see Telford. 

Road machine 271, 332 

Roof 1094 

cement felt 1153 

concrete 1165,1166 

dome 1172 

Ferroinclave 1094 

filter, see Filter. 

gravel 1092 

painting 1824 

shingle 1089 

slate 1093 

steel 1172 

tin 1091 

Rope 716, 1399, 1563 

steel 1399 

Rosin, price 226 

Roundhouse 1147, 1362 

Rubber boots, price. . .1399, 1614 

Rubber packing, price 1613 

Rubble (see also Stone ma- 
sonry) 1099 

Rubble concrete 587, 590, 592, 

1688. 

Rueping process 959, 1262 

Rutger process 1262 

Sal soda, price 226 

Sand, amount in mortar.... 538 

cost 549 

voids 542, 586 

washing 550, 752, 758 

Sand filter, see Filter. 

Sand-clay road 323, 327 

Saw, cross-cut 1399 

Sawing 953, 964 

Scales 222, 1274, 1361 

Scarifying .286, 287 

Scow 987, 1608 

Scraper 126 

Screen 222 

Screenings 266 

Section house 1121 

Septic tank 940 

Service connections 672 

Sewage disposal 936, 938, 997 



Page 

Sewer, Section VIII.... 802 

blocks 920 

brick 839 

cement pipe.. 927, 928, 931 

concrete 899 

cleaning 934, 942 

flushing 943 

manhole, see Manhole. 

pipe 278, 817, 818, 820, 

861, 864,-866, 926. 
tunnel.. 865, 881, 887, 893, 
896. 

Shacks 1139 

Shaft 876, 878, 1218 

Sheet pile, see Pile. 
Sheeting, see Trench sheet- 
ing. 

Shield 882, 887 

Shingles 1089 

Shop, blacksmith 1127 

car 1147 

machinery 1468 

railway 1362 

Shoring, see French bracing. 

Shovel, price .1399 

Shoveling , 122 

Shrubs , 1064 

Side track , , . 1252 

Sidewalk, brick S52 

Siding 1088 

Signal plant 1287 

Signs 1313, 1353 

Sinking fund, diagrams 797 

tables 12 

Slate roof 1093 

Slip scraper 126 

Slope wall 517, 739, 788, 1030, 

1037, 1044. 

Smoke jack 1148, 1274 

Smoke stack (see also Chim- 
ney) 222, 1720 

Snow fence 1286, 1361 

Snow plow 1439 

Snow shed 1285 

Soap, price 631 

Sod 1822 

Sounding 1778 

Spreader, stone 270 

Sprinkling, earth 123 

macadam 273 

roads and streets 457 

wagon, price 215 

Spur 1255 

Square 264 

Stack, see Smoke stack. 

Stairs 1084, 1091 

Standpipe, brick casing 727 

concrete 730 

life 797 

steel 725 

Station, see Depot. 

Steam roller 215, 271, 284 

Steam shovel 134 

work 201, 204. 1267 



« 



1852 



INDEX. 



Page 

Steelwork, Section XIII 1717 

bridge (see also 

Bridge) 1368, 1471. 

1488, 1559, 1575. 

bridge shop 1493 

buildings... 1074, 1152, 1173 

elevated ry 1376 

lock 575 

piling 1724 

reinforcing concrete. . .546, 
723, 905, 909, 914, 917, 
918, 1105, 1108, 1158, 1160, 
1161, 1168, 1526, 1679, 
1696. 1704, 1822. 
riveting 1394, 1399, 1519, 

1565, 1633, 1717. 

Standpipe 725, 726 

subway 1391, 1394, 1719 

tank and tower 728 

Steel, cleaning 1742 

corrugated 1174 

expanded metal.. 909, 1101 

forms 1170 

lath 1101 

rails, see Rails, 
reinforcing... 548, 620, 911, 
1163. 

ties 1427 

twisted bars 548 

unloading.. 1497, 1499, 1502, 

1566, 1567. 

weight in buildings. . .1171 

wire fabric 911 

Stock yard 1361 

Stoker, price 741, 1444, 1445 

Stone, see Rock. 

crushing (see Crush- 
er), 
cutting and dressing. .485, 
487, 514, 1100, 1541, 1581, 
1592, 1594, 1597, 1611, 
1707. 

hand breaking 228 

hauling 268, 276 

loading 197, 267 

sawing 486 

settlement 179 

sizes of broken 183 

spreading 269 

unloading.. 1592, 1597, 1907 

voids 171 

weight 

Stone curb 456 

Stone dust, price.. 409, 414, 415, 

417, 420. 
Stone masonry. Section V. . . 475 

ashlar 1100, 1574 

bridge anchorage 1569, 

1573. 

bridge, arch 493, 1654, 

1658. 

bridge foundation 509, 

1557, 1578. 1592, 1593, 

1595, 1611, 1612, 1618. 

cleaning with acid. 527, 637 



Stone Masonry, Cont'd. Page 

culvert 1705, 1708 

dam.. 488, 497, 499, 510, 796 

dry wall 789 

excavating.. 528, 1594, 1597 

laying 483 

lock 513 

miscellaneous. . .1495, 1536, 
1541, 1584. 

mortar 480 

pointing 528 

retaining wall 506 

riprap, see Riprap, 
rubble (see also Rub- 
ble concrete)... 502, 1099 

sewer foundation 844 

slope wall, see Slope 
wall. 

tunnel 1239 

Stone block pavement. .279, 341, 
352, 368, 378, 420. 

dressing old 378 

excavating 376 

Stop cock box 703 

Store keeper, report. ....... 104 

Streets, Section V 258 

cleaning 459 

sprinkling 457 

work, prices 352 

Street railway, see Railway. 
Structural steel, see Steel. 

Stump, auger 1048 

blasting 1045 

grubbing, see Grub- 
bing. 

puller 1045 

Subway (see also Conduit). 

Berlin 1383 

concrete 1708 

Long Island 1399 

New York 1384, 1387 

Sub-contracts 60 

Suits, oiled 1399 

Superintendence 45 

Superintendents, instruc- 
tions 61 

Surfacing (see also Track 

surfacing) 124 

Switch 1242, 1252, 1354, 1360, 

1375. 

stand 1253, 1274 

Switchboard : 1445 

Survey, charges 1745 

hydrographic 1778 

leveling 1776 

railway 1748 

topographic 1767 

triangulation 1773 

Sweeping machine, life 474 

Sweeping street 459 

Sylvester, waterproofing. 631, 735 

System, Gilbreth's 61 

Tamping (see also Concrete 

ramming) 320 

~""1P "' 



INDEX. 



1855 



Page 

Tank, concrete 627 

steel 728 

track 1277 

water 222, 1274 

wooden 729 

Tar (see also Pitch). 

price 309, 378, 698, 1092, 

1548, 1608. 

Tar concrete 352, 1109 

Tar felt, waterproofing 632 

Tar paper 594, 632, 1092, 1114, 

1608. 

Tarring joints 358, 376 

macadam 296,309 

Team (see also Hauling, see 
Horses). 

defined 121 

work of 121 

Telegraph line 1354, 1826 

office 1127 

Telephone line 1827 

pole 596 

Telford 279, 322, 352 

Telpher 1062 

Terra cotta 1103 

Test holes 141 

Thawing water pipe 703 

Thermit 1429 

Tile drains 1796 

Tile fireproofing 1102 

Timberwork, Section IX 945 

bridge deck 1496, 1497, 

1500, 1502, 1503, 1505, 
1508, 1510, 1529, 1624, 
1626. 
buildings ...594, 1085, 1113 

caisson 986, 1545, 1606, 

1612, 1616, 1618. 
centers.. 749, 776, 1682, 1707 
cofferdam (see also 
Cofferdam) ...1579, 1587 

cord wood. 1840 

crib 575, 974, 1533, 1616 

crib dam 504, 978 

culvert 977 

erecting 962 

falsework.. 1493, 1495, 1501, 
1506, 1519, 1531, 1532, 
1533, 1536, 1560. 

forms 563, 572, 580, 583. 

1156, 1160, 1162, 1177, 
1680, 1704. 

framing 962 

grillage 1572 

hauling 963 

Howe truss, see 

"Bridge, Howe truss" 

loading 963 

measwrement 950 

reservoir roof 790, 977 

scow 1608 

sheet piling 1513, 1598 

sheeting 795, 802, 805, 

831, 850, 857, 1402. 

snow fence 1286 

snow shed 1285 



Timberwork, Cont'd. Page 

trestle.. 586, 966, 1006, 1562 

tunnel lining 1196, 1199, 

1201, 1210, 1221, 1230. 

viaduct 

Timber, creosoting 961 

growing tie 1251 

life 954, 1263 

manufacturing 951 

treating 956, 1259 

unloading 1160 

weight 951 

Tie 1253, 1257 

asphaltic oil treatment 962 

creosoting 961 

life 956, 1263 

making 1375 

price 1266 

replacing 1266 

spacing 1265 

steel 1427 

treating 960, 1259 

Tie plate 1242, 1375 

Time card 114 

Time keeping 91 

Timing work 116 

Tin roof 1091 

Ton 264 

Tool box 993 

Tool house 1131, 1132 

Torch 1399 

Tower, Eiffel 1719 

Track laying 1240, 1249, 1303, 

1305, 1354, 1375, 1377, 
1380, 1405, 1414, 1415, 
1416, 1438. 

Track materials 1274 

Track scales 12/4 

Track surfacing 1240 

Track tank 1277 

Traction engine 134, 1819 

Train mile 1456 

service 1243 

stopping 1468 

Tramway 1062 

Transformer 1445 

Transmission line 1446 

Transportation (see also 

Hauling) 80 

Traveler, bridge.. 1496, 1499, 1502, 

1563, 1623, 1625. 
Trestle (see also Timber- 
work) 966, 1291, 1328, 

1354, 1562, 1966. 

concrete 1655, 1686 

life 954 

pile 970, 971, 1002 

wagon road 970, 1001 

Trolley pole, see Pole. 
Trolley road, see Railway. 

Truck, timber 1399 

Truss, see Bridge. 
Treating, see Timber treat- 
ing. 
Trees, planting 1063 



1854 



INDEX. 



Page 

Trench 650, 802, 1798 

backfill.. 140, 825, 827, 831, 
833, 837, 843, 847, 855, 858, 
900. 
bracing (see also 

Trench sheeting). 900, 930 
excavator ...651, 804, 1802 

machine 805, 871 

pumping.. 654, 848, 854, 857 

rock 207, 859, 868, 916 

sewer 782 

sheeting.. 802, 805, 831, 850, 
857, 1402. 

water pipe '\802 

Tunnel.. 1180 to 1239, 1312, 1323, 
1360, 1367, 1375. 

Alaska Central 1203 

Busk 1207 

Cascade 1197 

Mount Wood 1197 

MuUan 1232 

Peekskill 1201 

Raton 1215 

Stampede 1181 

sewer 865, 869, 881, 887, 

893, 896. 

Tunnel lining 528, 1181, 1186, 

1199. 1201, 1210, 1225, 
1230, 1232, 1237, 1239. 
Turnout, see Switch. 

Turntable 1278, 1325 

Value, going concern 39, 796 

Valuation, commercial 40 

physical 38 

Valve 659 

Vault 689, 693, 1408 

Viaduct, concrete 1686 

Kinzua 

Marent 1631 

painting 1641 

Pecos 1630 

steel 1620 

timber 969 

Vise 1399 

Vitrified sewer, see Sewer 
pipe. 



Page 
Voids, gravel 172 

sand 542 

stone 171 

Wages 333, 1779 

Wagon 125, 215 

Wainscoting 1088 

Walk (see also Cement 
walk). 

asphalt 429 

Wash boring, see Boring. 
Washing gravel 1271 

sand 550 

Waste, price 226, 1614 

Water, softening 766 

Water crane 1151 

JQ^ g2R 

meter. *. *. '. VbV, ' 687*, ' '68'9, 690 
pipe, see Pipe. 

station 729, 1274, 1314, 

1326. 

Waterproofing." .'631,' 6'35",'735,* 782, 
786, 1391, 1393. 

Waterworks, Section VII 641 

appraisal 796 

depreciation 643 

operating 643 

systems 643 

Well 140, 165, 253, 736 

Well drill.. 165, 246, 251, 253, 255 

Wellhouse process 957 

Wharf 1314, 1361 

Wheelbarrow 124, 1399 

Wheelscraper 127, 215 

Willows, see Brush. 

Window 1090 

Wire, price 1634 

telegraph 1826 

Wood, cutting 1840 

price 407, 414, 417, 1062, 

1210, 1230. 
Wood block pavement. .342, 344, 
352, 383, 1680. 

life 387 

removing 383 

Wood pipe 716 

Tarn, price iS71, 672 

Zinc chloride process 962 



ADVERTISEMENTS 



The Cube's Fundamental Principle 

Is Mixing by Incorporation Under Pressure 




No other form of mixing drum gives this principle in 
its perfection. Some will fold the batch like the cube, some 
will give it alternate changes of shape, but none will fold 
it to the right 4 times, to the left 4 times and forward 4 
times, changing its shape by pressure 8 times every revo- 
lution. 

No other form of mixer subjects the entire batch to 
each motion. All mixers with inside disintegrators act on 
the batch piecemeal. The fundamental principle of their 
operation is mixing "by tearing apart and throwing to- 
gether," which is absolutely different from the kneading 
action of the cube and vastly inferior as a mixing action. 

The mixing action of the cube is that of the expert 
cement tester in mixing cement paste for test briquettes. 
Cement testers have tried "shakers" and "stirrers" in- 
numerable but none gave the same perfect result as knead- 
ing the paste. Kneading is the fundamental principle 
of mixing a pasty material. It is the principle of the 
Austin Cube Mixer. 

AUSTIN CUBE MIXER COMPANY, 

Railway Exchange, Chicago, 111. 
Agents wanted in unoccupied territory. Send for Catalogue No. 64 



The name to remember 
when you buy 

Wire Rope 




Shipments direct from the 
Roebling works at Trenton, 
N. J., and from Agencies 
and Branches throughout the 
Country. 



HIGH EXPLOSIVES 

Dynamite, Gelatin Dynamite, Semi-Gelatin, Blast- 
ing Gelatin, Red Cross Low Freezing Dynamite. 

The "Permissible Explosives" for Gaseous or Dusty Coal Mines 

Monobel Meteor The Carbonites 

Du Pont Blasting Powder 

The result of 108 years' experience 

Write for Descriptive Catalogues 

E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Company 



EstablUhed 1802 



Wilmington, Delaware, U. S. A. 



ROCK 
DRILLS 

AND 

ROCK 

EXCAVATI NG 

MACHINERY 

FOR EVERY 
PURPOSE 

Every important piece of en- 
gineering-contracting since 
1871 has been carried to a 
successful issue by the aid. 
of Ingersoll-Rand contract- 
ors' machinery. 

In the list of products op- 
posite, every advanced type 
of cost-reducing contract 
equipment will be found, 
and each line is backed by 
the guarantees of the oldest, 
largest and most responsible 
builders of air power ma- 
chinery in the world. 

Profit-earning contractors' 
equipment means "Inger- 
soll-Rand equipment." 
Pamphlets on any line will 
be sent on request. 




COMPRESSORS 

Twenty Types 

A Thousand Sizes 

ROCK DRILLS 

"Sergeant" 
"Little Giant" 
"Electric-Air" 

CHANNELERS 

"Monitor" Track 
"Broncho" Bar 

HAMMER DRILLS 

"Crown" 
"Imperial" 

CORE DRILLS 

"Calyx Diamondless" 

AIR TOOLS 

"Crown" 
"Imperial" 

AIR HOISTS 

"Imperial" 

PILE DRIVERS 

"Sergeant" 



INGERSOLL-RAND CO. 



NEW YORK LONDON 

Offices In all the Principal Cities of the World. 



J 



-it 




The Russell & 
Company 

Massillon, Ohio, U. S. A. 

Steam and Gas 

Engines for Contractors. 

Heavy Hauling and 

Spreading Wagons. 



Write for 

Catalogs . 

General Utility 
Steam Engine. 

American 

Gas Tractor. 

Wagons. 



iMU«««*«nnu»iiM«*M««»Mi « 1 1) 





mm MECHANISM & ENGINEERING CO. 

PARK ROW BUILDING, NEW YORK CITY 

Designers and Constructors of Railroad Labor Saving Appliances. Pneumatic 
Dump Cars, Derrick Cars, Etc. 



Tk; 



;:.! 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent; Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Nov. 2003 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




01 1 544 006 8 






m^ 



'.m 



'\K. 



1^1 






'i 



,t' ^': y>!^ 



V.f, 






4 



c'':^f 



#-' 






> • v; 



m 



Xi^t^wt: 



m 






':;".'■ 



■ ''/ >■»«••.*' 






)■ 



' if. 



:i 



it. 



\ IP*' * ^ A 

','.,'• ^, -W J,-. .)'>-^ •' 



ll 



rssc:.5. 



5' 



• Vik\'VTf Vi','- I Vl'i 



